|
|
| Re: B44 Progress Report Released (58115) | |
 |
|
| Home > The Reef | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 8 of 8 |
||
|
| (58465) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:00:08 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by R30A on Thu Jul 21 23:26:49 2016. Page 6:"Inadequate Local Service, Poor Bus Reliabilityand Nearly Empty SBS Buses During the Peak HourWe know from media reports that local passengers initially complained about a denigration in local bus service claiming routine 40minute waits for a localbus after SBS began." Do you have the statistic showing that local service was actually substantially reduced? "They had to wait months for local service to be increased." Three month response times? That is FANTASTIC. "SBS buses still routinely arrive three at a time with no reduction in bus bunching despite the exclusive bus lanes. SBS ridership south of Avenue W is virtually non-existentwith only about six passengers per bus riding in the peak direction at virtually all times," Where is your source for this? "while the B36 to Sheepshead Bay is so overcrowded during the morning rush, passengers are frequently bypassed." B36 is not affected by this. If the B36 has problems, they should be fixed. (The MTA just did fix a number of them independent of the B44SBS!) "This is due to the fact that Sheepshead Bay passengers did not switch en-mass from the B36 to the SBS as the MTA predicted." Who says they predicted that? "In fact, there areso few B44 riders south of Avenue W that local service south of that point was cut by 75 percent afterSBS implementation when you consider that prior to SBS the Limited buses made all local stops south of Avenue U." If there are so few riders to those stops, then the B44 SBS not making them is not a problem. |
|
| (58466) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 22 15:04:42 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by Cornell Park on Fri Jul 22 12:44:10 2016. I responded as soon as I saw your post and I admitted I was incorrect. Happy now?Still it is all fine and good to list all these initiatives but continuing enforcement is what is needed not sporadic crackdowns. Even if reducing the default speed limit to 25 mph is only one line in a massive document, it is the feature that has the biggest impact and does not make sense. Speed limits need to be appropriate for the specific street from 10 mph to 40 mph. A lowest common denominator one size fits all will not be adhered to and does not work. I do not have a problem with all the other features of Vision Zero, but I object to lumping the SBS program to be considered part of Vision Zero which DOT is now doing. |
|
| (58467) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by Cornell Park on Fri Jul 22 15:22:22 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 22 14:41:42 2016. " My mistake. I should have said which the 25 mph speed limit does not address."There were ads all over buses showing why 25mph saves life versus 30mph. If you think Vision Zero is all about 25mph, you are out of touch with reality. " In 46 years of driving, I have never seen an aggressive driver ticketed." You never seen an aggressive driver ticketed because you were not in the right place at the right time. So unless you follow the reckless driver while relaying info to law enforcement, you won't see it happen. |
|
| (58468) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:27:00 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:00:08 2016. Page 6 continued:"Nomention of Annual Ridership, Fare Evasionor Fare Machine Reliability" They mentioned a directly related statistic for the first. The second has been shown to not have anything to do with SBS, and the third is not particularly important to riders. "The progress report only discusses average weekday ridership as if weekends and major holidays which account for over 30 percent of the days that service is provided do not count. Using annual patronage statistics rather than statistics just for weekdays would have painted a more complete but perhaps less favorable picture." Average weekday ridership is certainly a valid statistic to use for discussion. While weekends are roughly 30%, weekend ridership is well under 30%, so weekday ridership is often a more appropriate stat to use. "Could the lower SBS passenger numbers during the first year be attributed to increased fare evasion?" Theoretically possible, which is why it has been studied and proven false. "Could an increase in enforcement account for the higher SBS patronage numbers the second year?" Theoretically possible again, but this would only indicate that SBS is more of a success, from a total ridership perspective, than even the MTA claims. "There is no data on fare machine reliability. What are the median and maximum times machines have been out of service and how often have all the machines at any particular stop been inoperable? These data are important." These don't matter whatsoever to riders of the line. The answer is VERY RARELY with regards to all machines at a particular stop being offline. "The Progress Report discusses none of these subjects." Because it looks at things that matter to riders. "A progress report needs to detail all significant eventsas 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, and must not only present partial factswith the intention of misleadingas is being done by the MTA and DOT." There was no intention of misleading riders despite your desire to fan flames of conspiracy theories. The MTA/DOT have presented a great deal of information here, most of which they are under no real obligation to do. "Customer SurveyThe MTA'scustomer satisfaction survey is grossly deficient." Or so you claim. You also claimed that they never took these surveys earlier. hmm. "All it states are that 91 percent of SBS users are either satisfied or very satisfied with the service." A sign of great success! "No date is given as to when the survey was taken, how many were surveyed, whether it was done in person, via mail back survey cards, or was a telephone survey." They are constantly being given, through email. No idea if there are other modes as well. Regardless, it does not matter to the target of this report. It only matters to conspiracy theorists who think the MTA is out to trick riders. "The MTA only saw fit to survey SBS passengers and not local passengers after SBS implementation." Not true. "Either that or they chose not to release the results of the reviews of local bus service because they were so unfavorable." Chose not to release them AS THEY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC BEING DISCUSSED. "Those forced to switch from the Limited to the Local such as many Avenue R passengers or those boarding or destined for Kings County/ DownstateMedicalCentercomplexes,were omitted from the survey results, thereby skewing the results only toward SBS passengers." Yes. Surveys of SBS passengers only show SBS passengers. That is the point of a survey of SBS passengers. "We have no indication how local passengers presently feel about B44 service since SBS implementation." This is not looking at local B44 service. LOCAL B44 SERVICE IS UTTERLY IRRELEVANT. (And despite what you state, Local B44 service was greatly expanded in many areas as part of SBS) "Therefore, the customersurvey is worthless.Bus Rider SummaryIn summary, the MTA fails to prove that more bus passengers benefit than those who are inconvenienced as a result of Limited service being replaced by SBS and a change in the B44 bus route from New York to Rogers Avenue in the northbound direction reducing New York Avenue Service for half the riders." Those most severely inconvenienced are passengers bound for the Kings County Hospital / Downstate Medical Center complex which can now only be directly accessed by the local. An additional transfer or a walk of over a quarter mile is required in the northbound direction for SBS passengers which now uses Rogers Avenue (where service was doubled) instead of New York Avenue(where it was cut in half). "Articulated buses with ahigher capacity are only provided for SBS service while standard buses are used for the local. Since patronage levels are similar, locals must be much more crowded than SBS buses which also could account for a preference toward SBS." Not necessarily true. If the SBS riders have a longer average ride distance, the same riders will take up more space on the bus, as they have a greater overlap. "However, no data regarding crowding is provided" I'd be interested too. |
|
| (58469) | |
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 7/87 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... |
|
| (58470) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 15:47:19 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 14:30:18 2016. No. That's a fact, kid. |
|
| (58471) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 15:50:00 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 14:30:55 2016. Not sure that you are wrong? Of course. |
|
| (58472) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 15:52:16 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 14:31:39 2016. That's because you're too unintelligent and can't see your mistakes, child. |
|
| (58473) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 15:54:18 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 14:32:34 2016. Never bothered you? Compulsive liar..... |
|
| (58474) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:55:25 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:42:43 2016. Page 9:"The FutureA small modification to the B44 SBS route,that of extending every other SBS bus one stop to Kingsborough Community College from Avenue X and Nostrand Avenue via NostrandandEmmons Avenueandalongthe current B49 route on school days has the potential of increasing ridership in the off-peak direction by ten-foldwithout using any increased resources. It would also enable the elimination of the B49 AM Limited, thereby saving resources. B44 ridership would soar. All that is needed is the installation of two additional fare machines at the college, some signage, andpublic notice. The MTA has not yetprovided me with a response to this suggestion after initially rejecting it out of hand several years ago." Perhaps it could work. This assumes there is a desire to increase B44 ridership. It is a busy line as it is. Perhaps they want to push riders towards the Brighton which can handle the ridership more efficiently? Perhaps there is a concern that increased access from the north would further overburden the Nostrand IRT? "It also would have been farbetter if both the local and SBS were shifted to Rogers Avenue with New York Avenue servicereplaced with a new bus route or an extension of an existing route, integrating the B44 SBS into the rest of the bus system. There are several options how to accomplishthis. However, the MTA chose thesimplest solution to merely replace one layer of service(Limited) with another (SBS),rather than findasolutionwhich would fill the transit desert between Nostrand and Utica Avenuesinstead of making it worse by removing half the New York Avenue service." The B44SBS is integrated regardless of where the B44 local runs. That said, I think there could be a strong argument made to redesignate one or the other of the B44 routes to something else to reduce confusion. "The MTA just launched another SBS project on July 3rd, the parallel B46 route,and several more are in the planning stages, most notably the ambitious Woodhaven / Cross Bay Blvd BRT route which I have severely criticizedhere,hereand here." Yes. The MTA continues to demonstrate that it actually does wish to improve transportation options for the citizens of this great city. "There needs to be an immediate moratorium on new SBS routes until the MTA switches to contactless media in 2019." The city needs that about as much as it needs an outbreak of Herpes. I take that back. Herpes would be preferable. "It is a waste of money to now invest millionsofdollarsin fare equipment which will be obsolete in three years." Why would the equipment become obsolete in three years??? "It would make far better sense not to chargea fare on the proposed Q70 SBS, as suggested by the Riders Alliance." you need literally TWO FARE STATIONS. EASIEST CONVERSION EVER. "DOT and the MTA must be made accountable by providing fair, complete and transparentanalyses of their SBS projects and to spend their limited funds wisely." They already do. "The writer is a former director of bus planning for the MTA’s NYC Transit Authority and worked in the transit field for 31 years, 24 of them with the MTA." And I am a former governor of NY, as well as 1/2 of the famous songwriting pair Lennon/McCartney. (Wait... were we not discussing the contents of our dreams last night?) |
|
| (58475) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:55:59 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 15:55:25 2016. P.S. None of your links work. |
|
| (58476) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:01:08 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 14:30:18 2016. Facts are universally agreed - - and I don't agree. Therefore, Lenny; it's not a fact. |
|
| (58477) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by Cornell Park on Fri Jul 22 16:01:21 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 22 15:04:42 2016. " Speed limits need to be appropriate for the specific street from 10 mph to 40 mph. A lowest common denominator one size fits all will not be adhered to and does not work."You really believe that it's about speed for the road? It's about the energy the human body experiences when it gets hit by a vehicle. Less energy at 25mph, more at 30. So if your telling me you will lose a few minutes due to a lower speed limit, next time you cross a street pause for a minute and think about losing your life in a few seconds. All because someone didn't see the other and the human body met 2000 plus pounds of vehicle with extra velocity behind it. We might be annoying to each other, doesn't mean I want anything to happen to you. |
|
| (58478) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:01:39 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 15:50:00 2016. Wrong about what? |
|
| (58479) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:01:55 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 14:34:41 2016. And the bitchin' about Weinberg will continue. So I guess you'll be busy.Wow. You need to get a hobby and a life kid. |
|
| (58480) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:02:42 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 15:54:18 2016. If it bothered me, I'd be very unhappy and grumpy. I'm not neither. I'm laughing a you. Since you're compulsive, keep responding. |
|
| (58481) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:03:24 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:01:55 2016. You mean like you having a life, posting nonsense back at me? |
|
| (58482) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:03:47 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 15:52:16 2016. There are no mistakes to be seen. |
|
| (58483) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:05:59 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:01:08 2016. You're wrong, as usual.... |
|
| (58484) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:07:35 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:02:42 2016. Yes, you are compulsive, child. |
|
| (58485) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:10:39 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:03:24 2016. Yes. Your entire life is nonsense. I'm glad you know that Goebbels. |
|
| (58486) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:11:58 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:03:47 2016. Yes, your only big mistake -- your existence. |
|
| (58487) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 16:22:02 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:01:08 2016. You clearly don't know what a fact is. |
|
| (58488) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:27:00 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 16:22:02 2016. Obviously not.... |
|
| (58489) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:28:05 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by R30A on Fri Jul 22 16:22:02 2016. You're an expert in arguing - - and nothing else. |
|
| (58490) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:29:57 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:10:39 2016. Wineberg is Goebbels. You can be Himmler. |
|
| (58491) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:30:52 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:11:58 2016. You're funny, Himmler |
|
| (58492) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:31:05 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:28:05 2016. You're an expert in arguing.That's exactly what you doing right now -- with me. Hypocrite. |
|
| (58493) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:32:32 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:29:57 2016. wrong, goebbels. |
|
| (58494) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:35:01 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:30:52 2016. I wasn't being funny. I am only stating the facts, Goebbels. |
|
| (58495) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:37:16 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:31:05 2016. And what are you doing. Arguing in return. |
|
| (58496) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:38:08 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:07:35 2016. I knew you would respond. |
|
| (58497) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:38:28 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:35:01 2016. Whatever you say, Himmler. |
|
| (58498) | |
Re: B44 Progress Report Released |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:39:12 2016, in response to Re: B44 Progress Report Released, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:37:16 2016. Yes, this argument in which you started -- but not with me though. |
|
| (58499) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:43:03 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:38:08 2016. Thanks, captain obvious. That's what message boards/forums are for. Do you not see "Post a New Response"? |
|
| (58500) | |
Re: Renee Gill |
|
|
Posted by renee gil on Fri Jul 22 16:45:39 2016, in response to Re: Renee Gill, posted by nostalgia on Fri Jul 22 16:38:28 2016. Himmler? Are you German? |
|
|
Page 8 of 8 |
||