Because we need to turn this kid into a second coming of jesus:
There's now not only a proposal rename the 198 (Scajaquada) after Maksym Sugorovskiy, the kid killed in the late May accident in Delaware Park (http://www.wkbw.com/news/page-pushes-to-name-198-after-maksym-sugorovskiy), but now there is a plan to put a memorial garden and bench in his honor in the park. (http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/north-buffalo/2015/06/25/plans-progress-toward-permanent-memorial-to-victim-of-scajaquada-tragedy/29296535/)
I'm sorry, but at some point we draw the line. This kid was an accident victim because the state neglected to put guard rails in years ago on the 198, and while we're in the process of ruining a perfectly good expressway cross town because of the death of one 3-year old and political "pressure" (aka money talks). This kid wasn't anything special for anything but his death, but this is getting absurd.
There are people in the area that I know who are now cursing this kid (and his parents) out because of what politics has done to the 198 since this. At the same time, I don't see opposition from those stuck in traffic daily and it's getting really annoying.
I've heard rumors that the parks department blocked a plan to put guide rails in back in the 70s. Knowing how this place works, wouldn't shock me one bit.
I also want to know who the family had connections to. People get hit all the time, but the reaction from politicians is rarely this big unless an affected party is connected to a politician.
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on June 28, 2015, 08:34:35 PM
Because we need to turn this kid into a second coming of jesus:
There's now not only a proposal rename the 198 (Scajaquada) after Maksym Sugorovskiy, the kid killed in the late May accident in Delaware Park (http://www.wkbw.com/news/page-pushes-to-name-198-after-maksym-sugorovskiy), but now there is a plan to put a memorial garden and bench in his honor in the park. (http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/north-buffalo/2015/06/25/plans-progress-toward-permanent-memorial-to-victim-of-scajaquada-tragedy/29296535/)
I'm sorry, but at some point we draw the line. This kid was an accident victim because the state neglected to put guard rails in years ago on the 198, and while we're in the process of ruining a perfectly good expressway cross town because of the death of one 3-year old and political "pressure" (aka money talks). This kid wasn't anything special for anything but his death, but this is getting absurd.
There are people in the area that I know who are now cursing this kid (and his parents) out because of what politics has done to the 198 since this. At the same time, I don't see opposition from those stuck in traffic daily and it's getting really annoying.
Because one person means that an entire important road has to have the speed limit lowered when it was obvious all they needed to do was install guardrails.
The whole thing smells of political corruption on the part of who-knows-who. When I drove on the 30 MPH portion for the first time, I thought it was ridiculous. Nobody was going to get in an accident or kill anyone on the areas that don't abut the ring road. If anything, all that had to be done was to put in a recommended speed for the turn there.
Nice way to shift all of the blame off the driver, guys...
Would this crash have been avoided had guardrails been present? Likely.
Does that absolve the driver involved of all responsibility? ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Quote from: froggie on June 29, 2015, 08:53:22 AM
Nice way to shift all of the blame off the driver, guys...
Would this crash have been avoided had guardrails been present? Likely.
Does that absolve the driver involved of all responsibility? ABSOLUTELY NOT.
The driver should be arrested because it is his fault the crash happened. But just because a 3 year old was killed by a driver doesn't mean he has to be a second coming of Jesus. I could understand putting a small memorial piece for him but not name an entire park and freeway after him.
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on June 29, 2015, 09:42:37 AM
The driver should be arrested because it is his fault the crash happened.
Evidently not, if there were no charges filed against him.
Quote from: froggie on June 29, 2015, 08:53:22 AM
Does that absolve the driver involved of all responsibility? ABSOLUTELY NOT.
The driver claimed they fell asleep at the wheel. This is more his fault than anything else. He should've pulled over if need be. You can't just suddenly fall asleep at the wheel - you have to know you're too tired.
Quote from: froggie on June 29, 2015, 08:53:22 AM
Nice way to shift all of the blame off the driver, guys...
Would this crash have been avoided had guardrails been present? Likely.
Does that absolve the driver involved of all responsibility? ABSOLUTELY NOT.
I don't absolve any responsibility off the driver, but it's the response that's getting me more and more annoyed daily, especially as the local channels here start beating the dead horse about it.
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on June 28, 2015, 08:34:35 PM
Because we need to turn this kid into a second coming of jesus:
There's now not only a proposal rename the 198 (Scajaquada) after Maksym Sugorovskiy, the kid killed in the late May accident in Delaware Park (http://www.wkbw.com/news/page-pushes-to-name-198-after-maksym-sugorovskiy), but now there is a plan to put a memorial garden and bench in his honor in the park. (http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/north-buffalo/2015/06/25/plans-progress-toward-permanent-memorial-to-victim-of-scajaquada-tragedy/29296535/)
I'm sorry, but at some point we draw the line. This kid was an accident victim because the state neglected to put guard rails in years ago on the 198, and while we're in the process of ruining a perfectly good expressway cross town because of the death of one 3-year old and political "pressure" (aka money talks). This kid wasn't anything special for anything but his death, but this is getting absurd.
There are people in the area that I know who are now cursing this kid (and his parents) out because of what politics has done to the 198 since this. At the same time, I don't see opposition from those stuck in traffic daily and it's getting really annoying.
I can understand naming a small memorial garden and bench after him, but not anymore than that.
It's an excuse to reshape how people travel around the city.
Quote from: cl94 on June 28, 2015, 08:36:54 PM
I also want to know who the family had connections to. People get hit all the time, but the reaction from politicians is rarely this big unless an affected party is connected to a politician.
Maybe Cuomo? He sure did react awfully fast... I think the news of the speed limit reduction hit the news faster than the news that someone got killed!
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 29, 2015, 03:42:27 PM
It's an excuse to reshape how people travel around the city.
Pretty much. I suspect that the ONLY reason the driver hasn't been charged is because that would take the wind out of the sails of those who are trying to remove the freeway. Their argument centers around the road being inherently unsafe, while in reality, the driver shouldn't have even had a license. If I were the DA, the driver would be charged with involuntary manslaughter.
We have a saying. "There's no such thing as an unsafe road, only unsafe drivers."
What did the driver do to merit not have a license prior to this accident?
Quote from: hbelkins on June 29, 2015, 09:16:46 PM
We have a saying. "There's no such thing as an unsafe road, only unsafe drivers."
What did the driver do to merit not have a license prior to this accident?
Medical condition. Untreated narcolepsy, IIRC.
QuoteTheir argument centers around the road being inherently unsafe, while in reality, the driver shouldn't have even had a license.
In this case, both may well be true...
Personally, I would have lowered the speed limit to the original 40, put in guiderail, and then study ways of improving pedestrian/bike connectivity in the park. Instead, we're getting a knee jerk lowering of the speed limit to 30 and talk of removing the road entirely.
Quote from: vdeane on June 30, 2015, 01:46:49 PM
Personally, I would have lowered the speed limit to the original 40, put in guiderail, and then study ways of improving pedestrian/bike connectivity in the park. Instead, we're getting a knee jerk lowering of the speed limit to 30 and talk of removing the road entirely.
It's a typical bombastic reaction from a typical downstater.
Quote from: vdeane on June 29, 2015, 06:22:13 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on June 29, 2015, 03:42:27 PM
It's an excuse to reshape how people travel around the city.
Pretty much. I suspect that the ONLY reason the driver hasn't been charged is because that would take the wind out of the sails of those who are trying to remove the freeway. Their argument centers around the road being inherently unsafe, while in reality, the driver shouldn't have even had a license.
Indeed, there are groups that have been trying to get 198 downgraded for years. A story like this was just too perfect to not milk for all it's worth.
Man, people are nuts. They think that the minority (Parkside residents) control the will of the majority (entire city and region) and want to gerrymander, manipulate and hijack the DOT planning process and media to fit their agenda.
Channel 2 feeds this small group of people by continuing to air this stuff. Why don't they talk about those in opposition of this redesign? They certainly are out there.
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 01, 2015, 10:09:21 PM
Man, people are nuts. They think that the minority (Parkside residents) control the will of the majority (entire city and region) and want to gerrymander, manipulate and hijack the DOT planning process and media to fit their agenda.
Channel 2 feeds this small group of people by continuing to air this stuff. Why don't they talk about those in opposition of this redesign? They certainly are out there.
All of them are feeding the group because the group has money. I've followed all 3 and Channel 7 has been the worst (as they typically are). Buffalo News has remained relatively neutral in that they've at least brought up why the downgrade plans were thrown out in the past (traffic flow issues).
The 30 does seem like a kneejerk reaction, though I can understand local resident desire for changes. Val has a reasonable proposal above (after my previous post).
Quote from: froggie on July 02, 2015, 10:31:12 AM
The 30 does seem like a kneejerk reaction, though I can understand local resident desire for changes. Val has a reasonable proposal above (after my previous post).
Since (at the moment) tunneling it isn't financially feasible, her idea is definitely a good compromise for it, but I'm sure the odds of it happening are likely low.
Don't have a link yet, but I just saw a report stating that Buffalo is going to ask to have the speed limit raised. Probably got sick of the higher accident rate and traffic on surface streets
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 01, 2015, 10:09:21 PM
Man, people are nuts. They think that the minority (Parkside residents) control the will of the majority (entire city and region) and want to gerrymander, manipulate and hijack the DOT planning process and media to fit their agenda.
Channel 2 feeds this small group of people by continuing to air this stuff. Why don't they talk about those in opposition of this redesign? They certainly are out there.
unfortunately that's what happens, politicians would rather alienate the majority than upset the vocal minority or be politically incorrect. Removing freeways gives the impression of "I love my community and I love the town character" being pro-freeway is opposite of that. This story makes me sick all around.
and are the TV channels, from 3 different ownerships, also afraid of being politcally incorrect as well? Is that why they focus on those that are anti-freeway rather than most who are pro-freeway? I mean, all 3 TV stations have individual employees and procedures when covering the news. There's no big dude in a dimly lit office somewhere directing them what to cover.
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on June 28, 2015, 08:34:35 PM
time, I don't see opposition from those stuck in traffic daily and it's getting really annoying.
I notice that too is it because they are too busy with their daily lives to voice up?
Quote from: cl94 on July 02, 2015, 11:41:13 AM
Don't have a link yet, but I just saw a report stating that Buffalo is going to ask to have the speed limit raised. Probably got sick of the higher accident rate and traffic on surface streets
https://youtu.be/MByTBCPH894
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on July 02, 2015, 06:52:58 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 01, 2015, 10:09:21 PM
Man, people are nuts. They think that the minority (Parkside residents) control the will of the majority (entire city and region) and want to gerrymander, manipulate and hijack the DOT planning process and media to fit their agenda.
Channel 2 feeds this small group of people by continuing to air this stuff. Why don't they talk about those in opposition of this redesign? They certainly are out there.
unfortunately that's what happens, politicians would rather alienate the majority than upset the vocal minority or be politically incorrect. Removing freeways gives the impression of "I love my community and I love the town character" being pro-freeway is opposite of that. This story makes me sick all around.
and are the TV channels, from 3 different ownerships, also afraid of being politcally incorrect as well? Is that why they focus on those that are anti-freeway rather than most who are pro-freeway? I mean, all 3 TV stations have individual employees and procedures when covering the news. There's no big dude in a dimly lit office somewhere directing them what to cover.
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on June 28, 2015, 08:34:35 PM
time, I don't see opposition from those stuck in traffic daily and it's getting really annoying.
I notice that too is it because they are too busy with their daily lives to voice up?
They're speaking. Most people think it's BS. Money trumps everything.
I don't know if this is within the guidelines, but I thought I would bring this petition concerning the 198 to your attention: https://www.change.org/p/assemblyman-sean-ryan-keep-the-scajacuada-expressway-just-that-an-expressway
With Buffalo's push to raise the speed limit, the NY 198 thing seems to have put people into 2 camps:
1. Those who drive the road daily, live on/near one of the surface streets getting the excess traffic, and people who hate Cuomo
2. Old people who want everyone to slow down and the rich folk in the neighborhood
Basically, the people who want the speed limit low are the ones who have been wanting the thing to be torn out since it was built. From what I can tell, at least on the streets, most people in the area think 30 is BS. Most people think tearing it out is BS. Problem is that the people wanting it gone are either rich or too old to have nothing better to do, both of whom vote and have much influence on the politicians. Overall, public opinion on the highway has not changed one bit- the people who want it gone point at the death, while those who want it to stay point out what we would call LOS F on the surface streets surrounding the expressway and the increased accident rate. My educated engineering opinion is to keep the thing in place and do nothing except improve the interchanges, but as we have seen in the past couple months, Cuomo doesn't give a s--- about what we engineers think.
Quote from: cl94 on July 03, 2015, 10:48:08 PM
With Buffalo's push to raise the speed limit, the NY 198 thing seems to have put people into 2 camps:
1. Those who drive the road daily, live on/near one of the surface streets getting the excess traffic, and people who hate Cuomo
2. Old people who want everyone to slow down and the rich folk in the neighborhood
Basically, the people who want the speed limit low are the ones who have been wanting the thing to be torn out since it was built. From what I can tell, at least on the streets, most people in the area think 30 is BS. Most people think tearing it out is BS. Problem is that the people wanting it gone are either rich or too old to have nothing better to do, both of whom vote and have much influence on the politicians. Overall, public opinion on the highway has not changed one bit- the people who want it gone point at the death, while those who want it to stay point out what we would call LOS F on the surface streets surrounding the expressway and the increased accident rate. My educated engineering opinion is to keep the thing in place and do nothing except improve the interchanges, but as we have seen in the past couple months, Cuomo doesn't give a s--- about what we engineers think.
You know none of this would fly down south, whether it's a progressive or conservative city. They keep well-oiled highways.
Disaster in the making... Why TF would they put crosswalks on an expressway?
http://youtu.be/_2dzzYixsqo
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 06, 2015, 11:50:39 PM
Disaster in the making... Why TF would they put crosswalks on an expressway?
http://youtu.be/_2dzzYixsqo
Notice how the news calls it "The 198" :-D
Anyway it seems like they are catering to the people who want this turned into a boulevard by putting
Crosswalks. The good option would to have overpasses for pedestrains. It looks like they at least put in guardrail but a pedestrain crossing is a disaster waiting for
more people to die.
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 07, 2015, 08:52:42 AM
Anyway it seems like they are catering to the people who want this turned into a boulevard by putting Crosswalks. The good option would to have overpasses for pedestrains. It looks like they at least put in guardrail but a pedestrain crossing is a disaster waiting for more people to die.
Not necessarily - my town for example semi-recently added a pedestrian crossing on Dukes Parkway West. This is the road that houses the Duke Farms Estate, so there's a bit of tourism across a semi-busy county road. They installed one of those flashing beacon signs (the ones that have a strobing yellow signal attached to a warning sign), as well as a standard traffic signal. If done right, you can easily prevent accidents with signals (the speed limit on this road is 40 MPH, and has a bit of a windy nature) without spending tons of money on an overpass.
FWIW, here is the area they added the signals, which is unfortunately too new for Google Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.546265,-74.62408,3a,48.6y,80.58h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7mTSLfE_3f-H32PWkb-BNA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
Of course, the problem here is that you're trying to put a crosswalk on a limited access roadway, which yes, is absurdity at it's finest. You're not supposed to cross a limited access roadway on foot, unless you are willing to risk your life.
Quote from: Zeffy on July 07, 2015, 09:07:02 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 07, 2015, 08:52:42 AM
Anyway it seems like they are catering to the people who want this turned into a boulevard by putting Crosswalks. The good option would to have overpasses for pedestrains. It looks like they at least put in guardrail but a pedestrain crossing is a disaster waiting for more people to die.
Of course, the problem here is that you're trying to put a crosswalk on a limited access roadway, which yes, is absurdity at it's finest. You're not supposed to cross a limited access roadway on foot, unless you are willing to risk your life.
My point indeed. It isn't bad putting a crosswalk on a surface road that isn't super busy but not on a super-busy limited access road.
It would make more sense installing crosswalks like they do on DC parkways, making the Delaware Park portion just a parkway. But then it would lose the expressway designation.
Quote from: Zeffy on July 07, 2015, 09:07:02 AM
Not necessarily - my town for example semi-recently added a pedestrian crossing on Dukes Parkway West. This is the road that houses the Duke Farms Estate, so there's a bit of tourism across a semi-busy county road. They installed one of those flashing beacon signs (the ones that have a strobing yellow signal attached to a warning sign), as well as a standard traffic signal.
Ironically, the one time I biked down Dukes Parkway a few months ago at that point, they had a private security guard manually stopping traffic for peds to cross despite the functioning signal right above her.
(and thanks to the Somerset County's "high friction road surfacing" further down CR 627 and the gravel-lined path adjacent to 206 there, the Dukes ped xing was only the third worst thing on that ride)
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 06, 2015, 11:50:39 PM
Disaster in the making... Why TF would they put crosswalks on an expressway?
http://youtu.be/_2dzzYixsqo
I report still seemed a bit bias to me based on how the lead of the story was written, however, the 2 people interviewed did seem to think the crosswalks weren't needed.
(but even the media is being afraid of being politically incorrect, and are afraid of being labeled that way so they are going to lean towards taking out the expressway)Of course the crosswalks are more to get people to slow down I think, there doesn't seem to be a rush of people wanting to cross. It's dumb, lets put people in the middle of the expressway. Yeah that's the ticket.
A barrier between the park and the expressway is all that is needed.
I keep hearing the media refer to the 30 mph limit being on the entirety of NY 198, but a post earlier on this forum said it was only east of Grant St. Which is it? I'm hoping to get my NY 198 exit list on my site fixed.
Of course, it will just be wrong again when these crosswalks get put in, especially since finding the exact mile point they'll be located at will be difficult. Seriously, they should be overpasses. Someone needs to ask the people who support removing NY 198 if they would support tearing out a neighborhood elsewhere to built a replacement expressway.
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2015, 09:22:54 PM
I keep hearing the media refer to the 30 mph limit being on the entirety of NY 198, but a post earlier on this forum said it was only east of Grant St. Which is it? I'm hoping to get my NY 198 exit list on my site fixed.
Of course, it will just be wrong again when these crosswalks get put in, especially since finding the exact mile point they'll be located at will be difficult. Seriously, they should be overpasses. Someone needs to ask the people who support removing NY 198 if they would support tearing out a neighborhood elsewhere to built a replacement expressway.
It is currently 30 for the entire length. For the first few days, it was 50 west of Grant Street (which the media did not mention).
Quote from: cl94 on July 07, 2015, 11:17:01 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2015, 09:22:54 PM
I keep hearing the media refer to the 30 mph limit being on the entirety of NY 198, but a post earlier on this forum said it was only east of Grant St. Which is it? I'm hoping to get my NY 198 exit list on my site fixed.
Of course, it will just be wrong again when these crosswalks get put in, especially since finding the exact mile point they'll be located at will be difficult. Seriously, they should be overpasses. Someone needs to ask the people who support removing NY 198 if they would support tearing out a neighborhood elsewhere to built a replacement expressway.
It is currently 30 for the entire length. For the first few days, it was 50 west of Grant Street (which the media did not mention).
Yeah I just drove on the portion from the 190 to Elmwood. It's comically slow, and I basically just went at the speed limit to piss people off around me. People from out of state likely are scratching their heads as to why an expressway like this is 30 the entire way.
Quote from: Buffaboy on July 08, 2015, 05:02:41 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 07, 2015, 11:17:01 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 07, 2015, 09:22:54 PM
I keep hearing the media refer to the 30 mph limit being on the entirety of NY 198, but a post earlier on this forum said it was only east of Grant St. Which is it? I'm hoping to get my NY 198 exit list on my site fixed.
Of course, it will just be wrong again when these crosswalks get put in, especially since finding the exact mile point they'll be located at will be difficult. Seriously, they should be overpasses. Someone needs to ask the people who support removing NY 198 if they would support tearing out a neighborhood elsewhere to built a replacement expressway.
It is currently 30 for the entire length. For the first few days, it was 50 west of Grant Street (which the media did not mention).
Yeah I just drove on the portion from the 190 to Elmwood. It's comically slow, and I basically just went at the speed limit to piss people off around me. People from out of state likely are scratching their heads as to why an expressway like this is 30 the entire way.
I tried driving 30 mph from 190 to Grant, I couldn't seem to get myself to 30 without risking my life, so I had to speed just a little to keep an even flow and not risking an accident.
I'll throw this out there... Could the Scajacuada ever be upgraded to Interstate standards?
Anything could with political will behind it. That will never happen with the Scajaquada, however.
Let the slow death begin, they will be narrowing the lanes sometime this week in preparation for the crosswalks, which, well how would that be done anyway?
Puff piece:
QuoteTraffic calming work is underway along the Scajaquada Corridor. The work entails road re-striping and narrowing efforts.
“Today marks an important step forward in the ongoing transformation of the Scajaquada Expressway. Re-striping and narrowing the lanes is the first in a series of interim traffic calming measures to be implemented, and I am pleased to see that the work is now underway. Adjusting drivers to the new 30 mph speed limit is an important step in the process to transform the Scajaquada. The work being done now, and the other interim traffic calming measures which will be installed in the coming weeks, will help to accomplish this goal. We need to continue to move quickly to engage the public to discuss long term plans for the Scajaquada.”
While these traffic calming efforts are important, there are some road diet advocates who are reminding the public that the Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) needs to stick closer to its original 2004 plans that were released, and at the time were well received by the community. In a recent e-blast sent out by GROW WNY, the question was raised by a number of traffic calming advocates that while re-striping and lane narrowing efforts are appreciated, it’s important to remain steadfast in united efforts that would see the 2004 plan trump the now outdated 2013 plan.
At this point, right-sizing advocates would like to see the NYSDOT move forward with the 2004 long-term vision that was extensively studied over a decade ago. Your opinion matters. Some of the best projects in Buffalo got started because of public outcry and citizen involvement. Now is the perfect time for everyone to get involved.
http://buffalorising.com/2015/08/scajaquada-traffic-calming-efforts-raise-more-questions/
Now is a great time to drive this highway in its current form because before we know it, it will go the way of the Inner Loop. All because a toddler was killed by a guy with narcolepsy.
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 04, 2015, 04:35:38 PM
Puff piece:
Quoteit's important to remain steadfast in united efforts that would see the 2004 plan trump the now outdated 2013 plan.
So 2013 is outdated and 2004 isn't? :-/
Quote from: Rothman on August 04, 2015, 06:50:16 PM
Quote from: Buffaboy on August 04, 2015, 04:35:38 PM
Puff piece:
Quoteit's important to remain steadfast in united efforts that would see the 2004 plan trump the now outdated 2013 plan.
So 2013 is outdated and 2004 isn't? :-/
See how twisted this is? They (< 5,000 locals) want to manipulate the planning process to get what they want.
They didn't attribute the quote to anyone, but I'm willing to bet that it's from Mr. Sean Ryan. That guy needs to butt out of NYSDOT's affairs and leave the Scajaquada to Region 5 and the MPO.
Quote from: vdeane on August 04, 2015, 08:00:58 PM
They didn't attribute the quote to anyone, but I'm willing to bet that it's from Mr. Sean Ryan. That guy needs to butt out of NYSDOT's affairs and leave the Scajaquada to Region 5 and the MPO.
No comment. Read my signature to take a guess at my opinion.
The restriping they did looks like shit
Another puff piece: http://buffalorising.com/2015/09/what-if-buffalo-was-a-35-minute-city-would-that-be-so-bad/
QuoteA few months ago, after the tragic death of a child in Delaware Park and subsequent controversy over the status of the Scajaquada Expressway, Diana Augspurger, a resident of Kenmore, started an on-line petition demanding that the Scajaquada, remain as an expressway. Here is the language in her petition statement:
QuoteHow can an expressway become a city street overnight? Where is the discussion? If you want to reduce the speed to parkway speed at 45 mph, add trees and dress it up, that's one thing. This heavily traveled road connecting 2 major city arterials was never meant to be a bicycle path, have traffic lights and roundabouts. It was built to facilitate traffic navigating around the City of Buffalo. We have miles of parkways just down the road and acres of park right at the expressway's edge. What we won't have if this change is enforced, is an efficient path to downtown, north towns and south towns. Why is this convenience being taken away from those of us who use it daily and in some instances, multiple times a day? This change is being sold on the heels of a major tragedy. To leverage that tragedy in order to press an agenda does not seem in keeping with what is in the best interests of the public. Looking at this recent photo, what about that looks safe?
[/i]
It is an interesting demand on her part, as a Kenmore resident–that the people of Buffalo give up their quality of life, safety, and the usability of their park–for her convenience. Why should HER convenience be taken away, she asks. She points out that there are "miles of parkways just down the road" that people can use, but fails to point out that most of those miles of parkway were also converted to a stinking high-speed highway for her convenience. It is a kind of car culture arrogance we have developed in this country, which demands swift passage in our cars at the expense of everything else.
Take a look at this presentation, the LOS is a disaster: https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/page/portal/content/delivery/region5/projects/547022-home/547022-repository/15-09-16%20547022%20Final%20Public%20Meeting%20Presentation%20R91615.pdf
Does the LOS model presume that the same amount of people would try to use that highway? I expect that people would find other routes at that point. These fears are usually overblown anyway.
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on September 21, 2015, 05:52:26 PM
Does the LOS model presume that the same amount of people would try to use that highway? I expect that people would find other routes at that point. These fears are usually overblown anyway.
Not really easy to find alternate routes during rush hour. And let me be clear - while the LOS model is inexact and I can basically guarantee traffic won't look exactly like what they predict, the LOS model is the best estimate of future performance. It will deviate one way or the other, but your assessment that "this won't be as bad as they say" (summarizing, I believe, your sentiments) is saying the deviation will be toward the good end. We just don't know. It could be even worse than they think.
Source: I'm a traffic engineer. I work with this stuff every day. They're not doing this to promote fear. This is an honest engineering assessment of anticipated performance.
Just wasn't sure the the model encapsulates. Certainly some people would bundle trips elsewhere (instead of going to grocery store A, they go to grocery store B in a different direction on a different route). If the road is a commuter road, then maybe options are less fixed (you can only go to your office to work, not some other guy's!)
Having spoken with the people at the MPO who made the model, the model is conservative. LOS F is almost certain if it goes to two lanes or the speed limit drops to 30. The model shown here was completed approximately 2 months before the accident and I was one of the few to view it before June. As we have seen in practice, rush hours are LOS F since the speed limit dropped.
Alternatives 2, 2A and 3A were preferred prior to this crap happening and remain preferred. The MPO included Alternatives 4 and 4A to quiet the opponents.
Quote from: cl94 on September 22, 2015, 11:53:49 AM
Having spoken with the people at the MPO who made the model, the model is conservative. LOS F is almost certain if it goes to two lanes or the speed limit drops to 30. The model shown here was completed approximately 2 months before the accident and I was one of the few to view it before June. As we have seen in practice, rush hours are LOS F since the speed limit dropped.
Alternatives 2, 2A and 3A were preferred prior to this crap happening and remain preferred. The MPO included Alternatives 4 and 4A to quiet the opponents.
Between you and me, I prefer Alternative 1A, not because I want to be an asshole, but because it works best to move traffic around. But as we know there is a snowball's chance in hell that it will happen.
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on September 21, 2015, 07:13:40 PM
Just wasn't sure the the model encapsulates. Certainly some people would bundle trips elsewhere (instead of going to grocery store A, they go to grocery store B in a different direction on a different route). If the road is a commuter road, then maybe options are less fixed (you can only go to your office to work, not some other guy's!)
Even with commuting, though, there is long term inelasticity. A horrible commute may be a contributing factor to someone seeking a new job and quitting their current one. And when looking to buy a home or rent an apartment, someone may be less likely to consider one where the commute would involve the troubled road.
The thing is, this would take years to sort itself out. Close a well-traveled road and it's naturally going to cause havoc in the short term. In the long term, congestion will likely improve somewhat.
Of course, one should not conflate lack of congestion with mobility. A lower speed road is still a lower speed road even at LOS A and that has implications for how long it takes to get places.
Looks like the crosswalks will wait a few more months. http://wivb.com/2015/10/23/scajaquada-crosswalk-plans-suspended/
Quote from: vdeane on October 26, 2015, 05:39:09 PM
Looks like the crosswalks will wait a few more months. http://wivb.com/2015/10/23/scajaquada-crosswalk-plans-suspended/
As for the rest of the work being done, could you imagine what it would be like if highway construction was prioritized like this, needing to move as quickly as possible to get a new highway in? I can't fathom it.
so on a road where someone was killed (actually on the side...way off to the side....like 60 feet off to the side) they now want to put people in the middle of it?! Kinda makes no sense if you take a step back and look at it. You'd think they'd press for bigger barriers between the road and the park.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on October 26, 2015, 09:31:51 PM
so on a road where someone was killed (actually on the side...way off to the side....like 60 feet off to the side) they now want to put people in the middle of it?! Kinda makes no sense if you take a step back and look at it. You'd think they'd press for bigger barriers between the road and the park.
As I've been saying for months, it's all to push an agenda. The rich people have wanted crosswalks for a while and they fund the politicians. Some of Cuomo's biggest donors live in the neighborhood.
Quote from: cl94 on October 26, 2015, 10:22:01 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on October 26, 2015, 09:31:51 PM
so on a road where someone was killed (actually on the side...way off to the side....like 60 feet off to the side) they now want to put people in the middle of it?! Kinda makes no sense if you take a step back and look at it. You'd think they'd press for bigger barriers between the road and the park.
As I've been saying for months, it's all to push an agenda. The rich people have wanted crosswalks for a while and they fund the politicians. Some of Cuomo's biggest donors live in the neighborhood.
I have seen Ryan in person, and a relative knew him. He $eems to be fueled by the money, and/or is just blissfully unaware of the public will and intends to be subservient to the Cuomo administration.
Notice also that it's not just "suburbanites" looking to zip through the city. People in the city utilize the Scajacquada to get from say, Hamlin Park to Wegmans. And honestly with the amount of time that they want to add to such a commute, it could mean thawed and melting ice cream!
Quoteit could mean thawed and melting ice cream!
Dubious claim, at best. Any grocery shopper with half a clue knows how to prevent such, regardless of the time spent on the grocery drive.
Anything more complicated than "just stick the bags in the trunk" is more than I'd think to do.
Quote from: froggie on October 27, 2015, 07:47:42 AM
Quoteit could mean thawed and melting ice cream!
Dubious claim, at best. Any grocery shopper with half a clue knows how to prevent such, regardless of the time spent on the grocery drive.
It's extreme, but I'm sure there would be complications that would arise from a journey along this route.
Quote from: froggie on October 27, 2015, 07:47:42 AM
Quoteit could mean thawed and melting ice cream!
Dubious claim, at best. Any grocery shopper with half a clue knows how to prevent such, regardless of the time spent on the grocery drive.
Quote from: vdeane on October 27, 2015, 12:50:07 PM
Anything more complicated than "just stick the bags in the trunk" is more than I'd think to do.
There's always the strategy of "don't buy ice cream at a time and place where it will melt before you get home". If your current trip cuts it close enough that the few extra minutes added by the downgrade of NY 198 risks pushing it over the edge, the logical conclusion is that you need to find somewhere closer to home to buy ice cream. Depending on your travel patterns this may make your grocery shopping less convenient and/or more expensive, but you do what you gotta do.
Now they're removing the paths that were to go to those crosswalks: http://wivb.com/2015/10/27/dot-removes-brand-new-path/
So, how is it pronounced? I have heard:
Sack-a-juh-way-uh
and
Skuh-jack-wa-duh
I was always thinking 'skaj-a-kwaduh' with a hard j. :-D watch it be none of the above.
Quote from: route17fan on October 28, 2015, 06:30:02 PM
So, how is it pronounced? I have heard:
Sack-a-juh-way-uh
and
Skuh-jack-wa-duh
I was always thinking 'skaj-a-kwaduh' with a hard j. :-D watch it be none of the above.
I've (and most people I know) call it the second one. Like the Schuylkill, I can spell Scajacquada correctly without having a spell check.
Very good - noted for future reference. Thank you
They had a meeting about this again. I wonder what was discussed.
Not looking forward to this downgrade!