|
|
| DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. (314156) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (314156) | |
DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu May 26 13:09:34 2016 http://rockawaytimes.com/index.php/news/22-we-get-email/918-dot-misleadsWhen I tried to ask them questions at the workshop, they responded that they are not here to debate me. When I asked to see the slides again at the Community Advisory Meeting that I referred to in the article so we coud discuss it, they claimed the "projector jammed". Yeah, digital slides jamming. All they had to do was reboot the computer if it locked up. The truth is they didn't want to discuss those slides because they prove what has thus far been installed is a failure. Now they are also proposing extending the bus lane to operate from the LIE to Queens Blvd. when I told them that only two kept turning lanes would back up traffic, they told me they still haven't collected traffic volume data there. So how do you first make a proposal, then collect data. That is ass- backwards. First you need to see if the data supports your proposal before you present it as a final proposal. |
|
|
| (314200) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Thu May 26 22:25:48 2016, in response to DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu May 26 13:09:34 2016. They are tired of dealing with you, and frankly so are some of us.Bus chat has been the "Al and Brian" show for the past month. from the LIE to Queens Blvd wow, they want extend it a whole...few yards? |
|
|
| (314205) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri May 27 02:21:14 2016, in response to DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu May 26 13:09:34 2016. When I tried to ask them questions at the workshop, they responded that they are not here to debate me.Burned! You got BURNED by DOT! Ouch! When I asked to see the slides again at the Community Advisory Meeting that I referred to in the article so we coud discuss it, they claimed the "projector jammed". Yeah, digital slides jamming.Ha ha haahahahahahahah ahah!!! DOT ain't taking no sh*t from you. They put you in your place. The truth is they didn't want to discuss those slides because they prove what has thus far been installed is a failure.Doubful. I don't think it's a conspiracy like you do. I think they just ain't got time to deal with your dumb ***. |
|
|
| (314210) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri May 27 08:30:13 2016, in response to DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu May 26 13:09:34 2016. Your "private autos uber alles" mentality has prevented you from seeing a fundamental flaw in DOT's Woodhaven Blvd SBS analysis.Their analysis is based on a simulation (pp. 50-51). The question is how well does this simulation model the current situation? If it doesn't, then it should be "back to the old drawing board," as we used to say in the engineering business. The first slide shows before/after bus running times between Jamaica and Metropolitan Avenues. Their peak period before/after running times are: 12.9 and 7.8 minutes, espectively. These figures are easily verifiable from MTA sources. What about the MTA schedules? It would have been convenient, if the printed MTA Q52/53 schedule showed these stops. That way anyone could simply take bus schedule and compare the before running time versions of DOT and MTA. The next best thing is to use the printed Q11/Q21 local bus schedule. It shows the running time 7 minutes between these two stops. This means the current local service between these stops is quicker than what BRT would provide. If the current local service is better, what about the current limited stop service? The MTA releases bus schedule data for developers for free (as in no charge). This data shows the arrival times for all bus trips at all stops. What does this data say about the current running times for the Q52/53 bus between Jamaica And Metropolitan Aves? It shows 6 minutes for the Q52 and 6:41 for the Q53 during the peak hours. That's a 20% increase in running time over what the current schedule says. |
|
|
| (314213) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri May 27 09:14:43 2016, in response to Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by The Silence on Thu May 26 22:25:48 2016. They are tired of dealing with me because they have no answers to my questions.And those few yards can make a big difference in travel times. It can add another 5 minutes to people's trips. I showed them a way to add a bus lane without having those ill effects. They took notes. I will see if they revise their plans to include my ideas. I shouldn't have to engineer the intersection for them. |
|
|
| (314214) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri May 27 09:17:38 2016, in response to Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by Terrapin Station on Fri May 27 02:21:14 2016. Yes all they have time for is to push their plan through without dealing with legitimate issues like average travel speeds slowed down to 10 or 12 mph as their plan causes with slower bus trips also in the AM peak as their own data showed. Of course they wouldn't want to take time to discuss that. |
|
|
| (314216) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri May 27 09:24:45 2016, in response to Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri May 27 08:30:13 2016. You raise very good questions, but I didn't even go that far to analyze how valid their simulation is. I took them at their word that it was accurate and asked a more basic question. Why only show the simulation results for Concept 2? They needed to show how the results for Concept 2 were more favorable than either Concept 1 or 3 to lead them to choose Concept 2. They didn't even do that. When asked why Concept 2 was chosen when the communities preferred Concept 1, their response was that some homeowners preferred the buses to be further from their houses. Since when should that be the primary concern when the buses were there when they purchased their homes? |
|
|
| (314219) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri May 27 09:54:35 2016, in response to Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by BrooklynBus on Fri May 27 09:24:45 2016. I didn't even go that far to analyze how valid their simulation is. I took them at their word that it was accurate and asked a more basic question.What is more basic? All their "what-if" answers are based on simulation. Their answers are only as good as the simulation. |
|
|
| (314220) | |
Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri May 27 10:21:07 2016, in response to Re: DOT continues to mislead regarding Woodhaven SBS., posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri May 27 09:54:35 2016. Exactly. I have always had doubts about the validity of their simulations because we have been asking for those results for almost two years now and now we first have partial answers.Rather than splitting hairs, I will just say they are both basic. The simulation has to be checked for accuracy which you have shown was not done, and then if accurate, then it has to be shown that it was used in their decision making which it probably wasn't. If the simulation results showed better numbers for Concept 1, and they chose Concept 2, tgave woukd be plain dishonest. |
|
|