|
|
| Re: Middle Village and Maspeth NIMBYs come out to oppose IBX (1645092) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Middle Village and Maspeth NIMBYs come out to oppose IBX |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Nov 12 15:54:47 2025, in response to Re: Middle Village and Maspeth NIMBYs come out to oppose IBX, posted by New Flyer #857 on Wed Nov 12 07:03:33 2025. I actually didn't realize it already reached the double-digits.Not all the datasets reported 13%. I chose the largest percentage. The 13% was recorded by LEHD census from IBX stations to Eastern Queens. The reverse commute for those living along the 7, E, F, M and R was only 5%. The actual subway origin-destination numbers were less. 8% going from IBX stops to Eastern Queens and 1% in the reverse direction. The MTA trip survey showed a more balanced directional preference at 10%. It's bad policy to spend 100% of expansion dollars to serve only 10% of the demand. So long as areas in Northeastern Queens and similar places will fight against a subway line extension, That's always the excuse to divert funds away from where it will have the greatest impact. The big problem is that the current bus-to-subway service is both costly and not sustainable. The intersections in downtown Flushing and Jamaica see more than 200 bus crossings per hour. These are the busiest such intersections in the City. One back burner project is to verify that these are the busiest intersections in the US. The shape file is missing from the GTFS data for most foreign operators. It's likely a world record but I won't have the data to prove or disprove this hypothesis. There are some quick, dirty and inexpensive solutions but inexpensive isn't in a transit planner's vocabulary. the SAS, there's an element too there of thinking ahead. The Lexington Ave line was highly congested. You needed SAS just to help out with that, A frequent misconception among those who rely on the MTA to do their research. One major change in travel patterns over the last 100 years has been the decrease in peak hour demand. NYMTC has zipped many older Hub Bound Reports, so it's not possible to supply a direct link. Here's the link to their web page: https://www.nymtc.org/en-us/Data-and-Modeling/Transportation-Data-and-Statistics/Publications/Hub-Bound-Travel If you pull up the 2016 (year before SAS) report and look at the table on page III-13, you will note that between 8 and 9am there were 240+210=450 subway cars on the Lex exp and local and they carried 49K passengers. If you go to the archive and pull up the 1971 report and look at the table on page 20 (next to last page), you will note that between 8 and 9am there were 547 subway cars on the Lex and they carried 62K passengers. They carried 25% more passengers on 22% more subway cars. N.B. 1971 was before the federal government dangled a wad of capital funding dollars. Had the MTA continued operating 547 subway cars for the decreasing peak hour demand, the Lex would not have been over-crowded by the time the feds starting funding capital expansions. Overcrowding and congestion require an insufficient number of rail cars to meet the passenger demand. The MTA has a Service Guidelines Manual. Should passengers find seats during the peak hour, the guidelines suggest that service levels be decreased to maintain the guidelines discomfort index. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|