the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Reader says new bike lane by the Ridgewood train station appears very ill-conceived, dangerous and might not be legal in New Jersey
The new bike lane by the Ridgewood train station strikes me as very ill-conceived, and frankly, dangerous. It is the first bike lane I have ever seen that crosses over from the right shoulder into a space between two car lanes. The fact that it is on a sharp decline, just after a hard right turn, and just before a busy intersection, makes it even worse.
https://theridgewoodblog.net/reader-says-new-bike-lane-by-the-ridgewood-train-station-appears-very-ill-conceived-dangerous-and-might-not-be-legal-in-new-jersey/
Ridgewood NJ, Almost one year later the “Traffic Easing “project continues to appear ,”very ill-conceived, and frankly, dangerous”. When this project was initially hatched a project no one in town including some very long term residents had ever heard of until ground was basically broken.
At the time the Village Manager assured us that there were no traffic issues at Garber Square. Where as any resident knows that by 7:15 am on any given day there are cars backed up West Ridgewood Ave, waiting to get through the light or into the train station. The same can be said at the end of the day. With some days heavy traffic extends throughout the morning.
This really was seen by many as the tipping point of “trust factor” for those in charge. Residents organized as a community to challenge this decision and were categorically dismissed as not wanting change, NIMBY’s and not knowing what we were talking about.
Traffic study? Who needs that? We will calibrate the traffic lights to make it all better. We know better than you guys do. Well, unfortunately the bikers ,for fear of their lives have not come but the traffic sure has. Now the projects and the stakes are getting much bigger than a poorly thought out bike lane of death or an obnoxious flashing sign telling passing motorists to eat and shop in Ridgewood. Residents continue to be told , rest assured everything has been carefully thought out and planned by professionals. These projects so far certainly don’t seem to show that and one wonders why some many residents don’t view the town council as having the residents best interests in mind with these projects.
Roberta and her Chrissy Boy wrecked this mess
This was an incredibly dumb and ill conceived project from the beginning. A total waste of time, money and resources.
Do not forget to throw in the new electronic sign that was also greatly needed at a cost of $13,600.
Do not forget to throw in the new electronic sign that was also greatly needed at a cost of $13,600. The town is run by village idiots intent on wasting taxpayer money.
I’m a cyclist and I’d never take my bike under that bridge. The town just needs to admit they miscalculated on this one and all it will take is a little paint to correct. Get rid of the green bike lane and restore the stretch of road to two lanes for traffic in each direction. Easy right?
The article is correct. The scheme does not work, it is dangerous at most times of the day and night, and the electronic sign adds a new distraction. Who authoriz d that sign? Did the Village Council vote for the funding or did the Chamber pay for it? Bad placement, bad idea, and a dangerous intersection.
Bike lane constricts traffic and makes it more dangerous for bikers who feel it’s a safe zone. Two black posts that were supposed to give light to the walkway hide crossing pedestrians. New sign flashes at drivers – further distracting them from oncoming traffic, pedestrians crossing and bikes accessing the lane. Another ridiculous move by our mayor and manager.
What is dangerous are the crazy drivers in Ridgewood. Maybe this bike lane just heightened our awareness of the carelessness of drivers. I’m nearly struck multiple times a year walking in the CBD. I’m careful and make sure I cross at crosswalks yet people seem to disregard pedestrians and pedestrians seem to disregard the rules. Why don’t we focus on those issues too.
Startwith a 500 ticket for blowing through a marked pedestrian crosswalk one in front of library is a death zone with PD 2000 yards up Maple
Pd could easily monitor from kings and radio pull overs and fines
Just remember who created this mess . No amount of thickets will fix it.
6:17 Any use of the police is very expensive to tax payers. Better paint over the bike lanes. I am a biker and would NEVER use those lanes. Well, maybe at three in the morning. But I am sleeping then.
Thank you 617. library crosswalk in front of Kings needs to managed compliance wise or painted over or a light installed. Former police focus cheaper than massive lawsuit. Police dept is 2000 yards away on Maple Avenue …A fact that would be strong for negligent death or Injury LAWSUIT. Details yes. Police this ones an easy Fix
Oh now were on to the crosswalk in front of Kings 8:05? Maybe they should take that crosswalk away and you walk down to the light at Maple and Franklin Ave.and cross. Easy Fix.
Try read this 8:05 I believe that whomever approved that crosswalk would bare the responsibility. That would be the Village engineer and the Council.
MID-BLOCK CROSSWALKS ARE DANGEROUS, STUDY SHOWS
A controversial decision about whether or not to perpetuate a mid-block crosswalk on Route 11 in downtown Malone between Elm St. and Harrison Place is clouded with safety issues. The particular crosswalk in question has recently been removed by the NYS DOT after careful consideration by representation from the Franklin County Traffic Safety Board, the Malone Chief of Police, and the DOT. Although the decision was made in the interest of safety, this is not apparent to many citizens, including nearby merchants that presented a petition to retain it.
The simple explanation for not having mid-block marked crosswalks is that they give the pedestrian a false sense of safety but motorists don’t grant pedestrians the safety they need because motorists don’t expect to find mid-block crosswalks. In other words, a pedestrian “thinks” he is safer but in reality, he isn’t. When a pedestrian crosses at a marked crosswalk, he expects the vehicles to yield, which they are required to do by law. However, if vehicles fail to yield because of not observing the crosswalk, seeing the pedestrian or some distraction, the pedestrian’s safety is jeopardized. In cases where a pedestrian crosses where there is no marking, the pedestrian becomes much more careful and observant of traffic, and waits for a significant gap in traffic before attempting to cross.
Studies show, and sound traffic engineering practices concur, that a mid-block crosswalk should NOT be installed when the distance to the nearest protected crossing is less than 300 feet. In the Malone case, the distances from the former mid-block crosswalk to Harrison Place and to Elm St. are both less than 250 feet. Furthermore, on multi-lane (4 or more lanes) roads, with vehicle average daily traffic (ADT) greater than 10,000 vehicles (Route 11 in Malone has an ADT vehicle rate of over 20,000), mid-block crosswalks should NOT be considered, even if there is a pedestrian safety median separating opposing traffic lanes (which there isn’t in Malone).
The logic here is from what is termed a “multiple threat crash”. A multiple threat crash involves a driver stopping in one lane of a multi-lane road to permit pedestrians to cross, and an oncoming vehicle (in the same direction) strikes the pedestrian who is crossing in front of the stopped vehicle. This crash type involves both the pedestrian and the driver failing to see each other in time in order to avoid the collision.
Statistics show the pedestrian crash rate at marked mid-block crosswalks without traffic or pedestrian signals to be significantly more dangerous than the same crossings without marked crosswalks. The old adage that “perception is not reality” holds true here. It would seem a marked crosswalk should be safer than not, but in reality, it is significantly more dangerous. Simply installing a marked crosswalk without other more substantial crossing facilities often does not result in the majority of motorists stopping and yielding to pedestrians, contrary to the expectations of those pedestrians.
Merely repainting would not be enough. The total width of car lane plus bike lane is smaller than it was before the new divider was installed. Every inch counts. The entire thing needs to be ripped out and redone, as was known by many before it even happened.
Thank you 10.28. Excellent summary of fact behind the process of road and pedestrian safety design.More children at risk near Library Crosswalks..distractions like cell phones texting add to the risk of assumed safety where opposite situation is in fact the case.Amazing a town can’t police a cross walk on own headquartered street.
To11.07. But the town management always knows better. Before the Whoops moment…situation at this tight location known well.in winter the Lighting ESP at Eve rush hour is inadequate.ALL PED SHOULD BE FORCED TO CROSS ONLY TO OR FROM BAGEL STORE SIDE OF THE QUAD.ITS JUST LOGIC
The manager’s daughter didn’t feel safe driving through the underpass when it had two lanes each way so she changed it. It is unsafe now for a bicyclist and the median was a huge waste of money as was the expense of the green bike zone. The goal was to reduce vehicles from utilizing the train station underpass and get vehicles to use Glen Ave. and Ackerman Ave. underpasses.