Wednesday, May 16, 2007


A new crosswalk, that took weeks to build on E Hartsdale Ave, has been installed. I have been getting mixed reactions. Am curious: Does any pedestrian use the new crosswalk? Has the crosswalk had any positive impact on pedestrian safety? So far- reports indicate that very few people use it.
This feedback will help determine whether the concept should be considered elsewhere.


hal samis said...

Because you asked...
Few people use it because the location is off center and the few who do are likely people like Bob B who walk south into Edgemont.

What was built is a state-of-the-art crosswalk which conforms to safety standards regarding sightline distances but remains untried because when the function aspect is considered, it just is in the wrong place, even if the right place is just 12 to 20 feet away. "Right" would be opposite the sidewalk bisecting DeSantis Park.

So whereas no one can fault the siting with regard to safety codes, people will walk the shortest distance between two points and will not even go five steps out of the way unless there is an absolute payoff which there is not.

And whereas the location may be textbook correct, the extra degree of safety being provided by the raised height is still not the safety provided by a traffic light. So even though residents will not understand or analyize their behavior pattern, if the safety is not near 100%, they are more likely to choose the direct route.

Of course this question may really be more appropriate when more of the store nearest the crosswalk are open.

For now, two thumbs down.

Anonymous said...

I like it. I drive to the Hartsale station, but would generally prefer not to run into pedestrians.

feiner post misleading said...

Feiner's post is misleading.

He suggests that few people are using the new crosswalk on East Hartsdale Avenue.

In fact, the crosswalk was completed and made safe for pedestrians only two days ago when the town finally painted the state-required striping.

Before that, without the striping in place,the crosswalk was not yet safe to use and most people exercised common sense and didn't use it.

The original crosswalk in that area was removed by the town last year after a commuter using it was hit by a car that police investigators determined could not have stopped in time because the crosswalk was on a blind curve and wasn't sufficiently marked.

Once the crosswalk was removed, commuters, residents, and shoppers seeking to cross in that area were left to fend for themselves.

Recognizing that this was an inherently dangerous situation, Chief Kapica recommended the new crosswalk, its novel design, and its specific location -- and thanks to the persistence of a couple of town council members -- the town finally installed this important public safety improvement.

Anonymous said...

That's not a "crosswalk"'s a speed bump to slow down the numerous morons who drive around the bend of Fisher Street at 40mph with their tires screeching. I can't begin to tell you how many times my vehicle was almost hit head on by these fools who intentionally cross the lane divider line around that bend to make a "tighter" turn befor proceeding onto Fenimore Rd or turning on the Bronx River Pkway ramp. Also, all those "yield to pedestrian" signs placed on the lane dividers don't do anything to force drivers to yield or even stop for pedestrians looking to cross the streets. The attitudes of the motorists driving through E. Hartsdale are no better and even worst than many of the rudest drivers in Manhattan who will mow you down if God forbid you accidentally cross the street in front of them. I've seen the Greenburgh Police issuing tickets to rude motorists who blare their horns and don't yield to pedestrians during the morning and evening commutes, but once they are gone, everything goes back to the way it was and cross E. Hartsdale Ave turns into a game of "Frogger" among the pedestrians who are trying to cross the street without getting hit by a speeding car. The pedestrian that was struck a few months back was the fault of the driver speeding around the bend, not the "blind spot" excuse. I'm a driver and I see speeding and hear tires screeching when cars make the turn on Fisher St onto E. Hartsdale Ave. Perhaps installing high rumble strips would be a better idea instead of a low speed bump which many cars simply speed over anyway.

hal samis said...

Dear Bob,

In the absence of a "Grand Opening", few people would have the expertise to know whether painting and striping were essentials before using the crosswalk, especially since the trucks and closed parking spaces were gone. Fortunately we have you and your distribution list to alert everyone that "come on in, the water's fine".

My only issue with your posting is that you give the "impression", although taking care to avoid using the definitive wording, that somehow Feiner has does something wrong again. Perhaps you want to convert my "impression" into something a more tangible or do you just want to leave the hint versus something that you cannot support?

Why do I ask?
Because your first line is
"Feiner's post is misleading".

It seems to me, and I could be wrong, that you are putting in the numbers and leaving the actual painting to readers of the picture that Feiner opposed the crosswalk while "others" championed the construction over oppostion.
If I am wrong I apologize. I do recall that the impermanent crossing marker was there, disappeared and then crosswalk consruction began. If it was needed here, then why aren't you fighting for the residents further west on Hartsdale Avenue where the impermanent crossing still remains.
And just like you suggest for the new crosswalk, if you build it they will come.

However if you want to look at a boondoggle in road layout, I suggest you look the North Washington Avenue (my turf) realignment to Central Avenue and Harvard Drive on the opposite side (by 9/11 Memorial). The problems resulting in sharp right turns created by an unnecessary new curve to result in these turns was the lesson I learned in advance of my concerns regarding the Library.
Concerned residents must make it their business to look at construction plans; they cannot trust Architects and Engineers and "experts".

Can't trustFeiner said...

And they can't trust Feiner when he says:

1. Town is being pro-active on the coming flood
2. Homeless kids will be using the Valhalla schools
3. Taxter Ridge will be the Central Park of Greenburgh
4. Anything regarding Herb Rosenberg

Anonymous said...

So Samis thinks few people would know that painting and striping were "essential" before you can safely use a crosswalk?

Sorry Samis, people are not that stupid.

The following is from Wikipedia:

"Crosswalks in North America

In the United States, crosswalks are usually marked with white stripes, though every municipality seems to have a slightly different method, style, or pattern for doing so (and the styles vary over time as intersections are built and replaced). There are two main methods for road markings in the United States. Most frequently, they are marked with two thick white lines running from one side of the road to the other. A shorter third line is usually also present, to be used as a stop point for vehicles and discourage drivers from pulling into the crosswalk. The more easily visible continental stripes (like UK zebra crossings) are seeing increasing usage in place of the two-line variant."

Anyone using the new crosswalk on East Hartsdale Ave before the lines and stripes were painted was engaging in high-risk behavior.

Anonymous said...

The following is not from Wikipedia:

Cross at the Green, not in between.

Anonymous said...

The following is also from Wikipedia:

"Crosswalks are usually placed at traffic intersections or crossroads, but are occasionally used between intersections near schools or other popular pedestrian destination. In the United States, such crossings may be marked by signs such as "PED XING" (for "pedestrian crossing"), by flashing yellow lights, by stop signs, or by full traffic signals. At a crossing without a traffic signal, the vehicles must yield right-of-way to a pedestrian or bicyclist who has already entered the crosswalk."

hal samis said...

If everyone knows that painting is essential, why go to Wikipedia?
Alternatively, does everyone know that Wikipedia is essential?

But in the spirit that most of your comments are made, I offer the following:

Why did anonymous* cross the road?
To find something about Feiner to deride.

hal samis said...

*the chicken

Anonymous said...

Wasn't it Ogden Nash who said:



Chicken or the Egg? said...

Yes Hal, Feiner is a chicken for not posting the 2005 memo about the flood (which took place near the new crosswalk).

chicken crossing said...

We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to
know if the chicken is on our side of the road or not. The chicken is
either with us or it is against us. There is no middle ground here.
I invented the chicken. I invented the road. Therefore, the
chicken crossing the road represented the application of these two
different functions of government in a new, reinvented way designed to
bring greater services to the American people.
I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What do you mean by chicken?
Could you define chicken, please?
The chicken's habitat on the original side of the road had been polluted by
unchecked industrialist greed. The chicken did not reach the unspoiled
habitat on the other side of the road because it was crushed by the wheels
of a gas-guzzling SUV.
To steal a job from a decent, hardworking American.
I don't know why the chicken crossed the road, but I'll bet it was getting
a government grant to cross the road, and I'll bet someone out there is
already forming a support group to help chickens with
crossing-the-road syndrome. How much more of this can real Americans take?
Chickens crossing the road paid for by their tax dollars, and when I say tax
dollars, I'm talking about your money, money the government took from you to
build roads for chickens to cross.
No one called to warn me which way that chicken was going. I had a standing
order at the farmer's market to sell my eggs when the price dropped to a
certain level. No little bird gave me any insider information.
Because the chicken was gay! Isn't it obvious? Can't you people see the
plain truth in front of your face? The chicken was going to the
"other side." That's what they call it -- the other side. Yes, my
friends, that chicken is gay. And, if you eat that chicken, you will become
gay too. I say we boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination
that the liberal media whitewashes with seemingly harmless phrases like
"the other side."
Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, The
chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed, I've not been told!
To die. In the rain. Alone.
I envision a world where all chickens will be free to cross roads without
having their motives called into question.
In my day, we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Someone told us
that the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough for us.
Isn't that interesting? In a few moments we will be listening to
the chicken tell, for the first time, the heartwarming story of how
it experienced a serious case of molting and went on to accomplish
its life-long dream of crossing the road.
Imagine all the chickens crossing roads in peace.
It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.
It was a historical inevitability.
This was an unprovoked act of rebellion and we were quite justified in
dropping 50 tons of nerve gas on it.
What chicken?
To boldly go where no chicken has gone before.
You saw it cross the road with your own eyes! How many more chickens have
to cross before you believe it?
The fact that you are at all concerned that the chicken crossed the road
reveals your underlying sexual insecurity.
I have just released eChicken 2003, which will not only cross roads, but
will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your checkbook -
and Internet Explorer is an inextricable part of eChicken.
Did the chicken really cross the road or did the road move beneath the
Because the road was black and the chicken was white. We must acquit.
And God came down from the heavens, and He said unto the chicken, "Thou
shalt cross the road." And the chicken crossed the road, and there was much
I missed one

Kudos to Greenburgh Police said...

While using the new crosswalk this evening, I was nearly hit by a car that failed to yield.

Fortunately, a Greenburgh police officer saw the whole thing, went after the offending driver and nabbed him.

Thanks Greenburgh P.D. Car 61!

Hartsdale Wine & Liquor Store said...

The new crosswalk is just as dangerous as any other crosswalk in the hamlet.
Drivers pass thru our little strip at 35 to 45mph!
We need a flashing warning sign to alert drivers. If you look closely at the ground directly after the raised crosswalk you will see many cars have "bottomed out" after zooming thru the crosswalk. not to mention the "BUMP" sign is located a foot after the bump!
Also, anyone writing on this blog should be man or woman enough to put thier name to it. Bashing the town supervisor as anonymous is cowardly.
Did I mention I'm open for biz?

Anonymous said...

The traffic backups between 22 and 100, along with situations like this, are the main reasons I haven't been to any East Hartsdale Avenue shops in years. Nothing against the merchants, but I do everything possible to avoid that road.

hal samis said...

Dear Chicken Crossing,

I usually wing it but thanks for keeping me abreast of what's going on. Your posting was pure poultry in motion. It will become leg endery and thigh above the posting just before yours. Inspiring. Hens forth I shall try not to poach from other bloggers postings and omelet them speak more because even the dumb coop erating clucks on the Town Council deserve to get out of the frying pan in resisting Regula be fired. And people say I'm stove over the top...Maybe next year's dais will witness new faces when the clerk reads the town rooster. Regarding that,
I'm making a note right now to lock the barnes door before more times basses.

Still searching for an eggs-it line but all I can think of is the recent fowl weather which wasn't very pheasant; so enough of these bad yolks. Gotta go, time to scramble.

Anonymous said...

the town pandered to bernstein and wasted taxpayer dollars

Anonymous said...

just think what would happen if edgemont became a village.

Anonymous said...

Why the personal attack on Bernstein?

The new crosswalk was suggested by the chief of police, not Bernstein.

The police chief had recommended the previous crosswalk in that vicinity be removed as unsafe after a resident in the crosswalk was struck by a car.

The town board went along with that recommendation, but asked the chief to come up with alternative ways to make it safe for the many people who cross in that area who no longer had use of a crosswalk.

Even Feiner agreed, telling residents that doing nothing was not an option. He also said he favored the existing crosswalk and called for an elaborate system of solar-powered lights to warn drivers to slow down. The chief rejected that idea as too impractical, expensive and inherently unsafe.

The chief instead recommended the new crosswalk. That recommendation, issued last fall, was forwarded to DPW, which had enough money in its 2007 budget to get the work done.

If getting the town to install needed public safety improvements on East Hartsdale Avenue somehow qualifies as pandering to Bernstein, the town should pander to Bernstein more often.

Maybe then, for instance, the town will start building sidewalks in all those places where the chief says they're needed for public safety -- before someone else is struck by car.

Anonymous said...

"just think what would happen if edgemont became a village"

would be a dream-come-true for all parties

hal samis said...

Actually, had the "improved" crosswalk been located say 10-15 feet "north", it would connect to the sidewalk through the "park" which goes to and from the train station. It might be then used from more logically by those on the station side in pursuit of shopping at the stores.
Where the crosswalk is actually located is at the end of the store strip and thus of greater interest, if not only, by those residents seeking to walk the most direct route to their homes in Edgemont, not going 10-15 feet out of their way. But this isn't pandering to Bernstein.

Anonymous said...

The new crosswalk is needed by the several hundred Greenburgh residents who live in that portion of Edgemont, the dozens of people who need to get to and from the train to the four-story office building there, and the dozens more who need to get to and from the train to their jobs at the Scarsdale Golf Club.

To Samis, presumably speaking for Feiner who made this a blog topic, these people evidently don't count. The fact that one of them nearly got killed last year using the prior crosswalk in that area must not matter to either of them either.

All they care is that Bernstein lives there. What schmucks.

Anonymous said...

this was installed for one person who was complaining he didn't want to walk down to the light where all should be crossing for safety sake

Anonymous said...

this was installed for one person who was complaining he didn't want to walk down to the light where all should be crossing for safety sake

Anonymous said...

this was installed for one person who was complaining he didn't want to walk down to the light where all should be crossing for safety sake

Anonymous said...

The suggestion that the crosswalk was installed for one person only is false and malicious.

The following e-mail was sent to the town on December 18, 2006 by a senior vice president at one of New York's advertising agencies, who lives in the Greenridge area:


It's been nearly a year since my neighbor [name deleted to protect privacy] was run down in the crosswalk (that, apparently, wasn't REALLY a crosswalk) at the bottom of Club Way. The town made a very public--albeit temporary--display of concern and promised to construct a new crosswalk (that, apparently, really WOULD be a crosswalk) just north of the spot of the accident. 

I suggested at the time that the town was more concerned with saving face and egos than it was saving pedestrians' lives. You took me to task for that characterization, but your actions--or more specifically, inactions--in the past year have proven me right.

Your response to this issue was textbook self-serving politics: express your deepest concern, make a public promise to address the problem and then, when the dust settles, do nothing. You were quick to blame, quick to deflect responsibility, and painfully--I hope not fatally--slow to act. Classic bureaucracy.

What are you waiting for? A more serious injury? A fatality? The blood of the next victim will be on the town's hands."

The author of that e-mail spoke for the many hundreds of people in that area who were left to fend for themselves when the crosswalk was removed.  

hal samis said...

The crosswalk IS needed and I'm not arguing that. However the placement is unusual. Were it just 10-15 feet away from Edgemont it would be better located for not only Edgemont people and those at the Scarsdale Country Club -- they HAVE NO CHOICE and would use it even if it were 15 feet away. However, for everyone else, it would have made more sense and more likely to be used VOLUNTARILY were it closer to the Bagel Store (across from the direct mid-park sidewalk to the Station) where those buying coffee enroute to the Station cross, closer to the cybermobile for those coming from the parking garage and the most direct route for those using the enclosed overpass when returning from the city, those coming from White Plains would also detrain nearer to the 15' away location [I try to anticipate all the angry replies] AND as a bonus, not only would it retain the sightlines but also make it further away from the blind curve and the first or second car, taxi or bus making the left into the Station or to the Pipeline. Of course those train riders who walk over the roadway bridge might be tempted to cross Hartsdale Avenue before the crosswalk.

The accident last year occurred because a proper crosswalk WAS needed; this however does not argue against one 15 feet away. And why does Edgemont feel the need to embellish its case with "important" people? The need is obvious, the sidewalk was built and even the Town Council would have gone along if there was a need; but the need was not greater because a senior vice president of one of the NY advertising agencies concurred. I just hope this person is at least a world class huckster.

I'm not trying to sling mud just stating what is obvious. But bring it on because this must be a golden opportunity to attack Feiner by those who support Berger.

Anonymous said...

Samis, what's all the fuss over a lousy 15 feet? Kapica made the decision where it should be placed; he's the public safety pro around here, not you, not Feiner, not Bernstein, and not some world class advertising huckster.

Did it occur to you that moving the crosswalk the extra 15 feet (1) might make it too close to the stoplight, forcing cars to stop twice in a relatively short distance and (2) might discourage residents of Edgemont from even bothering to use it?

Anonymous said...

The crosswalk is used by almost no one.

hal samis said...

Dear 8:57,

The lousy 15 feet is also just a lousy 15 feet closer to the light. If a driver has to stop for a pedestrian, he should do so even if it is 5 feet from the light.

And are you suggesting that Edgemont pedestriasn wouldn't walk 15 feet for safety. Mr. Bernstein, for example, rides at the rear of the train which is closer to White Plains. Thus he has to walk the extra 15 feet anyway. And that goes for those Edgemonters who start their day with a cup of java from Starbucks which is opposite the extra 15 feet alignment. But guess what, I don't think it is Bob who is objecting to this; I think it is some other constipated Edgemonter who is used to having his/her way. Someone who will respond black if Samis says white and white if Samis says black.

As for the Chief of Police, he is not all knowing or all seeing and we do not know if he would have objected if the crosswalk were 15 feet away. Ask him.

Anonymous said...

Requiring cars to stop for pedestrians so close to a stoplight would create an obvious safety hazard in a heavily trafficked area, as East Hartsdale Avenue is, because cars backed up behind wouldn't expect cars in front to stop so suddenly after the light turns green.

Also, the crosswalk was already moved at least 60 feet from where it had previously been. It's questionable whether Edgemonters will walk the extra 60 feet for safety, but the hope is that they will because that's the only safe place to cross that the town was willing to provide.

Moving it an additional 15 feet, to make it more convenient for people like Samis, would make it even less likely that Edgemont residents, and workers at the office building and Scarsdale Golf Club will use it -- which would defeat the whole reason for installing the crosswalk in the first place.

hal samis said...

Dear Pissing in the Wind,
aks every little bit hurts.

The crosswalk was NOT moved at least 60 feet from where it was, more like 20 feet.

Samis comes from the West and never uses the crosswalk where it is located and would not use it 15 feet away either.

Cars which have just gone through a new green light cycle would not be traveling at such a great rate of speed in the 20 feet they would travel before the better crosswalk location.

Cars are required to stop whenever or wherever a pedestrian places himself in front of their car; this has nothing to do with having or not having a crosswalk. Or do you think drivers are entitled to just drive over pedestrians?

Finally, we are talking about a fairly densely populated area consisting of apartment buildings to the west, a "downtown" grouping of stores, a railroad station, the entrance/exit to the golf club, the entrance/exit to a parking garage and a sharp curve to the immediate South. Do you think that drivers should be flooring it while in this area such that the 15 feet would make a difference?

Don't you have a more important battle, even somewhere on this blog, to win instead of wasting your bullshit here?

Anonymous said...

FYI, for the Ogden Nash fans among you, it's:

Cross children Walk
Cheerful children ride

Anonymous said...

Samis doesn't know what he's talking about and, judging from his use of obscenity, he doesn't like being called on it.

The prior crosswalk across East Hartsdale Avenue was at the bottom of Clubway, which is past the Mobil station and at least 60 feet from where the new crosswalk is located.

Should anyone care to measure, the curbcuts for the disabled are still there.

hal samis said...

Dear 12:33,

And children who think they are clever are cautioned to use op cit when posting what has come before.

See May 17 2:10.

hal samis said...

Dear James Joyce challenged,
A rose is a rose but you are an ass. And that has nothing to do with whether or not there is a mere difference of opinion. If I were certain of your sex, I would call you a dick.

Bodily functions are not obscenities.

And everyone who cares should indeed hie thee hither with a tape measure.

Anonymous said...

Samis got nailed for being dead wrong. But rather than be a man and admit his mistake, which he never does, we instead get potty mouth.

hal samis said...

No one on this blog nailed Samis.
I repeat go measure, you know who I am, do you know who is anonymous.
Go measure for yourself.

Unless the writer is the same anonymous blowing their own horn.

And careful, maybe "potty" will be defined as offensive.

joe hartsdale said...

I just measured. The old crosswalk is at least 60 feet from where the new one is. How wide across do you think the Mobil station is? Samis, you don't know what you're talking about -- you just can't admit it.

hal samis said...

Dear Joe and others:

As you read through think of the tale of the blind men and the elephant.

So in the paragraphs ahead is a type of peace offering but I can't resist pointing out that if you measured, the anticipated response would not be "at least 60 feet" but a definite number. But no one would accuse me holding back just to move forward.

It is quite possible that two different locations and two separate accidents are being discussed. Hopefully we are looking at different parts of the elephant.

My comments are based upon the following.

Somewhere around a year ago (more or less I'm guessing) I got off the train at 6:05 PM and waiting for the Commuter Bus to arrive in front of the station, I saw some people standing in the road at the station entrance on the incline just before the entrance to the Pipeline. Hurrying over, I learned that she had been hit by a bus turning into the station from Hartsdale Avenue. People were calling on their cell phones, a police car arrived and the officer directed got out to direct traffic on Hartsdale Avenue. A fire vehicle arrived and someone from it attended to the woman. There was nothing for me to do, no bus in sight so I walked home. By the time I reached Hartsdale Avenue and Columbia, I saw an EMS vehicle racing toward the scene. I noticed that it was now 6:25 and it seemed like an awfully long time to get there when they had the ability to go through red lights etc. I later discussed this with Chief Kapica and he said the EMS had just dropped someone off at the Westchester Medical Center and thus from there was the problem. Meanwhile I was berating the Scarsdale Inquirer for not reporting the incident (I had also been lobbying with the Chief at the time for a police officer during rush hours and Kapica said next year when he gets new officers through training but that is another story) and the paper was aware of my correspondence with the Chief so it was disconcerting to learn from the Inquirer that "my" incident did not appear on the blotter and thus it never was published.

Sometime either before or after this incident I remember Bernstein discussing the need for a crosswalk. And before that a sidewalk on his street because he had almost been hit by a car in winter. Some of these incidents can appear to run together after time.

Sometime either before this or after I remember the appearance of the "yellow" sign with "NYS Yield to Pedstrians" mounted on a pedestal appearing in the area which I believe was across from the Bank of New York and zebra stripes painted. At the same time a similar sign was placed on Hartsdale Avenue at the exit from the garden apartments on the north side. Six months or so, both signs disappeared for a few months and then reappeared. And followed by the new crosswalk.

So what I was discussing was the crosswalk (albeit temporary) across from Bank of New York which is not 60 feet from the now existing one. And thus the argument for doing it another 15 feet over was not such a big deal.

However the blogger who mentioned an existing curb cut caused me to look again tonight on the way home. I did see the curb cut at the south corner of the gas station, I could also see some raised surface on Hartsdale which could have been a crosswalk once, if so, and there was an accident there which clearly is a dangerous and blind turn, then you or the anonymous blogger were correct that this siting is more than 60 feet away; I would put it at 70 feet. If this was where "your" (not you personally) accident occurred I do sympathize with the victim because it was a poor location for installation and convenience over safety should never be the recipe.

I was accompanied tonight by someone known to Mr. Bernstein as Ardsley Voter and on this blog by a variety of colorful nommes de plumes. I believe that he would concur that the current location is not all that it could be but you and Bob are free to approach him directly.

When I am wrong I will admit it. However, even though my memory is a little shakey about what I was talking about (I had no reason to bookmark it, but you can ask me about any day in the life of the Library expansion and I shall be crystal clear) I do believe that on the blog topic we are both correct but speaking about different incidents and different crosswalks. I very seldom have any reason to go as far "south" as Clubway so I don't have any remembrance of a earlier crosswalk or of an accident occurring there. How long ago did this occur?

Again, I think we are both right but I believe I was looking at the tail and you were looking at the trunk.

Anonymous said...

Good to see Samis finally admit when he's wrong.

The accident involving the former crosswalk at the corner of Clubway and East Hartsdale Avenue took place in October 2005 at around 7 a.m. The woman, a dentist who lives off Clubway, was in the crosswalk when she was hit.

Samis also owes an apology to "anonymous at 12:33." That person was an Ogden Nash purist, who could not bear to see Nash mangled and misquoted, even here.

Anonymous from May 17 had quoted Nash as saying "Happy children ride."

True Nash aficionados know the correct line is "cheerful children ride."

Samis, however, missed the point of the correction and sneered that the second Nash poster was not very clever at all as the same poem had been posted several days before.

If he gets these rather basic things wrong, shouldn't we be wondering what else he's said that's wrong too?

Hartsdale Wine & Liquor Store said...

I was in front of Big Top when a woman was struck in the head by the mirror of a bus making a left turn into the train station. I witnessed the accident.She did not cross corner to corner. She walked up from the station and entered east bound into the crosswalk halfway up the hill. The buses rightside mirror clipped her in the head.
The morning accident isn't a suprise to me.
Cars coming down from Clubway during rush hour rarely stop at the two stop signs. A police officer would call it a roll thru. Unfortunatly for me, I once had an incident at that very intersection.
I don't have a problem with the crosswalk at all. We neeed to slow down the traffic when it's not rush hours.
Cars fly thru here.
It just seems like the crosswalk is at a strange angle. It should probably be moved to the corner in front of Harry's Steak House.
If it was it would lead directly to the path in the center of the train station park plaza. Another crosswalk in front of starbucks connecting the two would help with getting the crowds to use them.
Besides Edgemont residents, commuters using garage site A would also use this crosswalk.

hal samis said...

Dear 12:01 anonymous,

I offered an explantion, allowing that a blogger and I were discussing two different incidents and two different locations. And that neither was wrong for what they were discussing.
I used the blind men and the elephant as the illustrative reference point.

Apparently there is a third blind man who posts but cannot even find the elephant; that person is you.

When I am wrong, I shall admit it however that was not the occasion.

As for your Ogden Nash issue, no I did not read each line and scroll back to see if they were word for word the same. So, if someone was aware of the mistake and corrected it, then I apologize for painting him either as a johnny come lately or plagiarist. But those readers who do take the trip back to see what would so obvious to Nashophiles probably would not hold it against me, especially as your friend at 12:33 wasn't exactly clear that he was correcting the earlier post.

So to you, in parting I offer these Nash lines:

Celery, raw
Develops the jaw,
But celery, stewed,
Is more quietly chewed.

Grind away.

GPD Officer said...

I am a Police Officer in the Town, I have sat in the area of the new cross walk in the morning and evening rush hours. I could count on one hand how many people crossed E. Harts using the new cross walk.

It should be moved. Moved to the entrance into the hamlet, this way pedestrians could just continue to walk through the park - to the station.

Why in the world was it placed where it is ???? It makes zero sense.!!!!