|
|
| Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven (309839) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 22 |
||
|
| (310155) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Jan 31 20:51:51 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Sun Jan 31 20:43:41 2016. Good post. |
|
|
| (310156) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Jan 31 20:52:15 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Sun Jan 31 20:44:42 2016. Woo-hoo! |
|
|
| (310157) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jan 31 21:11:34 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 31 11:50:05 2016. "Thus proves you do not know what you are talking about. Many changes other than ADA were made at the rebuilt stations. Stairways were widened at all stations and additional stairways were added (Avenue M for example.) Yet none of the local stations received elevators." You are correct with regards to Brighton. The rebuild was further back than I recalled. Either way, what I said is true for rebuilds today, and regardless of whether it was under 2008's ADA or 1990's ADA, or any of the in between amendments, you CERTAINLY could not build ANY new stations without full compliance. The amount of effort required for compliance has certainly gone up since, but regardless of that elevators or ramps at every new build station(Which this would be considered in any case). That is not cheap. "The busway would be able to make all the crosstown bus connections presently available on Woodhaven and no existing connections would be removed because bus service would still remain on Woodhaven." Yes!(for the most part) Even if it did not, It would be cheap and easy to move bus stops to make such so. BUT! Guess what isn't easy to move? The Rockaway Boulevard A train station! Guess what is also not too easy to move? The Woodhaven J/Z train station! "The ramp would come down to street level at Liberty for the buses to continue on the surface so I do not understand what would be do incredibly hard to connect if a busway is chosen, but rail would be superior anyway." And what the hell would you do on the North end? Besides, why are you acting like a connection at Liberty would be cheap? "Prove it would be incredibly expensive." How many fully ADA compliant stations? A connection to street level at each end. Each station and connection is likely more expensive than the entirety of Woodhaven SBS "BRT on Woodhaven is what would be incredibly expensive and would take a very long time to complete. Every DOT project is delayed by at least three years. The seven Belt Parkway bridges were due to be completed in mid-2014 and the reconstruction of the Mill Basin Bridge has not even begun." So because a simple project might be delayed we should institute a substantially more complicated and less useful project???? How does that follow at all?!?!? "So if DOT is projecting 2022 for completion of BRT if it is done, that realistically would mean 2025. That's 11 years since they decided on BRT and more than that if you consider the years they were considering SBS. So no way is it short term and cost efficient at almost a quarter billion dollars with countless negatives." No substantial negatives. 1/4(Actually 1/5) billion instead of over a Billion. First BRT will be in 2017. That is roughly 0.9-2 years from now "The people requesting a busway are certainly not anti-transit advocates. If they were they would have not suggested other bus improvements they believe are needed that the MTA won't even consider since SBS/BRT is the only thing they are looking at. So quit making untrue statements." They suggested dysfunctional and inefficient ideas at best, with the explicit intent of undermining an effective and functional alternative with the possibility of actually happening. Yes. That makes them anti transit advocates. |
|
|
| (310158) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jan 31 21:30:04 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 31 11:35:49 2016. "First of all it is debatable that bus service will be greatly improved. It's more like minimally improved. Connections will not be reduced or the number of fares required for three bus trips. The B15 will not transfer to Q53 and neither will the B82 SBS because there is no proposal for a route extension to Cross Bay Blvd."I think you misunderstand the goals of this project. "If what you say will happen, why is neither the MTA or DOT venturing a guess on how many will switch modes. It's because they don't want to be wrong. What is ridership actually decreases like it did on many other SBS routes? What will you say then?" I suspect that unlike you and like me, the MTA certainly does hesitate to make concrete assertions about what future ridership. Yes, they value not being wrong! Unlike yourself. You seem to revel in it! But ridership is up on all but one of the improved markets! And the one where ridership is down is clearly following the trend of ridership in its area. |
|
|
| (310159) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Mon Feb 1 08:28:22 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Sun Jan 31 21:11:34 2016. Good post. |
|
|
| (310160) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:01:37 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Sun Jan 31 21:11:34 2016. The busway or rail is intended primarily for long distance north south travel in Queens with greatly reduced travel times. It actually has the possibility of drawing people out of their cars which SBS or BRT (and not even full BRT at that) would do. Travel times to Queens Center would be cut in half to about 15 minutes and it is much more useful than SBS which will take much more time and won't severely negatively affect traffic slowing average speeds to 10 or 15 mph or less.If a bus way is incredibly expensive and ridiculous as you claim, a study would show that. What are you calling a "simple" project? SBS or BRT? SBS is simple. BRT is not and besides no one has shown there is any added benefit to a project costing ten times as much. That is crucial and necessary before we embark on the more expensive one of the two. Rail may cost five tines as much but it is much more beneficial with long term advantages such as increasing real estate values and lower operating costs. When you look at the long term costs instead of just the implementation costs, it is more cost efficient which a study would most likely show which is why all alternatives need to b looked at before we commit to a quarter billion dollars and eight years of construction disruption and the lost business to commercial establishment that would cost. You call the communities ideas dysfunctional when you didn't even hear the ideas they recommended like a zone express bus service instead and a shuttle bus from New Howard Beach to the Howard Beach station among others. So they are definitely not anti transit and know their neighborhood much better than you know it. |
|
|
| (310161) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:10:36 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Wed Jan 27 19:31:16 2016. If you think traffic will be improved, why did everyone at the Woodhaven meeting disagree with that. When the speed limit is reduced from 35 and 40 mph to 25 mph, average speeds have to slow down and trips have to take longer. When there are fewer lanes and the same number of cars, travel has to slow down considerably. This has already happened with the rush hour bus lanes on Northern Woodhaven where people are already complaining of trips taking 25 to 45 extra minutes.If bus stops are not cleared now requiring people to wait on sidewalks cleared by commercial establishments or in the parking lane, it is common sense to see that with SBS on the main roadway and no nearby sidewalks, those waiting for buses wil wait in the main roadway in the bus lane which is much more dangerous than waiting in a parking lane or on a cleared sidewalk. |
|
|
| (310162) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Feb 1 10:12:55 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:01:37 2016. You are so transparent.You don't care whether a busway or a rail line is built, as long as it's over in the RBB corridor where it won't interfere with the automobile traffic. Nothing else matters to you, including usefulness for transit users, who would benefit much less from any line in the RBB alignment than they would from an upgraded bus service along Woodhaven. (Or, I should say, a line in the RBB alignment would benefit far fewer people; those who would benefit from it might, individually, benefit greatly, but with so few people able to benefit from it, the total benefit to transit users would be far less.) |
|
|
| (310163) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:15:44 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Wed Jan 27 19:38:19 2016. Local buses stop every avenue block.Express buses and SBS buses will not be able to enter the general traffic lanes to pass stopped buses when those lanes are backed up and standing still because no car will let them enter. Buses have problems currently leaving bus stops to enter traffic on heavily used roadways. They have to wait sometimes up to a minute for traffic to pass. In that tine most likely the stopped bus ahead will already be moving. Where did you get that only five local stops will be potentially blocking the bus lane? What I heard was that there only will be about five bus stops that will not be blocking the bus lane if service roads are built throughout. |
|
|
| (310165) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 10:44:46 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:01:37 2016. "The busway or rail is intended primarily for long distance north south travel in Queens with greatly reduced travel times. It actually has the possibility of drawing people out of their cars which SBS or BRT (and not even full BRT at that) would do. Travel times to Queens Center would be cut in half to about 15 minutes and it is much more useful than SBS which will take much more time and won't severely negatively affect traffic slowing average speeds to 10 or 15 mph or less."SBS/BRT is intended for longer distance riders. The benefits created by it would spill over to the local buses on Woodhaven as well. Your numbers have no basis in reality. I could just as easily say that SBS will decrease the speed so much that it will only take TWO MINUTES to go from Broad Channel to Queens Boulevard! Sure, that is false, but no more so than your estimates. "If a bus way is incredibly expensive and ridiculous as you claim, a study would show that." If it is so incredibly expensive and ridiculous, no agency would ever put the money into making such a study. Wake me when the MTA does a study. "What are you calling a "simple" project? SBS or BRT? SBS is simple. BRT is not and besides no one has shown there is any added benefit to a project costing ten times as much. That is crucial and necessary before we embark on the more expensive one of the two." SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! SBS=BRT! How do you seriously not understand that by now? The A C and E trains are really slow, but the 8th avenue subway is FAST! "Rail may cost five tines as much but it is much more beneficial with long term advantages such as increasing real estate values and lower operating costs. When you look at the long term costs instead of just the implementation costs, it is more cost efficient which a study would most likely show which is why all alternatives need to b looked at before we commit to a quarter billion dollars and eight years of construction disruption and the lost business to commercial establishment that would cost." Rail is probably not feasible. Only a couple new stations would probably not justify building the line. Especially one which would connect to an incredibly overburdened line at the north end. But even if you did it, Woodhaven SBS would still be a needed project. It serves a different market. "You call the communities ideas dysfunctional when you didn't even hear the ideas they recommended like a zone express bus service instead and a shuttle bus from New Howard Beach to the Howard Beach station among others. So they are definitely not anti transit and know their neighborhood much better than you know it." I am calling the anti transit advocates in the community's ideas dysfunctional, not those of the whole community. Gee... an express bus to Howard Beach... If they really wanted that, they would support the bus lanes!!! |
|
|
| (310166) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Mon Feb 1 10:45:16 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:10:36 2016. If you think traffic will be improved, why did everyone at the Woodhaven meeting disagree with that.Because people show up at meetings to complain. Sometimes you get some supporters but usually only if there is some strong organized effort. |
|
|
| (310167) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 10:48:13 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:10:36 2016. "If you think traffic will be improved, why did everyone at the Woodhaven meeting disagree with that."Because they are not traffic engineers. "When the speed limit is reduced from 35 and 40 mph to 25 mph, average speeds have to slow down and trips have to take longer." That is likely going to happen regardless of this. And it is a VERY good thing. "When there are fewer lanes and the same number of cars, travel has to slow down considerably. This has already happened with the rush hour bus lanes on Northern Woodhaven where people are already complaining of trips taking 25 to 45 extra minutes." People always complain. Anecdotal information is never of any serious utility. "If bus stops are not cleared now requiring people to wait on sidewalks cleared by commercial establishments or in the parking lane, it is common sense to see that with SBS on the main roadway and no nearby sidewalks, those waiting for buses wil wait in the main roadway in the bus lane which is much more dangerous than waiting in a parking lane or on a cleared sidewalk." Some bus stops surely are being cleared. Some are not. Some have adjacent areas to stand in anyway. Some don't. None of this is changed by Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
| (310168) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 10:59:06 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:15:44 2016. "Local buses stop every avenue block."That just isn't true. At all. "Express buses and SBS buses will not be able to enter the general traffic lanes to pass stopped buses when those lanes are backed up and standing still because no car will let them enter. Buses have problems currently leaving bus stops to enter traffic on heavily used roadways. They have to wait sometimes up to a minute for traffic to pass. In that tine most likely the stopped bus ahead will already be moving." If there is traffic, they will not. But considering the below point, that is not too big of a deal. "Where did you get that only five local stops will be potentially blocking the bus lane? What I heard was that there only will be about five bus stops that will not be blocking the bus lane if service roads are built throughout." By taking the plan and looking at each stop. Adding one to my count if it fills two criteria: A. it is local only. B. if a bus stopped there would block the bus lane. The total I came up with is 5. (It is also possible that I missed a stop if it blocked the bus lane SB only, or counted a stop that does such NB but not SB. I was counting NB stops.) I'd list off the stops but I am not at home where I have the printout of the plan and can do such. I'll do so tomorrow when I am. |
|
|
| (310171) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Feb 1 13:10:00 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:01:37 2016. Travel times to Queens Center would be cut in half to about 15 minutesFrom where? |
|
|
| (310173) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 14:08:32 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Feb 1 13:10:00 2016. The beauty of made up trip times is that they do not need silly things like start points. |
|
|
| (310174) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Feb 1 14:49:42 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 14:08:32 2016. LOL!!! +1,000 |
|
|
| (310175) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 15:25:28 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Jan 20 20:13:48 2016. Everything! |
|
|
| (310178) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 21:30:59 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 15:25:28 2016. Very intelligent response. |
|
|
| (310179) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 22:24:21 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 21:30:59 2016. I know that was hard for you to admit. |
|
|
| (310180) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Feb 2 10:58:28 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 22:24:21 2016. You didntt even notice the sarcasm. |
|
|
| (310181) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 11:29:53 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Feb 2 10:58:28 2016. What sarcasm could I possibly have missed? |
|
|
| (310182) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Feb 2 12:50:04 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 22:24:21 2016. +3 |
|
|
| (310185) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Feb 2 18:38:43 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 10:48:13 2016. Why is it a very good thing? |
|
|
| (310186) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 19:06:16 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:15:44 2016. The Local only bus stops blocking the bus lane.1. 62nd Road. 2. Furmanville Avenue. 3. 66th Road. 4. 68th Avenue 5. 85th Road. (5.5 89th Avenue. Southbound only.) |
|
|
| (310187) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 19:11:45 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Feb 2 18:38:43 2016. Lower speeds offer both greatly reduced mortality and incident rates with regards to automobile-pedestrian collisions. |
|
|
| (310188) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Feb 2 19:16:42 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 19:11:45 2016. I don't have any sympathy for jaywalkers. |
|
|
| (310189) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 19:54:28 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Feb 1 10:15:44 2016. So... Local Buses stop at every Avenue?Lets see: 60 Avenue- No stop. (Wetherole St. has one, and it is close. I'll count it to be nice) Eliot Av- No stop. 63 Avenue- No stop. Penelope Avenue- SBS, Local, Express stop. Furmanville Avenue- Local stop. 65 Avenue- No Stop. Close enough to Furmanville that I won't count it against you. (See how nice I am?!?) 66 Avenue- No stop. 67 Avenue- No stop. 68 Avenue- Local stop. Cooper Avenue- No stop. Metropolitan Avenue- SBS, Local, Express stop. Doran Avenue- No Stop, but I'll consider it as part of Metropolitan(I'm practically giving you the benefit of the doubt everywhere I possibly could!) 73/Rutledge Avenue- No stop. 74 Avenue- No stop. 75 Avenue- No stop. 76 Avenue- No stop. 78 Avenue- No stop. 81 Avenue- No stop. 82 Avenue- No Stop... But I'll count 81 Road, as it is roughly between 81 and 82 Ave, with a Local/Express stop. (I'm a pushover!) 83 Avenue- No stop. Myrtle Avenue- Local/Express/SBS stop 85 Avenue- No stop. 86 Avenue- No Stop. (I'll count 85th road local stop for one of 85/86. If my professors were this nice, I'd have graduated Summa cum laude!!) Jamaica Avenue- SBS/Local/Express stop. 88 Avenue- No stop. 89 Avenue- Local stop 90 Avenue- No stop. 91 Avenue- SBS/Local stop. 92 Avenue- No stop. 93 Avenue- No stop. Atlantic Avenue- Local/Express Stop. 95 Avenue- No stop 97 Avenue- Local Stop. 101 Avenue- SBS/Local/Express stop. 103 Avenue- No stop. Liberty Avenue- Local/Express/SBS stop. (Technically Rockaway Boulevard. Any more generous, I'd be giving away my vital organs!!!) 107 Avenue- No stop. 108 Avenue- No stop 109 Avenue- No stop. Sutter Avenue- Local stop. Plattwood Avenue- No stop. 133 Avenue- No stop. 134 Avenue- No stop. Pitkin Avenue- Local/SBS/Express. 149 Avenue- (titled Albert Road, but this one really should be 149 Ave.) Local stop. I won't hold North Conduit or South Conduit against you as that wouldnt make much sense to put a stop there anyway. So apparently something is universally true, if it is true roughly 45% of the time. If I were to take you at your word, and assume that you actually mean a bus stop exactly at every avenue, that falls to roughly 30%. |
|
|
| (310190) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 20:04:53 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 19:54:28 2016. Damn. The work I did got cut off south of South Conduit!11 Avenues, 3 local stops. It would further work against your point if I counted them. Barely changes the strict count. Reduces the generous count to roughly 40%. |
|
|
| (310191) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 20:07:16 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Feb 2 19:16:42 2016. I do.Furthermore, a great deal of the pedestrians injured by traffic are not Jaywalkers. (And also, slower speeds greatly reduce injuries of those involved in car on car accidents.) |
|
|
| (310192) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Feb 2 20:44:00 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 20:07:16 2016. Like what? The speed limit doesn't have as much effect on accidents caused by running red lights or the real problem: failure to yield. |
|
|
| (310193) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 21:01:33 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Feb 2 20:44:00 2016. It certainly has a significant effect if they are following the speed limit. Obviously they won't always be, but that is no reason to not have such a speed limit.A driver who fails to yield while driving at 25 MPH has a near 0 chance of killing a pedestrian which they hit, while a driver who fails to yield at 45 MPH has a near 100% chance of killing a pedestrian which they hit. Furthermore, both the driver and the pedestrian are substantially more likely to successfully avoid said collision should the car be traveling at 25 MPH vs 45 MPH. |
|
|
| (310194) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Feb 2 21:46:10 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 21:01:33 2016. If a maniac is going to speed at 50 or 60 mph on a city street, they are going to do that and kill people regardless if the speed limit is 25, 30, or 35 mph.The other most common way pedestrians are injured is when cars are turning and either the motorist, the pedestrian, or both are not paying adequate attention. Again, no relation to the speed limit. What lowering the limits to unrealistic levels accomplishes are longer trip times for cars and trucks, costing time and money and driving up prices. It also has the additional effect of greatly adding to the city's revenue which is the real reason. Increased safety for pedestrians is just a smokescreen. If the city really cared about increased safety, crosswalks and lane markings would not be allowed to totally deteriorate and in some cases remain that way for years. My street was resurfaced a year ago and DOT still has not painted a yellow line in the center of the street to separate the directional traffic. State DOT also would not have installed dangerous and misleading signs on the Gowanus that could not be read after dark if safety was a priority. Now that the permanent signs are in place, there still is a problem because they didn't allow you any time after the sign to switch lanes. You have to be in the proper lane by the time you reach the sign, so you only have a few feet to get in the proper lane at 50 mph which is highly dangerous. Those so called traffic engineers are throughly incompetent. |
|
|
| (310195) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 22:11:34 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Feb 2 21:46:10 2016. "If a maniac is going to speed at 50 or 60 mph on a city street, they are going to do that and kill people regardless if the speed limit is 25, 30, or 35 mph.The other most common way pedestrians are injured is when cars are turning and either the motorist, the pedestrian, or both are not paying adequate attention. Again, no relation to the speed limit. What lowering the limits to unrealistic levels accomplishes are longer trip times for cars and trucks, costing time and money and driving up prices. It also has the additional effect of greatly adding to the city's revenue which is the real reason. Increased safety for pedestrians is just a smokescreen. If the city really cared about increased safety, crosswalks and lane markings would not be allowed to totally deteriorate and in some cases remain that way for years. My street was resurfaced a year ago and DOT still has not painted a yellow line in the center of the street to separate the directional traffic. " What lowering the limits does is that it allows the police to fine somebody before they kill somebody. A crash at 35 MPH is still reasonably likely to cause mortality. A crash at 25 MPH is not likely to result in death. Somebody traveling the speed limit won't kill someone they hit if the speed limit is 25. Somebody traveling the speed limit is reasonably likely to kill someone should that speed limit be 35 or 40. The police can pull over somebody going 40 down a city street before they kill somebody if the speed limit is 25. They cannot do that if the speed limit is 40. Woodhaven is one of the most dangerous streets in the city for pedestrians. Regardless of SBS, the city needs to change that. (And not by making other streets more dangerous for pedestrians as you clearly desire.) With regards to revenue- GOOD! Cars take up FAR too much of this city's resources, while serving relatively little of the population. I would prefer that funding come from user fees, but fining dangerous drivers is certainly something the city should do. "State DOT also would not have installed dangerous and misleading signs on the Gowanus that could not be read after dark if safety was a priority. Now that the permanent signs are in place, there still is a problem because they didn't allow you any time after the sign to switch lanes. You have to be in the proper lane by the time you reach the sign, so you only have a few feet to get in the proper lane at 50 mph which is highly dangerous. Those so called traffic engineers are throughly incompetent. " So because the STATE DOT (Probably a contractor and not NYSDOT itself for that matter) did something you judge to be unsafe, the CITY DOT should ignore making essential safety improvements elsewhere??? Because my neighbor didn't get his fire extinguisher inspected this year, I'll just let my house burn down, despite having a hose at my ready! Although that assumes the signs aren't visible. If you can't find the elevators at 34th street Hudson Yards, I don't think your sign comprehension capabilities are a useful frame of reference. |
|
|
| (310196) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Feb 2 22:35:35 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Feb 2 21:46:10 2016. From Impact Speed and a Pedestrian’s Risk of Severe Injury or Death, September 2011 by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.Results show that the average risk of severe injury for a pedestrian struck by a vehicle reaches 10% at an impact speed of 16 mph, 25% at 23 mph, 50% at 31 mph, 75% at 39 mph, and 90% at 46 mph. The average risk of death for a pedestrian reaches 10% at an impact speed of 23 mph, 25% at 32 mph, 50% at 42 mph, 75% at 50 mph, and 90% at 58 mph. Risks vary significantly by age. For example, the average risk of severe injury or death for a 70‐year‐old pedestrian struck by a car travelling at 25 mph is similar to the risk for a 30‐year‐old pedestrian struck at 35 mph. These results could be used to inform efforts to improve pedestrian safety, for example, by limiting traffic speeds to levels that are unlikely to result in severe injury or death in places where pedestrians and vehicles may encounter one another, creating physical separation of pedestrians and vehicles in places where higher traffic speeds are desired, and developing vehicle‐based systems that detect pedestrians and warn the driver or brake automatically when a collision is imminent. |
|
|
| (310197) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Wakefield-241st Street on Wed Feb 3 12:14:04 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 21 13:05:40 2016. . Just read the hundreds of pro-mass transit articles I wrote and the largest bus route improvements in NYC history I designed and tirelessly fought to get implemented.I didn't know that you worked on redoing the entire Bronx bus network in 1984. That is the largest set of bus route changes and improvements which literally affected the entire borough of the Bronx, the largest in NYC history, IINM. If you are implying that you were the architect of the 1978 Southwestern/Southeastern Brooklyn bus route changes/improvements, it was the largest in Brooklyn history, not NYC history. |
|
|
| (310198) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 12:33:09 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Wakefield-241st Street on Wed Feb 3 12:14:04 2016. I had nothing to do with the Bronx 1984 route changes. Where did I say I did? I know they changed a lot of bus route numbers, but how many routes were actually changed and how extensive were those changes?They also changed a lot of Queens routes in about 1983, I think 12 routes, but virtually all those changes involved terminal loop changes around Jamaica due to one-way street changes, so in my opinion even if one more route was changed than in Brooklyn in 1978, they weren't nearly as extensive and therefore their impact on riders was very small. |
|
|
| (310199) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 12:41:00 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Sun Jan 31 21:30:04 2016. I fully understand the goals of the Woodhaven project, some of which are unwritten such as to slow down auto traffic, to make it so inconvenient fewer people will choose to drive.The MTA is not venturing to say how many will switch modes because they don't believe anyone will really change modes due to some minimal bus improvements. If they really did model the project and the model was indeed usable, that is just one of the outputs that it would have provided, so they indeed do have that information. They are no telling us what the model says because the results were probably so ridiculous, they have zero confidence in it. Where do you get bus ridership is up in all but one of the improved markets? If you are going by the fact that the new routes with 30 minute headways had no ridership before they began operations and now they have six riders per bus, then you are correct. |
|
|
| (310200) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 12:43:53 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by fdtutf on Mon Feb 1 10:12:55 2016. Well how come then there are dozens of people whom I am in contact with who wholeheartedly disagree with you and believe use of the RBL would be much more beneficial to transit riders than SBS on Woodhaven. And these people unlike yourself have decades of experience in the transit industry. |
|
|
| (310201) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 12:47:03 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Feb 1 10:44:46 2016. SBS = $20 million.BRT= $231 million. Which part of that do you not understand? BRT does not equal SBS. SBS=BRT as much as 2+2=3. |
|
|
| (310202) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 12:52:50 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Feb 1 13:10:00 2016. From Howard Beach. |
|
|
| (310203) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 3 13:01:05 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 21:01:33 2016. Except that the turning car isn't going to be going through speed limit anyway. They'd have to slow down approaching the turn, and that's a function of the intersection design and not as much the starting speed. |
|
|
| (310204) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Wakefield-241st Street on Wed Feb 3 13:02:51 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 12:33:09 2016. About 16 route changes - - some of these routes merged, some discontinued. |
|
|
| (310205) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 3 13:04:32 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 22:11:34 2016. With regards to revenue- GOOD! Cars take up FAR too much of this city's resources, while serving relatively little of the population. I would prefer that funding come from user fees, but fining dangerous drivers iscertainly something the city should do. So you prefer revenue to safety? |
|
|
| (310206) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 13:06:38 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 22:11:34 2016. What lowering the limits does is that it allows the police to fine somebody before they kill somebody.Okay so now the person receives a fine and then he kills someone anyway. You really think that someone who is crazy enough to drive at 60 mph on a local street really cares about fines? The city speed limit was 30 not 40, so the police certainly could have still pulled over someone doing 40 prior to lowering the speed limit. State DOT is responsible for its contractors. Hiring a contractor doing incompetent work does not get them off the hook. Besides NYSDOT defended their work. Your analogies make no sense. What I stated was that NYCDOT does not really care about safety regardless of what State DOT is doing. If they did they would, they would timely repainted crosswalks, not do it years after they wear out. They would replace missing by and faded street signs in less than three years. Poor signage causes indecision and can lead to accidents. And I couldn't find the elevators from the lower mezzanine to the upper mezzanine at Hudson Yards because there aren't any. They have inclinators and I didn't bother looking for the tiny wheelchair symbol to tell me where they were. The escalator was right there so I took it. My sign comprehension is just fine. |
|
|
| (310207) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Wed Feb 3 13:11:32 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 3 13:01:05 2016. The argument may be made that starting speed could matter in that if a driver going 40-45 brakes harshly to make the turn he/she may be so focused on the braking and making of the light, that a pedestrian may not register. In fact they may not even be prepared to stop but only have time to brake enough to make the light while turning. If the turn begins at maximum turn speed (let's say 15-20 MPH), seeing a pedestrian at that moment can be a big problem. They may not be ready to stop.A slower starting speed makes for a more normal, ordinary turn that gives plenty of opportunity to detect obstacles. Not giving an opinion on the speed limit. . .just throwing this in. |
|
|
| (310208) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Feb 3 13:13:01 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 12:52:50 2016. From Howard Beach.There's an operating subway line between Howard Beach and Liberty Avenue on the right of way. How would the proposed RBL busway affect existing subway service? |
|
|
| (310209) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Feb 3 13:27:28 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 13:06:38 2016. The city speed limit was 30...The sensitivity for KSI (killed or seriously injured) probability and impact speed is most sensitive in the 20 to 40 mph range. As I previously quoted, reducing impact speed from 32 mph to 23 mph reduces serious injury incidence from 50% to 25% and killed incidence from 25% to 10%. Raising the impact to approximately 40 mph results in increasing serious injury and killed incidence to 75% and 50% respectively. |
|
|
| (310210) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 13:34:19 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 20:04:53 2016. Are you sure you counted all the stops? Google maps shows a stop at Linden Blvd.And when I said buses stop at every avenue block I didn't mean that there is the word '"avenue" in the street name which in Queens could sometimes be as close as 200 feet. An avenue block is commonly considered every 750 feet which is the standard for Lucas bus stops. But I will grant you the fact that on Woodhaven many avenues are skipped line 103 Avenue which puts the local bus stop spacing closer to every quarter mile at places orr every 1300 feet because many bus stops seem to have been removed. |
|
|
| (310211) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 3 13:35:19 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Feb 2 11:29:53 2016. It wasn't an intelligent response. |
|
|
| (310212) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Feb 3 13:37:12 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 3 13:04:32 2016. No. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 22 |
||