Home · Maps · About
Home > The Reef

[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[ First in Thread | Next in Thread ]

view flat

Re: B44 Progress Report Released

Posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:42:43 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:27:00 2016.

Page 7/8
7 is giving me copy/paste trouble:
Can't comment on your article as you didn't include an article.
Drivers should be aware of their surroundings to the extent that overhead signs should be sufficient. No grace period is needed. If a driver consciously uses a bus lane one minute before the period of enforcement, they should be damn sure that their clock is properly calibrated.

8:
"B44 Conclusion The MTA states that B44 SBS ridership has risen by 10 percent and bus travel times are up to 31 percent quicker while travel speeds for other vehicles have been maintained asa result of implementing bus lanes, unequivocally demonstrating success."
yup. Success here is pretty damn undeniable.

"TheMTA hidesthefactthat since SBS, annual B44 ridership has declined by 2 percent"
Of no relevance.
"and that traffic speeds for other vehicles since implementation of the bus lanes declined by as much as 7 percent in the peak direction during the peak hour."
Source?

"So a program designed to reverse the decline in bus ridership and maintain traffic speedsfor other traffic failed todoeither."
A. Not the goals of the project.
B. Proof it didn't do either?
C. (It did.)

"Additionally, it cost about $20 million in implementation costs toset up the B44 SBS, as well as ongoing costs to maintain fareequipment,andbus lane markings and signage, not to mention the enforcement costs to ensure passengers are paying their fares."
It did? I'd believe it, but I don't trust your assertions on their face.

"Where is the MTA’s cost/ benefit analysisweighinginitialandongoingcostswiththefactthatridershipontheB44isdownbytwopercentsincetheinstitutionofSBS?"
Ridership on B44SBS is not down at all.

"ThatneededtobedonebeforeembarkingonaB46SBS."
No, they don't.

"Other ConclusionsA progress report needs to detail all significant events and results as well as providing adequate amounts of data to prove the case that most are better off with SBS than they were before with the Limited service."
Nobody in their right mind denies that the average person is better off.

"Itmust not only present favorable factswith the intention of misleading which is what the MTA is doing by presenting a partial picture.TheProgressReportis a disgrace for all of its omissions."
The MTA is presenting an admirably full picture here. FAR beyond what they have any obligation to do.

"We have manypages devoted to repetition of eventsoccurring years beforeimplementation such as excruciating details regarding the meetings held with communities and business associations insteadofthefactsweneed."
LOL.

"Can the MTA and DOT be trusted to perform proper and fair evaluations of other SBS routes?"
Obviously.

"Obviously not."
LOL.

"They still consider the M15 a success by only considering the first year initial ridershipincreaseof 9 percent and ignoring the fact that since then, ridership has dropped an alarming 16.4 percent."
Because that is showing the effects of the SBS change on a line that has since been subject to incredible amounts of delays due to construction.

"The M15 has performed25 percent worse thanother Manhattan non-express bus routes since 2012 and 50 percent worse duringthe past year."
Yeah. And you somehow don't realize the effects of SAS here.

"However, with the B44, they are only considering second year statisticsand only SBS ridership increases (not including the local) to conclude SBS is a success."
They aren't only doing so.

"Passenger satisfaction statistics did not survey local bus riders after the institution of SBS althoughthe media has provided numerous reports on dissatisfaction in B44 local bus service after implementation."
They did survey them, and such surveys are not relevant to what is being discussed.

"No methodology or date for this survey is provided."
They don't matter to the target audience. This is not intended for a peer reviewed journal.

"We are expected just to accept the results as being accurate."
There is no reason not to.

"Not providing a survey methodology is totally unprofessional and unacceptable."
Totally professional and acceptable. Again, this is not a peer reviewed journal.

"The MTA and DOT is just insulting our intelligence."
They aren't. However you are readily making such insults believable should they be made...


Responses

 Thread is locked Responses disabled

[ Return to the Message Index ]