Home  Maps  About

Home > BusChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10>> : Last

< Previous Page  

Page 7 of 11

Next Page >  

(322020)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Thu Jan 12 08:48:23 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jan 11 23:02:17 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
What?

That was an uncommonly idiotic comment.


(322030)

view threaded

Sorry, This Thread Is Locked....Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by heypaul on Thu Jan 12 09:26:16 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Thu Jan 12 08:48:23 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
As this subject has been beaten to redness, the thread is now closed. Anyone attempting to circumcise this edict will be subject to immediate ejaculation.

(322033)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jan 12 10:50:13 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Thu Jan 12 08:48:23 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
No, it's not. You claim that treating diseases as opposed to curing them increases economic activity.

(322034)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jan 12 10:58:33 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Wed Jan 11 10:25:09 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Well, if people can get jobs as heroin dealers, they can avoid getting into things that are more dangerous to society like driving dollar vans.

(322038)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jan 12 11:04:56 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by JerBear on Thu Jan 5 08:38:41 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
I never said that removing lanes doesn't have a net positive economic benefit, I'm just saying that it's not the universal panacea that some believe it is.

I don't think we disagree at all. All I'm saying is that there is a detriment to removing lanes, so that the benefit has to outweigh it. I don't believe that is the case along Woodhaven.

(322040)

view threaded

Re: Sorry, This Thread Is Locked....Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Jan 12 11:09:58 2017, in response to Sorry, This Thread Is Locked....Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by heypaul on Thu Jan 12 09:26:16 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
What? Mentioning the word "ejaculation" will cause even more foamers to join in the discussion.

(322041)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by AlM on Thu Jan 12 11:15:31 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jan 12 10:50:13 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
???

I thought he was saying that curing a disease is a more beneficial economic activity than just treating the symptoms.



(322046)

view threaded

Re: Sorry, This Thread Is Locked....Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by heypaul on Thu Jan 12 12:31:41 2017, in response to Re: Sorry, This Thread Is Locked....Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Jan 12 11:09:58 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
You're right. Instead of ejaculated, how about eviscerated?

(322052)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jan 12 13:14:03 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Thu Jan 12 11:15:31 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
No, he says that it registers more economic activity to treat the symptoms over curing it. Completely ignoring all the economic activity lost from spending more time and money on disease treatment instead of something else.

(322053)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:31:05 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Wed Jan 11 13:44:28 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
You know I was saying the opposite of what you think I said.

The only reason I added myself in the mix was because if I just said all planners aren't experts (which includes MTA and. DOT planners), you would have made the comment that I am no expert.

(322054)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:34:04 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by terRAPIN station on Wed Jan 11 13:14:04 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Because average speed is the factor to determine how long it takes to get anywhere and lowering the speed limit so that you can't ever top 25 mph even when there is a great distance between intersections and no pedestrians anywhere lowers to average speed.

(322055)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:36:44 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by terRAPIN station on Wed Jan 11 13:12:23 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
"perfectly usable" does not mean without any flaws.

Since everything has some flaws, by your definition, nothing is perfectly usable.

(322056)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 13:38:02 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:34:04 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Lowering the speed limit does not necessarily lower the average speed.

Furthermore, I think the problem most people are having here is that lowering the speed limit would almost certainly not result in the specific changes in average speed you are claiming it would.

(322057)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:44:10 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Wed Jan 11 13:42:44 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
If have already shown you how five times as many auto users as bus users is perfectly likely.

I counted up all the cars and buses without considering distance because that is all the information we have available. I never stated it was the best way. Of course miles traversed for each mode would be better.

Show me that info and I will gladly apply it.

And f you have slightly proved bus service because we have no evidence that it will be any greater than slightly, only wild unsubstantiated predictions from DOT, while causing much more harm for the bulk of corridor users, we have a bad plan that made matters worse for most. Unless you believe that bus riders and pedestrians are the only ones who should be considered and the only ones matter which brigs us back to the subject of this thread. So us that what you believe? Yes or no?

(322058)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:45:41 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Wed Jan 11 13:37:08 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
I never said that at all so quit making up false statements.

(322059)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:53:18 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Wed Jan 11 13:02:58 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
There is much difference in practice.

Are you referring to the reckless cyclist who was traveling too fast for the dark and rainy conditions because he was desperate to make the green light and was riding without any reflectors or lights or bells (all law violations), reflective clothing, and swerved without looking into the crosswalk to avoid a collision but risking hitting any possible pedestrians there while I was cautiously making my turn at about three miles per hour?

Safety is everyone's responsibility as I have numerously pointed out and that includes cyclists and pedestrians. The cyclist had the responsibility to obey the law. The motorist cannot be expected to avoid someone that cannot be seen. That's the reality.

(322060)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:57:32 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Jan 11 15:31:40 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
That is the current proposal.

One of the alternatives was for two parking lanes, a center mall, two bus lanes and six traffic lanes. Under those circumstances, could the street have accommodated lanes that are 10 to 11 feet wide?

(322061)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 14:00:36 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:44:10 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
If have already shown you how five times as many auto users as bus users is perfectly likely.
And he and I and many others have shown you how equal bus and auto users is equally likely.

I counted up all the cars and buses without considering distance because that is all the information we have available. I never stated it was the best way. Of course miles traversed for each mode would be better.
Show me that info and I will gladly apply it.

You keep on making up erroneous assumptions based on numbers and claiming them to be facts. If there is no data, there is no data.

And f you have slightly proved bus service because we have no evidence that it will be any greater than slightly, only wild unsubstantiated predictions from DOT, while causing much more harm for the bulk of corridor users, we have a bad plan that made matters worse for most.
I have no idea what the first part of the statement is meant to say. You are the only person who seems to think the improvements would not greatly improve bus service. You don't need a citation for people to believe the sun will come up tomorrow. SBS being an improvement for bus riders is at a similar level of obviousness. Furthermore, nobody has demonstrated that it would result in any downgrade for auto users.

Unless you believe that bus riders and pedestrians are the only ones who should be considered and the only ones matter which brigs us back to the subject of this thread. So us that what you believe? Yes or no?
From a safety perspective, YES. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IS ALL THAT MATTERS. FULL STOP. Your desire to speed and terrorize the poor people on the street is not of any importance when put against the lives of people going about their days. You obviously don't care about such, which is why it is essential to build their safety into the roads. There is nothing wrong with assigning a higher value to the time of bus riders. Encouraging bus ridership and providing capacity for it to grow is the only way to maximize throughput.

(322065)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 16:37:16 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 14:00:36 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Okay, show me once again how the number of auto users and bus users is equally likely when many intersections show between 30,000 and 50,000 daily crossings of motor vehicles and there are only 33,000 daily bus riders. You can lie all you want. It doesn't make what you say true.

I am the only person to believe SBS is a poor idea? Really? Well here is another opinion from 2011. It is about the M15. The only difference now is that the M15 has since lost 3 million annual riders.

http://stuffnobodycaresabout.com/2011/05/04/the-mtas-select-bus-service-a-good-idea-poorly-executed/

"No one has demonstrated it would result in a downgrade for auto users."

The initial data from DOT where exclusive bus lanes were implemented demonstrated a 38 percent decrease in speed between Furmanville and Metropolitan northbound in the AM rush. So your statement is untrue.

(322066)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 17:16:51 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 16:37:16 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
You do realize that the post you are claiming is an example of it being a bad idea includes
"A Decent Idea"
in its title?


A 38 percent decrease in speed between furmanville and Metropolitan NB in a single hour of the AM rush is not indicative of the finished project being a downgrade for auto users, nor is it obvious that such a reduction is not a noble goal in and of itself.

(322085)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 22:21:51 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 17:16:51 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
I share his opinion that SBS is a good idea in theory but has been executed miserably. I was originally in favor of SBS when it was first announced as an additional layer on top of limited service.

If a partial implementation as already resulted in a downgrade for auto users, there is no reason to assume that a full implementation will lessen the negative impact on auto users. It will only exacerbate the situation.

A parallel situation is the bike lanes on half of Queens Blvd which has greatly worsened traffic there. It can not be assumed that when the project is fully completed, that traffic will even get worse, not better.

(322086)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 22:41:47 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 22:21:51 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
I share his opinion that SBS is a good idea in theory but has been executed miserably. I was originally in favor of SBS when it was first announced as an additional layer on top of limited service.
Except it hasn't been executed poorly. It certainly could have been better, but you endlessly complain about the attempts to actually improve it. (SEE WOODHAVEN BOULEVARD)

If a partial implementation as already resulted in a downgrade for auto users, there is no reason to assume that a full implementation will lessen the negative impact on auto users. It will only exacerbate the situation.
A. There is no reason to assume that the partial implementation will align with full implementation as to the effects it will have on autos.
B. There is no reason to assume that there is in fact a negative effect on auto users.
Therefore, as both premises are false, there is no reason to assume the conclusion is true.


A parallel situation is the bike lanes on half of Queens Blvd which has greatly worsened traffic there. It can not be assumed that when the project is fully completed, that traffic will even get worse, not better.
While the bike lanes are essential and therefore cannot be removed, bus lanes should be installed as well to get eliminate the delays.


(322096)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BusMgr on Fri Jan 13 01:27:54 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Jan 11 12:09:34 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
If a pedestrian purposefully intends to cause a collision, and does so, then absent valid excuse (e.g., legal necessity), it is the pedestrian is to be faulted. And the opposite where the automobilist purposefully intends to cause a collision. But we're talking the middle ground, largely composed of two ideas.

First, where both the pedestrian and automobilist have taken all reasonable precautions, and neither is affirmatively at fault. Who should bear the cost of the collision. I believe it is the pedestrian because it was the voluntary choice of the automobilist to engage in an inherently dangerous activity; the pedestrian made no such choice, and instead simply exercised his or her Constitutionally-protected right to travel. The automobilist assumed the risk by choosing to drive, even where the automobilist was not negligent, or otherwise breached his or her duty of care to the pedestrian. (And as a matter of public policy, holding otherwise would encourage everyone to always drive, and to use the bigger, heaviest, and most dangerous vehicles available, so as better ensure that such person is the one who survives a collision. Neither fair nor good public policy.)

Second, where there is a question of fact as to whether or not the pedestrian and the motorist each exercised the appropriate and reasonable standard of care necessary for traveling. I believe that driving a motor vehicles requires a very high standard of care, and the government enforces that high standard by prohibiting people from driving motor vehicles unless they are examined as to their knowledge and skill, and are then licensed to do so. I believe that walking requires a very low standard of care as a fundamental human right, which by itself imposes little risk of hazard, and therefore has never required examination, testing, or licensing to perform. Nonetheless, I will acknowledge that the lines here, as to the duties imposed on each, are grey, not bright.

(322098)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:30:27 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jan 12 13:14:03 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
OMG I was saying that while treating diseases after they manifest increases economic activity, preventing them from occurring in the first place is more beneficial to society.

Treatment costs more than prevention, so it seems to make the economy bigger. But allowing diseases to manifest carries a cost both in terms of human suffering to the individual, and in terms of *decreased* economic activity because in general, people with diseases are less productive.

Sheesh.


(322099)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:32:08 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:45:41 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
I'm not making up false anything. Start taking responsibility for the obvious implications of what you say.


(322100)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:32:42 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jan 10 17:58:00 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Why on EARTH would we want to do that to ourselves?


(322101)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:35:01 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:53:18 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
The motorist cannot be expected to avoid someone that cannot be seen.

Again with the invisible cyclists. *sigh*

Second Avenue is well-lit. If you couldn't see a cyclist there, either (1) you weren't looking, or (2) your vision is so extraordinarily poor that you shouldn't be driving. Pick one.


(322102)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:38:10 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:44:10 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
If have already shown you how five times as many auto users as bus users is perfectly likely.

I counted up all the cars and buses without considering distance because that is all the information we have available. I never stated it was the best way. Of course miles traversed for each mode would be better.

Show me that info and I will gladly apply it.


Neither you nor I have that information. The difference is that you're perfectly willing to recklessly proceed to draw conclusions that aren't supported by the data.

Of course, this is your MO, so no real surprise there.

And f you have slightly proved bus service because we have no evidence that it will be any greater than slightly, only wild unsubstantiated predictions from DOT, while causing much more harm for the bulk of corridor users, we have a bad plan that made matters worse for most. Unless you believe that bus riders and pedestrians are the only ones who should be considered and the only ones matter which brigs us back to the subject of this thread. So us that what you believe? Yes or no?

Neither of us has proved anything.

The difference is that I haven't claimed to prove anything, because I understand that I don't have data or other information to underpin any conclusions. I'm raising questions about your own unsubstantiated assertions.


(322104)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jan 13 09:02:13 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:30:27 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
So you believe in the broken window fallacy. Do you even know what that is?

(322105)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jan 13 09:41:48 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 12 13:34:04 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
But that situation (great distance between intersections, no pedestrians anywhere) doesn't really apply to much of NYC, and in those spots where it does, the limit tends to be a little higher (e.g. 35 MPH on Flatbush Ave around the Belt Parkway interchange, although that results in 45 to 50 MPH driving ordinarily).

(322112)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 14:21:26 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BusMgr on Fri Jan 13 01:27:54 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Very well said. Thank you.


(322113)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 14:24:09 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jan 13 09:02:13 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Yes, and I know it's irrelevant to my point.


(322117)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 16:52:39 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 13:38:02 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Lowering the speed limit will not lower the average speed if no one obeys the new speed limit. In all other cases, it would.

(322118)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 17:05:16 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Thu Jan 12 22:41:47 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
So now we want bike and bus lanes on Queens Blvd. it used to be a ten lane roadway and you want only six lanes with only four contiguous lanes because we all know that the cars will just magically disappear and delays will all be eliminated. What planet are you living on?

SBS certainly has been executed poorly when DOT has presented only the postures and omitted all negatives never even stating outright that general traffic lanes will be removed. When they never solicited from the communities the problems they saw and just dictated SBS is the answer and you are getting it whether you like it or not.

When they presented a $20 million plan that suddenly became $200 million, then $400 million, then somewhere in between without any explanation.

There are about a thousand pages of SBS material that DOT has produced and the information about costs is about one page. We have no idea how much the B44 Nostrand service even costs. In one document NYCDOT states its $15 million and in another they state it is about $47 million. They also state in that same document that the operating costs are an additional $6.7 million annually, but in the staff summary, it is $3 million. The B44 also was two years late.

That is poor execution. There should be no discrepancies and tine estimates should be realistic.

(322119)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 17:20:20 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:38:10 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
You have proved that you aren't capable of answering a single question directly if pedestrians and bus riders are all that matter. That is what I asked you

You also have alleged that it s possible that the numbers riding buses could be the same as the numbers in cars. THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE because there are only 33,000 daily bus riders and every cordon count shows vehicles numbering between over 30,000 and 60,000. So even if every car rides the entire length of Woodhaven and Cross Bay (a total impossibility because we know there is turnover), THERE WOULD STILL BE AT LEAST TWICE AS MANY AUTO USERS AS THERE ARE BUS RIDERS.

The only way the numbers could be equal is if at least half the cars are driverless and carry no passengers. Do you want to make that argument because I am listening?

YOU ARE CORRECT THAT YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I have made reasonable case scenarios. It perfectly follows from the data we have that the people in cars could represent as much as 80 percent of motor vehicle usage on Woodhaven if the turnover is threefold. A perfectly logical assumption given the 14 mile length. There is about a 50 percent turnover at the Belt Parkway and another complete turnover between that point and Metropolitan, most probably. Anyone who uses the roadway regularly could tell you that.

(322120)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jan 13 17:21:36 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 14:24:09 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
No, it's not. Your point was that treating sickness is an example of increasing economic activity and causing a detriment to society. I am saying that your example is not that because your example is an example of the broken window fallacy and it does not actually increase economic activity, it suppresses it.

Ultimately, I never said that adding highway lanes, or not removing them was beneficial to society in general, my only point is that it's not always neutral or beneficial to remove lanes. It may increase economic activity by decreasing the negative externalities caused by the existence of those lanes or by auto travel itself.

(322121)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 17:22:28 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 13 08:32:42 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
I wouldn't expect someone who believes he has all the answers to be wiling to want to learn something. So you are excused.

(322122)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jan 13 17:24:36 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 16:52:39 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
FALSE! A lowered speed limit could still cause people to go slower. i.e. people think it's fine to go 40 in a 30 might not believe that 40 in a 25 is OK and will go 35 instead.

(322129)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Fri Jan 13 21:03:01 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 17:22:28 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
He realizes that you have nothing to teach him. Learning incorrect things is not beneficial.

(322130)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Fri Jan 13 21:22:41 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 17:20:20 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
You have proved that you aren't capable of answering a single question directly if pedestrians and bus riders are all that matter. That is what I asked you
How does whether pedestrians and bus riders being all that matters with regards to him being able to answer a single question? Regardless of whether pedestrians and bus riders are all that matter, I have seen him answer questions, both singular and in multiple, so I must admit to being slightly confused here as to why that means pedestrians and bus riders don't matter.

You also have alleged that it s possible that the numbers riding buses could be the same as the numbers in cars. THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE because there are only 33,000 daily bus riders and every cordon count shows vehicles numbering between over 30,000 and 60,000. So even if every car rides the entire length of Woodhaven and Cross Bay (a total impossibility because we know there is turnover), THERE WOULD STILL BE AT LEAST TWICE AS MANY AUTO USERS AS THERE ARE BUS RIDERS.
Not if cars tend to make multiple trips moreso than bus riders... But he isn't saying that is the case. He is just saying you can make any set of assumptions and ram your case through with it- That does not mean that there is anything backing up your claim.

The only way the numbers could be equal is if at least half the cars are driverless and carry no passengers. Do you want to make that argument because I am listening?
But he isn't making that argument. He is making the argument that you don't, much like he doesn't, have any relevant data.

YOU ARE CORRECT THAT YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I have made reasonable case scenarios. It perfectly follows from the data we have that the people in cars could represent as much as 80 percent of motor vehicle usage on Woodhaven if the turnover is threefold. A perfectly logical assumption given the 14 mile length. There is about a 50 percent turnover at the Belt Parkway and another complete turnover between that point and Metropolitan, most probably. Anyone who uses the roadway regularly could tell you that.
So in the end, even if we take your assumptions as fact, installing bus lanes on Woodhaven would likely be an equitable use of space.

(322131)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Fri Jan 13 21:23:52 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 16:52:39 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
People can certainly obey a lower speed limit and still not lower the average speed.

That said, Lowering the average speed is not an obviously negative outcome.

(322132)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Fri Jan 13 21:33:18 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 17:05:16 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
So now we want bike and bus lanes on Queens Blvd. it used to be a ten lane roadway and you want only six lanes with only four contiguous lanes because we all know that the cars will just magically disappear and delays will all be eliminated. What planet are you living on?
Earth. Maximum throughput on Queens Boulevard is not the primary goal of society. Induced demand is not exactly unheard of either...

SBS certainly has been executed poorly when DOT has presented only the postures and omitted all negatives never even stating outright that general traffic lanes will be removed. When they never solicited from the communities the problems they saw and just dictated SBS is the answer and you are getting it whether you like it or not.
There are no real downsides. That is why this is so popular outside of your absurd little bubble. They have certainly shown that traffic lanes will be removed in places. No, they did not outright lie and say that capacity will be reduced by 50%, because outside of your head, THAT WOULD BE A BLATANTLY FALSE STATEMENT. If they didn't solicit community input, they would not have modified the Woodhaven plan so substantially. It is a shame that they have let those ignorant of transit and traffic neuter the plan so far as they have. Too bad we will lose so much of the potential capacity we would have gained had it gone as initially planned. ONLY BECAUSE THEY LISTENED TO THE COMMUNITY.

When they presented a $20 million plan that suddenly became $200 million, then $400 million, then somewhere in between without any explanation.
And as we discover last time, the $20 million claim existed only in your hallucinations.

There are about a thousand pages of SBS material that DOT has produced and the information about costs is about one page. We have no idea how much the B44 Nostrand service even costs. In one document NYCDOT states its $15 million and in another they state it is about $47 million. They also state in that same document that the operating costs are an additional $6.7 million annually, but in the staff summary, it is $3 million.
You are going to have to actually link to these documents if you want anybody to believe you, considering how many times you have simply fabricated numbers, especially costs for Woodhaven.

The B44 also was two years late.
TWO YEARS??? I hope you took the following scheduled interval instead of waiting for the bus you scheduled yourself to take!!!!

That is poor execution. There should be no discrepancies and tine estimates should be realistic.
Show me the real discrepancies. So far they have just been you quoting different numbers for different things and wondering why they are different.


(322141)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 09:12:05 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Fri Jan 13 21:23:52 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Ridiculous.You think that you can make any statement you want and claim it is true. If drivers abide by a lower speed limit, their average speed must be lowered assuming they had previously reached the higher speed limit. Period.

(322142)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Sat Jan 14 10:22:07 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 09:12:05 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
A. You can't safely make that assumption.
B. No, that is not a true statement. Period.

(322146)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 14 13:48:18 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 09:12:05 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
If one red light turns green at T+5 seconds and the next one turns green at T+15 seconds, it doesn't matter whether you made it between the lights in 3 seconds or 4. I think that's his point, and it's not to say that it's the only reason why speed limit is not exactly correlated to average speed.

(322147)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Sat Jan 14 13:54:23 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 14 13:48:18 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Certainly an example of what I am thinking of, and far from the only reason.

(322148)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 17:00:56 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 14 13:48:18 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Thanks.

You are speaking about when lights are synched which is a minority of the roadways. But since virtually no one is making a trip on only roads where the signals are in sync, his average speed will still be lowered with a lower speed limit, though not as much as when none of the roads are in sync.

I could take the other position that traveling at 25 mph could cause you to just miss a green signal that you would have made going at 30 mph. That would certainly be a more common scenario.

(322149)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by R30A on Sat Jan 14 17:18:19 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 17:00:56 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
Thanks.

You are speaking about when lights are synched which is a minority of the roadways. But since virtually no one is making a trip on only roads where the signals are in sync, his average speed will still be lowered with a lower speed limit, though not as much as when none of the roads are in sync.

Virtually nobody??? Why in the world would you assume that?

I could take the other position that traveling at 25 mph could cause you to just miss a green signal that you would have made going at 30 mph. That would certainly be a more common scenario.
Actually, when the signals are timed for 25 MPH, that is a LESS common scenario. It only happens when entering or exiting the synchronized segment.

(322150)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Jan 14 17:47:31 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 17:00:56 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
You are speaking about when lights are synched which is a minority of the roadways.

It's virtually impossible to have progressive signals on a two-way street.

(322151)

view threaded

Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.

Posted by fdtutf on Sat Jan 14 18:04:47 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jan 13 17:21:36 2017.

edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr
You're misquoting me and misunderstanding me. You also don't seem to grasp that illness and crime -- i.e., medical problems and social problems -- are two completely separate animals and don't behave the same way at all.


[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10>> : Last

< Previous Page  

Page 7 of 11

Next Page >  


[ Return to the Message Index ]