|
|
| Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven (309839) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 17 of 22 |
||
|
| (311510) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Mar 14 16:44:23 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 15:13:19 2016. Read the first sentence.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_service It refers to highways only. Read the section titled "Multimodal LOS." Also, look up the definition of "highway," even on wickipedia. |
|
|
| (311511) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:45:05 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 16:32:27 2016. Sorry- hit post before addressing the last section."Also for through capacity to increase ALL LEFT TURNS would have to be eliminated not some to enable the progressive lights to increase capacity. And if priority signals for buses are put in, that would also mess up the progressive signals for general traffic. So I have real doubts about eliminTing left turns actually increasing through capacity." No. It certainly would help through capacity to eliminate all left turns, but it is not necessary to do so to see improvements in throughput. |
|
|
| (311512) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Mar 14 16:45:33 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 15:51:16 2016. Getting people to their destinations as quickly as possible is the goal"People" includes transit riders. |
|
|
| (311513) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:45:35 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by fdtutf on Mon Mar 14 16:38:52 2016. I'm ashamed of myself. How the hell did I miss that one? |
|
|
| (311514) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 16:46:40 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:17:52 2016. Then we shouldn't even speak of LOS since it is now irrelevent to the discussion.So what is being said is LOS will increase after the project is completed but we will never get to see the numbers. SO HOW WILL WE KNOW LOS WILL INCREASE? It's "TRUST US" as with every other facet of this project. |
|
|
| (311515) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:49:47 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 16:42:57 2016. "When cars need to make a right turn they first have to slow down. That means that a car going through also has to slow down behind him and possibly just miss the green signal. So it certainly does affect capacity when it is not a dedicated right turn lane. "But, as I keep saying, they aren't eliminating the right turn lanes at Metropolitan, so that does not apply. "Just because you have two other supporters here DOES NOT MEAN IT HELPS A LOT MORE THAN IT HURTS. DOT and the MTA would have to prove that by sharing the results of it Transportation Planning Model. THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT." You claim that. Nobody else seems to believe it outside of your little QPTC circle of insanity "So we have ZERO data that shows more are helped than hurt when considering those who are not in buses." Except there is no evidence that car riders in general are hurt whatsoever. "And judging from the fact that bus riders are in the extreme minority," Again, a total fabrication on your part. "one bus rider would have to save more time than six or so drivers and passengers would lose. " If your made up numbers were true, perhaps. But they aren't. "That is just not likely especially when you consider that the exclusive lanes will save bus riders time only for a few hours a day" You keep on saying that. Without any base in realty... "and cars will lose time for most of the day." You keep on saying that. Without any base in realty... |
|
|
| (311516) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Mar 14 16:51:47 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:43:06 2016. Ten was a flippant remark obviously not meant to be taken seriously. I am not saying there isn't any demand Woodside-Sheepshead, but to accept that such is large, I CERTAINLY would need to see data.Census journey-to-work modal data. |
|
|
| (311517) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:52:08 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 16:46:40 2016. We shouldn't speak of things you don't understand.Unfortunately this is a Transit board. I guess you shouldn't speak. :P |
|
|
| (311518) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:02:53 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:12:37 2016. Isn't it possible that during the first year many riders decided to try SBS because of all the hype so ridership increased during the first year."Yes, but those people would be insignificant in number to matter." Pure speculation on your part. Ridership went down systemwide but IT WENT DOWN BY GREATER PERCENTAGES ON MOST SBS ROUTES. Yes it is distinctly absurd even to think that some riders gave up on SBS because they weren't saving any time after they factored in the extra waiting and just missing a bus because they had to first get a receipt. Just absolutely absurd. But you can't just isolate the variable of SBS. That is the problem. There are just too many factors at play. You say ridership can go down and the route can still be a success. Are you saying that because UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES YOU WILL ADMIT SBS FAILURE? So what are you basing your B44 success on? That bus run times from end to end decreased by 15 minutes? How does that help the passenger when NO ONE TRAVELS THE ENTIRE ROUTE or even a majority of the route. The average passenger trip is only 2.3 miles long so the time savings for the average passenger may only be three minutes. Sure some are helped. No one ever denied that. But no one has shown more people aren't hurt even when you only consider bus riders. Service was greatly increased in the hopes most Sheepshead Bay residents would switch from the B4 and B36 to the B44 SBS. THAT NEVER HAPPENED. The B44 SBS never carries more than 6 passengers south of Avenue X in either direction except perhaps when shifts are changing at the nursing homes on Emmons Avenue. As a result service on the B44 SBS and the local was greatly reduced south of Avenue U when the additional passengers did not materialize as predicted. SO HOW DO YOU CONSIDER THIS ROUTE TO BE SUCCESSFUL? |
|
|
| (311519) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:16:36 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 15:25:11 2016. Look how you mislead.Spider Pig says "fewer lanes" You disagree and respond "Depends on where. Same number in many places. More in a couple places." The only places where the numbers are the same are over and under the LIRR and the bridges to Rockaway and points south. Between Queens Boulevard and Howard Beach there will be fewer lanes with only two small exceptions. Then I said: "The question was are general lanes being removed for bus lanes and the answer should be a resounding YES." You responded "EXACTLY WRONG" That says to me you are now denying general lanes are being removed. Nothing is in doubt. The street is still being fully rebuilt. Not true. The street is not being fully rebuilt in Phase 1. Only the bus lanes will be put in and islands widened to accommodate bus shelters. Everything else except for testing of banning left turns is Phase 2. DOT stated Phase 2 is not a given. It will be decided whether or not to proceed with it depending on the results of Phase 1 after it is analyzed. |
|
|
| (311520) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:18:44 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Mar 14 16:45:33 2016. And it also includes people in cars which are the overwhelming majority like 80 percent. |
|
|
| (311521) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:20:52 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Mar 14 16:51:47 2016. That was only one example from one specific origin/destination. There are many others like everyone from eastern Queens who will switch to the Van Wyck or Lefferts Boulevard if travel times become competitive as a result of longer travel times on Woodhaven. |
|
|
| (311522) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Mar 14 17:27:54 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:20:52 2016. I wouldn't worry about people "switching." It's not like the streets are rival companies. If people switch, it's not like someone's going out of business.I for one wish the Van Wyck was reliably faster. An actual expressway is supposed to be faster than its parallel streets. |
|
|
| (311523) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:30:08 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Mar 14 16:44:23 2016. Would they consider a street like Queens Boulevard which has a 25 mph speed limit to be a "highway"? |
|
|
| (311525) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:39:18 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:30:08 2016. Yes.Alderton would be as well. |
|
|
| (311526) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:40:29 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Mar 14 17:27:54 2016. Switching is a problem when switching does not improve travel speeds for the one who is switching and it reduced reliability for unreliable roads like the Van Wyck because there are now more cars on it. |
|
|
| (311527) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:43:45 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:19:33 2016. I do understand all of those. Lincoln McMahon who never worked in the transportation industry and never improved bus routes so that thousands every day are benefitting from his improvements and does not understand all of those. He is gullible enough to repeat as true everything he has heard from DOT. |
|
|
| (311528) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:44:22 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:20:19 2016. Do you know that for sure? Show me the link. |
|
|
| (311529) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:49:12 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:22:37 2016. But DOT has been and is continuing to eliminate using alternative routes in case of delays and accidents. When one does happen you will be stuck on Woodhaven for 10 or 15 minutes until you get the opportunity to get off. If one of the two general traffic lanes is blocked due to an accident, you will risk getting a summons by using the bus lane to bypass the blockage unless a policeman is present to direct you to use it. |
|
|
| (311530) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:49:32 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:02:53 2016. "Isn't it possible that during the first year many riders decided to try SBS because of all the hype so ridership increased during the first year."Yes, but those people would be insignificant in number to matter." Pure speculation on your part." A REALLY safe assumption. "Ridership went down systemwide but IT WENT DOWN BY GREATER PERCENTAGES ON MOST SBS ROUTES." Not really. Each route which went down appears to have similar loss to the parallel routes. "Yes it is distinctly absurd even to think that some riders gave up on SBS because they weren't saving any time after they factored in the extra waiting and just missing a bus because they had to first get a receipt. Just absolutely absurd." Yeah, because those things just don't happen. "But you can't just isolate the variable of SBS. That is the problem. There are just too many factors at play." Of course. Nobody said first year data is perfect. It is just the ONLY ridership data that is applicable in any way. "You say ridership can go down and the route can still be a success." Yeah, ridership is not the only way to measure success. "Are you saying that because UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES YOU WILL ADMIT SBS FAILURE?" Under no circumstances will SBS be a failure, so I can't see circumstances under which I will admit a falsehood. "So what are you basing your B44 success on? That bus run times from end to end decreased by 15 minutes? How does that help the passenger when NO ONE TRAVELS THE ENTIRE ROUTE or even a majority of the route." It certainly does help them. "The average passenger trip is only 2.3 miles long so the time savings for the average passenger may only be three minutes." Your source for that number is what exactly? And saving three minutes out of how many? If you save 3 minutes on what was a 5 minute trip, that is SPECTACULAR. "Sure some are helped. No one ever denied that." "But no one has shown more people aren't hurt even when you only consider bus riders." You are right! Nobody has shown that more people aren't hurt when you only consider bus riders! Thanks for admitting it. "Service was greatly increased in the hopes most Sheepshead Bay residents would switch from the B4 and B36 to the B44 SBS. THAT NEVER HAPPENED." It was? "The B44 SBS never carries more than 6 passengers south of Avenue X in either direction except perhaps when shifts are changing at the nursing homes on Emmons Avenue." Really? Where are the ride counts to back up your claim? "As a result service on the B44 SBS and the local was greatly reduced south of Avenue U when the additional passengers did not materialize as predicted. SO HOW DO YOU CONSIDER THIS ROUTE TO BE SUCCESSFUL?" 15 minute reduction in run times is not a big success? You can't win an argument if you admit the thing you are saying is unsuccessful is successful at the very beginning of your argument. |
|
|
| (311531) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:53:25 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:16:36 2016. Look how you mislead.Spider Pig says "fewer lanes" You disagree and respond "Depends on where. Same number in many places. More in a couple places." The only places where the numbers are the same are over and under the LIRR and the bridges to Rockaway and points south. Not true. All along Cross bay there is no reduction in bus lanes. "Between Queens Boulevard and Howard Beach there will be fewer lanes with only two small exceptions." There are NOT only two exceptions, and they are NOT particularly small. "Then I said: "The question was are general lanes being removed for bus lanes and the answer should be a resounding YES." You responded "EXACTLY WRONG" That says to me you are now denying general lanes are being removed. " Correct. They are not being removed throughout. They are being removed in specific locations. "Nothing is in doubt. The street is still being fully rebuilt. Not true. The street is not being fully rebuilt in Phase 1. Only the bus lanes will be put in and islands widened to accommodate bus shelters. Everything else except for testing of banning left turns is Phase 2. DOT stated Phase 2 is not a given. It will be decided whether or not to proceed with it depending on the results of Phase 1 after it is analyzed." Phase 2 will be completed. Some details may change based on the results of phase 1. |
|
|
| (311532) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:55:08 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:53:25 2016. First paragraph should read:"Look how you mislead. Spider Pig says "fewer lanes" You disagree and respond "Depends on where. Same number in many places. More in a couple places." The only places where the numbers are the same are over and under the LIRR and the bridges to Rockaway and points south." Not true. All along Cross bay there is no reduction in traffic lanes. (The bus lanes are being made from reduction in lane size, not through conversion of a lane there.) |
|
|
| (311533) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:55:26 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:18:44 2016. No. Nowhere near 80% |
|
|
| (311534) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:56:02 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:25:50 2016. "There is no reason to show such"I disagree. It is called proving your case which is what government is required to do. I didn't say you should put park and ride lots on Woodhaven. And you are correct. They are not building on any assumption of car use reduction which is exactly why this proposal cannot work. "You know, there is nothing preventing a SBS rider from transferring to a non- SBS route." What does that have to do with anything? If the B82 SBS does not connect with the Woodhaven SBS, a third bus and an extra fare is required so many will not do it. No one has provided any specifics to show that SBS will benefit more than will suffer from it. All we have a generalities like buses carry more passengers than cars. |
|
|
| (311535) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:56:19 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:40:29 2016. No it is not. |
|
|
| (311536) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:58:11 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:44:22 2016. Look it up. The plan is online. |
|
|
| (311537) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 18:09:58 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:43:06 2016. "I think West Street is a perfect example of traffic mirroring capacity, which was the initial point."So you are saying there is less traffic on West Street today than there was on Miller Highway since capacity was reduced? Do you have any numbers to back that up? "Your replacement in Woodside also lives n Sheepshead Bay? What a coincidence?" Don't be ridiculous. That isn't what I was saying at all. What I was saying was that someone living anywhere in souther Brooklyn could have got a job in Woodside, Sunnyside or Astoris for example who would have a similar route to the one I had. And as I said, that was only one example. There are also coming from the east who would switch from Woodhaven to the Van Wyck or Lefferts Blvd with longer Woodhaven travel times. That's right you can make a wild statement without any data but any statement I make is rejected for lack of data. Keep that up. Besides its not up to me to show Rogers traffic did not increase. THAT IS DOT's JOB, and they have been clearly negligent. "There are fewer additional lanes in select locations than there are today." Exactly and everyone in those "additional lanes" will now have to share the other lanes increasing traffic. You are assuming that everyone in those "additional" lanes are traveling over and under the LIRR when probably most of them may be never pass the LIRR. Your last paragraph is not comprehensible. |
|
|
| (311540) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Mon Mar 14 18:23:21 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 16:33:15 2016. In your question. |
|
|
| (311542) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 19:02:22 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:35:55 2016. WRONG!!! You said both statements:I said: "The purpose of an exclusive bus lane is to increase the average bus speed. Period." You responded: "No." And when I asked you what the purpose of exclusive lanes are you responded: "Speed up buses AND make them more reliable by reducing interference from other vehicles." I do know how to read. You are just speaking out of both sides of your mouth. First you deny the purpose of bus lanes are to speed up buses. Then you say the purpose IS to speed up buses. |
|
|
| (311543) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Mon Mar 14 20:02:16 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:19:33 2016. LOL!!!!! |
|
|
| (311544) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Mar 14 21:35:42 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 15:51:16 2016. The object is to get people where they want to go. We can eliminate all right and left turns on the entire Woodhaven and Cross Bay Boulevards. What would that do? It would increase capacity as you say. But no one would be able to get anywhere unless you were traveling from Howard Beach to Queens Boulevard. If you were a transportation planner or traffic engineer you would know that CAPACITY ISNT THE ONLY CONSIDERATION.Huh? Why are you changing the subject? You said there would be a 33% reduction in capacity. I replied and showed you why a reduction in lanes does not equate to a 1:1 reduction in capacity. And now you are ignoring what I wrote and are trying to say that there's more to it than capacity. Whether or not there is more to it than capacity is irrelevant to the discussion in this subthread. The discussion is about whether going from 12 to 8 lanes is a 33% reduction in capacity. You claimed it was. I told you why you're wrong. So either admit you were wrong or try bringing proff that you know what you're talking about. Why is this so hard? Why can't you follow along? If you were a transportation planner or traffic engineerIf you were a transportation planner or traffic engineer, or at least someone with even a shred of intelligence, you'd easily be able to tell who here is a transportation planner or a traffic engineer. Getting people to their destinations as quickly as possible is the goal and any proposal that hurts more than it helps as this one does is not a good one.You haven't shown how this plan hurts more than it helps. In fact, others have shown how it helps more than it hurts. So you STFU.No, since you';ve been shown to be completely wrong about almost everything you've said in this thread, you need to STFU and start listening. |
|
|
| (311545) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 21:37:00 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 19:02:22 2016. You obviously cannot read. You correctly quote my statement which disagrees with yours and cannot seem to understand how it does so. Reread my statement. See what it says. See how it differs from yours. It should be easy for you to find as you have my statement quoted in your post. No, I don't say anywhere that THE purpose is to speed up buses. |
|
|
| (311546) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 21:39:20 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 21:37:00 2016. Perhaps you need to look up the difference between definite and indefinite articles. |
|
|
| (311547) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 22:00:18 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:43:45 2016. It is funny that you think you improved bus routes. The only improvement I have seen with your name attached to makes the route it is on rather dysfunctional. |
|
|
| (311548) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Mar 14 22:00:47 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 16:45:35 2016. Nobody's perfect. Just keep in mind that you're doing fine, and a hell of a lot better than some people. ;-) |
|
|
| (311549) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 22:03:15 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 17:56:02 2016. ""There is no reason to show such"I disagree. It is called proving your case which is what government is required to do." A. No they are not required to do so. B. The results on the other lines clearly have proven the success of the concept, so they did anyway. "I didn't say you should put park and ride lots on Woodhaven." Then what the hell did you mean? "And you are correct. They are not building on any assumption of car use reduction which is exactly why this proposal cannot work." When you do not reduce capacity, you do not need to assume lower usage. ""You know, there is nothing preventing a SBS rider from transferring to a non- SBS route." What does that have to do with anything? If the B82 SBS does not connect with the Woodhaven SBS, a third bus and an extra fare is required so many will not do it." They can take a different bus. Or use an unlimited metrocard, like many regular commuters do. Or take the subway. Or drive. ETC. "No one has provided any specifics to show that SBS will benefit more than will suffer from it. " As nobody has come up with a group that will NOT benefit from SBS, such is moot. "All we have a generalities like buses carry more passengers than cars." That is not a generality, it is a nearly universal truth. |
|
|
| (311550) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Mar 14 22:03:37 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 18:09:58 2016. Your last paragraph is not comprehensible.Yeah. Somebody should let the author know. |
|
|
| (311551) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 22:15:51 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Mar 14 18:09:58 2016. "So you are saying there is less traffic on West Street today than there was on Miller Highway since capacity was reduced? Do you have any numbers to back that up?"I personally do not, but I believe such literally is a textbook example. "Don't be ridiculous. That isn't what I was saying at all. What I was saying was that someone living anywhere in souther Brooklyn could have got a job in Woodside, Sunnyside or Astoris for example who would have a similar route to the one I had. And as I said, that was only one example. There are also coming from the east who would switch from Woodhaven to the Van Wyck or Lefferts Blvd with longer Woodhaven travel times." Nobody in their right mind going from Astoria to Sunset Park would go via Woodhaven. I think you may have had literally the only commute for which Woodhaven or the BQE were roughly equivalent. "That's right you can make a wild statement without any data but any statement I make is rejected for lack of data. Keep that up. Besides its not up to me to show Rogers traffic did not increase. THAT IS DOT's JOB, and they have been clearly negligent." I didn't make a serious statement. I certainly claim that I expect the number of commuters from Woodside to Sheepshead Bay is not exactly 10 if it makes you feel better. DOT does not publish their counts for every single street in the city. Why should Rogers be any different? So NO. IT IS NOT DOT'S JOB. "Exactly and everyone in those "additional lanes" will now have to share the other lanes increasing traffic. You are assuming that everyone in those "additional" lanes are traveling over and under the LIRR when probably most of them may be never pass the LIRR." Except that they will need to merge where it goes down to 3 lanes anyway. Oh well. Not everyone does, but backups from merges can easily go back to areas prior to said merges and affect people who are not going through said area. "Your last paragraph is not comprehensible." I COULDN'T AGREE MORE. My one quibble is that I take no ownership of it. |
|
|
| (311553) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 10:58:34 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:39:18 2016. In that case every paved road is considered a highway. I really doubt that. |
|
|
| (311554) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:11:21 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:49:32 2016. Yes all your assumptions are really safe, but all of mine are unproven. REALLY?"Not really. Each route which went down appears to have similar loss to the parallel routes." You can't conclude that without doing an analysis of every SBS route that lost ridership which you did not do. The 2.3 mile average trip length comes directly out of a preliminary B44 SBS report before it was implemented. And we are not talking about saving three minutes out of a five minute trip. You pulled that number out if your ass. We are talking more about saving three minutes out of a 20 or 30 minute trip. Just because no one has shown more bus riders are hurt than are helped doesn't automatically make the contrary statement true that more are helped. It just means we don't know because of a lack of data. Yes service was initially greatly increased south of Avenue U. During rush hours the SBS and local initially operated every once every three minutes combined. Previously, it was like a limited bus once every five or more minutes. Service was reduced when the anticipated ridership never materialized. The ride counts are in at least one article in Sheepshead where I stood on the corner of Avenue Z and Nostrand for an hour in the AM and counted B44 and B 36 riders. A 15 minute reduction in run times may be good for the MTA. It does not follow that it is good for the passenger when those savings come as a result of walking extra distances to an SBS bus stop when compared to the Limited in place before. |
|
|
| (311555) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Mar 15 11:11:44 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 10:58:34 2016. "In that case every paved road is considered a highway."As are unpaved roads. "I really doubt that." Not surprising. You seem to doubt much of reality. |
|
|
| (311556) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:27:13 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:53:25 2016. "Not true. All along Cross bay there is no reduction in bus lanes."Your statement is not true. Two alternatives were put forth. One with narrowing the lanes and the other with keeping the lanes the same width but eliminating all left turn bays. To accomplish to first, the speed limit would have to be lowered to 20 or 25 mph because faster speeds would not be safe. A tractor trailer currently barely fits into the existing traffic lanes. The second option would greatly delay traffic as cars would be stuck vehicles d any car making a left turn at numerous cross streets. To say lanes are not being removed throughout is plainly misleading since lanes are being removed for 3.5 out of the 4 miles between Queens Blvd and Rockaway Blvd, Trottenberg stated that depending on the results of Phase 1, they will then decide whether or not to proceed with Phase 2. When I spoke to her on March 4th, I asked her why I never received a response to my letter suggesting they only go ahead with Phase 1 (with modifications) and drop Phase 2. She told me "you might get what your wish." That doesn't sound to me like Phase 2 is a definite. The federal funds necessary have not yet been procured. |
|
|
| (311557) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:28:30 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:55:26 2016. I am not going through that again. I already proved with numbers that bus riders outnumbered by only 2 to 1 over a 24 hour period is not possible. |
|
|
| (311558) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Mar 15 11:29:14 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:28:30 2016. Except you never did. And 24 hours is utterly irrelevant. |
|
|
| (311559) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:29:36 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Mon Mar 14 17:56:19 2016. More cars on the Van Wyck certainly decreases reliability on that roadway when it is already congested most of the time. |
|
|
| (311560) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:32:46 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by TerrApin Station on Mon Mar 14 18:23:21 2016. Definitely not. R30 stated that traffic is currently adequately handled during the peak hour. I disputed that. Yes you use peak hour data to determine what is happening during the peak hour. But it is insufficient for a plan to change the roadway 24/7 which has been my position all along. Do not say I said things I never said. That is dishonest. |
|
|
| (311561) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:34:43 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by R30A on Tue Mar 15 11:11:44 2016. So if every paved road is a "highway" then they could just say "paved road". There would be no reason to introduce a new term, |
|
|
| (311562) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Mar 15 11:41:08 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:11:21 2016. "Yes all your assumptions are really safe, but all of mine are unproven. REALLY?"In general yes. That is why I make safe assumptions. If you want people not to challenge your assumptions don't make ones which are obviously false. "Not really. Each route which went down appears to have similar loss to the parallel routes." You can't conclude that without doing an analysis of every SBS route that lost ridership which you did not do. Actually, you can just by looking at it. "The 2.3 mile average trip length comes directly out of a preliminary B44 SBS report before it was implemented." How can you possibly use the average trip length for BEFORE a change and apply it to AFTER the change when you looking at the service which will disproportionately favor the longer distance riders. "And we are not talking about saving three minutes out of a five minute trip. You pulled that number out if your ass. We are talking more about saving three minutes out of a 20 or 30 minute trip." LOL. Assuming 15 minute end to end savings on a route which takes under an hour, a 30 minute trip would end up with an 8 minute reduction. That all said. FINE, let us accept your numbers anyway. Saving 3 minutes on a 30 minute trip is a TEN PERCENT REDUCTION. THAT IS F'ING HUGE. But still, that is smaller than it is. "Just because no one has shown more bus riders are hurt than are helped doesn't automatically make the contrary statement true that more are helped. It just means we don't know because of a lack of data." LOL. You have to find a population which was actually hurt for it to be possible that more were hurt than helped. Yes service was initially greatly increased south of Avenue U. During rush hours the SBS and local initially operated every once every three minutes combined. Previously, it was like a limited bus once every five or more minutes. Service was reduced when the anticipated ridership never materialized. "The ride counts are in at least one article in Sheepshead where I stood on the corner of Avenue Z and Nostrand for an hour in the AM and counted B44 and B 36 riders." LOL. i.e. the counts don't exist. "A 15 minute reduction in run times may be good for the MTA. It does not follow that it is good for the passenger when those savings come as a result of walking extra distances to an SBS bus stop when compared to the Limited in place before." Yes, I forgot. Most riders want to take longer to get home. Relatively few stops eliminated. You think they don't do calculations to see how many riders would be inconvenienced by stop eliminations, and how much time will be lost by them relative to the amount of time gained by skipping those stops? You think that and expect anybody at all to believe you were ever a planner? Absolutely preposterous. |
|
|
| (311563) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Mar 15 11:41:51 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 11:34:43 2016. Who said every one is paved?Who said highway is a new term? |
|
|
| (311564) | |
Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Mar 15 11:53:37 2016, in response to Re: Summary and Video of November 2015 SBS meeting in Woodhaven, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Mar 15 10:58:34 2016. In that case every paved road is considered a highway. I really doubt that.New York State traffic law -- definitions -- Highway |
|
|
|
Page 17 of 22 |
||