BrooklynBus Posted June 17, 2016 Share #1 Posted June 17, 2016 http://www.qchron.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/mta-s-poor-priorities/article_1e76b91e-af73-57e2-9db2-7f7f9f88b9ff.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted June 18, 2016 Share #2 Posted June 18, 2016 Wow..... I can't argue with that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted June 18, 2016 Share #3 Posted June 18, 2016 http://www.qchron.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/mta-s-poor-priorities/article_1e76b91e-af73-57e2-9db2-7f7f9f88b9ff.html Good Ideas. Their reasoning for the off peak months is probably that those riders would normally take the train so adding service costs more money but they still have to run the same number of A trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future ENY OP Posted June 18, 2016 Share #4 Posted June 18, 2016 Well written article! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 18, 2016 Share #5 Posted June 18, 2016 Good article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted June 18, 2016 Share #6 Posted June 18, 2016 I would never drive my car and park in an unsecured parking lot to take a bus heading to Brooklyn to catch a train that if most, would get me to Manhattan 5 mins earlier. Just the thought of the return trip home is a turnoff. When I was out in the Rockaways almost no one that lives beyond 116th st takes the q22 and same goes with the q35 so I doubt those people will be jumping for joy to take a bus into Brooklyn to catch a train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 18, 2016 Share #7 Posted June 18, 2016 I agree with the general premise of the article, but I also agree with Mr. Rafa here.... This idea (that the MTA's already engaged in btw) of turning Riis parking lot into a park & ride I (still) have to SMH at.... It's not working with the QM16 - and I have absolutely no reason to believe that it would work - for the Q22 or the Q35.... Not trying to be funny, but folks don't park & ride to catch local buses - and they aren't going to in this city either..... As much as I hate to say this as a fan of buses, our local buses are sorely lacking in the SPEEEED category..... I can't fathom Rockaway patrons being ecstatic at the fact they get to drive to a parking lot (regardless if it's secured or not... but the fact that it isn't definitely does not help!) to catch a bus for the 7th av/Lex line OR the Brighton line (which I still don't think a bus should be backtracking from the Rockaways to get to Sheepshead anyway, and I'm not seeing how it's so painfully obvious that such a route would be this great success - or as stated verbatim, heavily utilized).... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 19, 2016 Author Share #8 Posted June 19, 2016 Well written article! Thanks. Good article Thanks. I agree with the general premise of the article, but I also agree with Mr. Rafa here.... This idea (that the MTA's already engaged in btw) of turning Riis parking lot into a park & ride I (still) have to SMH at.... It's not working with the QM16 - and I have absolutely no reason to believe that it would work - for the Q22 or the Q35.... Not trying to be funny, but folks don't park & ride to catch local buses - and they aren't going to in this city either..... As much as I hate to say this as a fan of buses, our local buses are sorely lacking in the SPEEEED category..... I can't fathom Rockaway patrons being ecstatic at the fact they get to drive to a parking lot (regardless if it's secured or not... but the fact that it isn't definitely does not help!) to catch a bus for the 7th av/Lex line OR the Brighton line (which I still don't think a bus should be backtracking from the Rockaways to get to Sheepshead anyway, and I'm not seeing how it's so painfully obvious that such a route would be this great success - or as stated verbatim, heavily utilized).... Many people all over the city park in unsecured spaces on city streets to take the subway, so I do not know if I agree with you about parking in an unsecured lot. I do not know about the QM 16, except that perhaps the express bus fare may be a deterrent for many but I was not thinking of Riis Park for the Q35 or Q22. If you can walk to the Q35, there would be no reason to drive to it and the Q 22 doesn't even leave the peninsula, so I don't see why you even brought it up. I was thinking about Riis Park for a new route to Sheepshead Bay which would be very quick using the Belt Parkway if it makes no other stops or two on Emmons Avenue. Considering the slow travel time to midtown via the A train, I believe a bus to Sheepshead Bay to the B would be much quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted June 19, 2016 Share #9 Posted June 19, 2016 Concerned with increased operating costs. How about trimming the fat at the top of the food chain (re: the OP MTA's "Poor Planning") by eliminating all the so called "educated people" with degrees in anything but said field. I could be wrong about this statement, but then again, I wouldn't be surprised if I'm right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 19, 2016 Share #10 Posted June 19, 2016 Many people all over the city park in unsecured spaces on city streets to take the subway, so I do not know if I agree with you about parking in an unsecured lot. I do not know about the QM 16, except that perhaps the express bus fare may be a deterrent for many but I was not thinking of Riis Park for the Q35 or Q22. If you can walk to the Q35, there would be no reason to drive to it and the Q 22 doesn't even leave the peninsula, so I don't see why you even brought it up. I was thinking about Riis Park for a new route to Sheepshead Bay which would be very quick using the Belt Parkway if it makes no other stops or two on Emmons Avenue. Considering the slow travel time to midtown via the A train, I believe a bus to Sheepshead Bay to the B would be much quicker. I sincerely don't believe many people in this city are getting off the subway & getting into cars afterwards; the long-standing complaint as it is, is that you can't find parking in this city..... Don't see much evidence of this happening.... Far too many are either hopping onto some bus, or walking after having disembarked at some subway station.... Don't know what else to say about that.... Hypothetically speaking, the Q22 not leaving the peninsula would be more of a reason to have Rockaways patrons park & riding to catch some bus to Brooklyn for the subway.... Walking to the Q35 would mean that patrons would only have direct access to the IRT, have them take that route... You are talking about a Sheepshead-Rockaways route, are you not? I'm not disagreeing that taking the Brighton would be quicker than the 8th av line, I'm disagreeing with this foresight of a trend that entails many people park & riding out in the Rockaways..... I think having a bus route running b/w those 2 points (save for the park & ride bit) is one of those ideas that might look/sound good in principle, but wouldn't pan out as anticipated.... At best, you would take people from off the Q35; there's nothing to suggest that latent ridership exists for such a route - Especially to the point where motorists would cease doing whatever they're currently doing to commence driving to Riis for a commuter bus to the Brighton line..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 19, 2016 Author Share #11 Posted June 19, 2016 Concerned with increased operating costs. How about trimming the fat at the top of the food chain (re: the OP MTA's "Poor Planning") by eliminating all the so called "educated people" with degrees in anything but said field. I could be wrong about this statement, but then again, I wouldn't be surprised if I'm right I wouldn't say the problem is the so-called "educated" people with degrees that are the problem. The problem is many of the long timers who know how to skate by by knowing how to do just enough work so as not to get fired but are never really accomplishing anything. The MTA is not a forward thnking organization that encourages new ideas. In fact, it discourages them. Come up with too many new ideas and you get a reputation for rocking the boat, so many good people leave after a few years because they want to accomplish something worthwhile with their lives. Yet if you do what your told consistently and never ask questions, you are the one who gets promoted and make more money. Good work is not rewarded. Fir example when I once sinflehandedly saved the MTA $4 million, all I hit was a verbal "good job", not even anything in writing. Another time my "good job" consisted of a post it note with the boss's first name only on it. Try using that to get a better paying job. So many of those working over 25 years are not the great workers but just mediocre ones, and are now making between $100,000 and $150,000 for working only three hours a day doing the same jobs they have been doing in the same inefficient ways they have been doing them. (Time clocks only ensure you are on the property, not that you are working.) Those are the ones the MTA needs to encourage to retire, since firing them would be very difficult. That is how you trim the fat. That is not to say that all long timers fit into that category. Some do work fir a full day and even exceed the 8 hour work day without receiving additional pay. But instead of being rewarded for their diligence because of insufficient staffing, sometimes working longer than eight hours is viewed by upper management as them being inefficient because they couldn't finish their work within an eight hour day. The MTA needs to reward managers who do good work and take chances even if they sometimes fail, rather than rewarding them simply for just following instructions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 19, 2016 Author Share #12 Posted June 19, 2016 I sincerely don't believe many people in this city are getting off the subway & getting into cars afterwards; the long-standing complaint as it is, is that you can't find parking in this city..... Don't see much evidence of this happening.... Far too many are either hopping onto some bus, or walking after having disembarked at some subway station.... Don't know what else to say about that.... Hypothetically speaking, the Q22 not leaving the peninsula would be more of a reason to have Rockaways patrons park & riding to catch some bus to Brooklyn for the subway.... Walking to the Q35 would mean that patrons would only have direct access to the IRT, have them take that route... You are talking about a Sheepshead-Rockaways route, are you not? I'm not disagreeing that taking the Brighton would be quicker than the 8th av line, I'm disagreeing with this foresight of a trend that entails many people park & riding out in the Rockaways..... I think having a bus route running b/w those 2 points (save for the park & ride bit) is one of those ideas that might look/sound good in principle, but wouldn't pan out as anticipated.... At best, you would take people from off the Q35; there's nothing to suggest that latent ridership exists for such a route - Especially to the point where motorists would cease doing whatever they're currently doing to commence driving to Riis for a commuter bus to the Brighton line..... Park and Ride works great on the LIRR and would also work well with the subway. The problem is that there are such few parking lots that have Park and Ride. People park and take the train at any train terminus where street parking is available. A former co-worker of mine lives in Pelham and drives to the Dyre Avenue station because he can find parking. The Sheepshead Bay parking lot only has about 20 spaces at $8 a day for long term parking and they are all taken by 7 AM. So they demand is there. The shopkeepers are against allocating more spaces for long term. There is space near the Belt Parkway under the Brighton El where another 50 or so spaces could be added. So I disagree with you regarding there being little demand for Park and Ride in the city. Also, there are always 20 cabs waiting at the station because people don't want to deal with long waits for buses and many who kiss and ride. I see nothing wrong with taking people from the Q35 if the new route I propose saves them at least 15 minutes which it would because the Q35 makes many more stops and has to deal with more street traffic than the route I propose which would use one exit on the Belt Parkway. Also there is the fact that the B is express from Sheepshead Bay and uses the Manhattan Bridge as opposed to the 2 and 5 which are local to Franklin Avenue and makes stops in lower Manhattan. I also see nothing wrong if riders are taken from express buses because of the high passenger cost to operate them. Anyway, there is no use arguing if there is or isn't demand. The way to find out is by trying it. The supposed advantage of buses over fixed rail is that it is rekatvely very easy to experiment with bus routes, but we haven't done that since the 1930s when buses were a new form of transit and routes changed very frequently. Why shoukd it have taken so many years for the MTA to gave thought up the successful Q70? Why shouldn't that route have started 50 years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 19, 2016 Share #13 Posted June 19, 2016 Park and Ride works great on the LIRR and would also work well with the subway. The problem is that there are such few parking lots that have Park and Ride. People park and take the train at any train terminus where street parking is available. A former co-worker of mine lives in Pelham and drives to the Dyre Avenue station because he can find parking. The Sheepshead Bay parking lot only has about 20 spaces at $8 a day for long term parking and they are all taken by 7 AM. So they demand is there. The shopkeepers are against allocating more spaces for long term. There is space near the Belt Parkway under the Brighton El where another 50 or so spaces could be added. So I disagree with you regarding there being little demand for Park and Ride in the city. Also, there are always 20 cabs waiting at the station because people don't want to deal with long waits for buses and many who kiss and ride. I see nothing wrong with taking people from the Q35 if the new route I propose saves them at least 15 minutes which it would because the Q35 makes many more stops and has to deal with more street traffic than the route I propose which would use one exit on the Belt Parkway. Also there is the fact that the B is express from Sheepshead Bay and uses the Manhattan Bridge as opposed to the 2 and 5 which are local to Franklin Avenue and makes stops in lower Manhattan. I also see nothing wrong if riders are taken from express buses because of the high passenger cost to operate them. Anyway, there is no use arguing if there is or isn't demand. The way to find out is by trying it. The supposed advantage of buses over fixed rail is that it is rekatvely very easy to experiment with bus routes, but we haven't done that since the 1930s when buses were a new form of transit and routes changed very frequently. Why shoukd it have taken so many years for the MTA to gave thought up the successful Q70? Why shouldn't that route have started 50 years ago? You said verbatim that "Many people all over the city park in unsecured spaces on city streets to take the subway....", now you're bringing up the LIRR (for whatever reason) & how park & ride works great on it (which no one is doubting here).... How many subways cut through the suburbs like the LIRR does exactly? You're now also saying that park & riding would work well with the subway (instead of what you said earlier about many people parking on the street to take the subway already)... I mean, which is it here - People are already doing what you claimed earlier in droves, or that there isn't much park & riding to the subway & that it would work well? Even if I consider what you're saying about how full that municipal lot is over @ Sheepshead (which doesn't constitute the entire city btw), what's making you think that same occurrence/dynamic would be repeated in the Rockaways exactly? I don't see anything wrong with taking people off the Q35 either; my claim is not that of worrying about Q35 ridership being lost to this route you're suggesting.... You keep reiterating the point about the Brighton being quicker than the IRT... I get that... But at the same time, it's like you seriously think that practically everyone is supposed to take the Brighton from the Rockaways because of the SPEEEED factor.... That's how it's coming across to me with that repetition of that point, when it's not being dissented.... I know, I know, The way to find out is trying it... Right - Coming from the same person that is (also) critical of these recent dinky shuttles that's been created w/i the bus network the MTA is "trying" to garner ridership from.... This is the same exact argument you made when you first posted that Sheepshead - Rockaways route on this forum... The only difference now is that you're proposing the route to run directly b/w the two areas (a commuter local), compared to having the route have/make whatever # of intermediate stops b/w the 2 areas along the way..... Like I said, I agree with the premise of your article here; your point about the Q70 & it taking a millennium (figuratively speaking) for this agency to come out w/ a route like that, I concur with... Shouldn't be the case... Not just the Q70, but the B83 extension to Gateway, the x21 itself, the list goes on with changes to the network that's taken so damn long to implement.... At the same time, I don't see this idea of yours as being tantamount to those same/similar successes.... I simply don't.... Don't know what else needs to be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share #14 Posted June 20, 2016 You said verbatim that "Many people all over the city park in unsecured spaces on city streets to take the subway....", now you're bringing up the LIRR (for whatever reason) & how park & ride works great on it (which no one is doubting here).... How many subways cut through the suburbs like the LIRR does exactly? You're now also saying that park & riding would work well with the subway (instead of what you said earlier about many people parking on the street to take the subway already)... I mean, which is it here - People are already doing what you claimed earlier in droves, or that there isn't much park & riding to the subway & that it would work well? Even if I consider what you're saying about how full that municipal lot is over @ Sheepshead (which doesn't constitute the entire city btw), what's making you think that same occurrence/dynamic would be repeated in the Rockaways exactly? I don't see anything wrong with taking people off the Q35 either; my claim is not that of worrying about Q35 ridership being lost to this route you're suggesting.... You keep reiterating the point about the Brighton being quicker than the IRT... I get that... But at the same time, it's like you seriously think that practically everyone is supposed to take the Brighton from the Rockaways because of the SPEEEED factor.... That's how it's coming across to me with that repetition of that point, when it's not being dissented.... I know, I know, The way to find out is trying it... Right - Coming from the same person that is (also) critical of these recent dinky shuttles that's been created w/i the bus network the MTA is "trying" to garner ridership from.... This is the same exact argument you made when you first posted that Sheepshead - Rockaways route on this forum... The only difference now is that you're proposing the route to run directly b/w the two areas (a commuter local), compared to having the route have/make whatever # of intermediate stops b/w the 2 areas along the way..... Like I said, I agree with the premise of your article here; your point about the Q70 & it taking a millennium (figuratively speaking) for this agency to come out w/ a route like that, I concur with... Shouldn't be the case... Not just the Q70, but the B83 extension to Gateway, the x21 itself, the list goes on with changes to the network that's taken so damn long to implement.... At the same time, I don't see this idea of yours as being tantamount to those same/similar successes.... I simply don't.... Don't know what else needs to be said. I wasn't talking about subways cutting through suburbs. I was referring to those who do not have convenient access to subways where using a car to get to them is much quicker than taking buses especially if you are traveling at times when buses operate very infrequently. All the municipal lots were utilized well by commuters but the city decided to start selling them off for a quick cash infusion and more development to make those areas even more congested than they already were instead of adding more park and ride which is why I believe the demand would be repeated in the Rockaways. People park on the streets to get to the subway because there are very few park and rides in the city. That's why some communities want only their residents to be able to park there with permits to keep commuters out. I am not saying the Brighton line is faster than the IRT for everyone. I was specifically talking about trips to midtown. I am critical about those dinky shuttles because the MTA put those in only to give the impression they are restricting the bus system to meet current demand but are not integrating those routes with the rest of the system. Whenever you have 30 minute headways in NYC, don't expect a lot of demand. Fifteen or twenty minutes should be the maximum daytime headway. As far as the B83 to Gateway, I was the first one who proposed that to the MTA back in 2001. They didn't think of it themselves because they were unaware they could run buses on the Belt Parkway until I told them all they needed was a permit from DOT. Then they studied it to death for five years before choosing the exact same route I recommended. After that they started using the Belt as run on and run offs to Ulmer Park for some trips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted June 20, 2016 Share #15 Posted June 20, 2016 There are people that drive to the subway because it's quicker than taking the bus and it works better for the return commute where they can get in their cars and drive home as opposed to waiting for a bus on increased headway. Also, because of alternate side of the street parking, the majority of people that can take advantage of those rules don't have to be to work until like 10am. The ones who need to be at work earlier are stuck with the bus/cab/uber however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 20, 2016 Share #16 Posted June 20, 2016 There are people that drive to the subway because it's quicker than taking the bus and it works better for the return commute where they can get in their cars and drive home as opposed to waiting for a bus on increased headway. Also, because of alternate side of the street parking, the majority of people that can take advantage of those rules don't have to be to work until like 10am. The ones who need to be at work earlier are stuck with the bus/cab/uber however. Park and Ride works great on the LIRR and would also work well with the subway. The problem is that there are such few parking lots that have Park and Ride. People park and take the train at any train terminus where street parking is available. A former co-worker of mine lives in Pelham and drives to the Dyre Avenue station because he can find parking. The Sheepshead Bay parking lot only has about 20 spaces at $8 a day for long term parking and they are all taken by 7 AM. So they demand is there. The shopkeepers are against allocating more spaces for long term. There is space near the Belt Parkway under the Brighton El where another 50 or so spaces could be added. So I disagree with you regarding there being little demand for Park and Ride in the city. Also, there are always 20 cabs waiting at the station because people don't want to deal with long waits for buses and many who kiss and ride. I see nothing wrong with taking people from the Q35 if the new route I propose saves them at least 15 minutes which it would because the Q35 makes many more stops and has to deal with more street traffic than the route I propose which would use one exit on the Belt Parkway. Also there is the fact that the B is express from Sheepshead Bay and uses the Manhattan Bridge as opposed to the 2 and 5 which are local to Franklin Avenue and makes stops in lower Manhattan. I also see nothing wrong if riders are taken from express buses because of the high passenger cost to operate them. Anyway, there is no use arguing if there is or isn't demand. The way to find out is by trying it. The supposed advantage of buses over fixed rail is that it is rekatvely very easy to experiment with bus routes, but we haven't done that since the 1930s when buses were a new form of transit and routes changed very frequently. Why shoukd it have taken so many years for the MTA to gave thought up the successful Q70? Why shouldn't that route have started 50 years ago? I agree with B35. The people "driving" to the subway are usually folks from the suburbs. I haven't heard of too many people that actually live in the city doing this, and it really is preposterous to compare the LIRR or MNRR (commuter trains to the subway). The subway is associated with URBAN living. MNRR and LIRR are associated with SUBURBAN living, so naturally people will drive to the train. The same is done here in Riverdale, but I don't see people driving to the subway in Kingsbridge, though I have seen people take a taxi is the bus takes too long, which makes sense. Driving to the subway is all sorts of bizarre though. It screams anti-local bus, which most suburbanites are. Outside of Manhattan, local buses have a stigma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 21, 2016 Share #17 Posted June 21, 2016 I agree with B35. The people "driving" to the subway are usually folks from the suburbs. I haven't heard of too many people that actually live in the city doing this, and it really is preposterous to compare the LIRR or MNRR (commuter trains to the subway). The subway is associated with URBAN living. MNRR and LIRR are associated with SUBURBAN living, so naturally people will drive to the train. The same is done here in Riverdale, but I don't see people driving to the subway in Kingsbridge, though I have seen people take a taxi is the bus takes too long, which makes sense. Driving to the subway is all sorts of bizarre though. It screams anti-local bus, which most suburbanites are. Outside of Manhattan, local buses have a stigma. You saved me a ton of keystrokes with this paragraph w/ the urban-suburban bit..... I mean, for every Sheepshead he brings up, I can bring up the old municipal parking lot (that is now occupied by the triangle junction shopping center, or w/e it's called)..... As big as that damn lot was, that lot stayed empty - there were more abandoned vehicles in that freakin lot than people park & riding in there ---------------- No need to quote the post, because I'm only going to say this much & that's basically it (as far as this particular discussion goes w/ the park & ride bit)...... BrooklynBus, I'm not going to continue to entertain the disingenuousness man..... If you truly believed that there were many people park & riding to subways in this city, then there would have been absolutely zero need to bring up the LIRR to try to fortify your original assertion (as if to say, what, because they're both rail services, then that must mean somehow by default, park & ride will work well in an urban setting for the urban subway - like park & riding working well in a suburban setting for the suburban railroad).... Furthermore, nobody said YOU were talking about subways cutting through suburbs; and this is exactly what I'm talking about with the feigning ignorance.... Like it wasn't obvious that a point was being made with that - regardless if doesn't exactly fit your narrative.... There could be a ton of parking lots for park & rides to the subway being propped up throughout various areas in the city & there would be a rude awakening had when it'd come to pass that those same lots would not get much usage..... Those with cars in this city would much rather drive directly to their destination within city limits, rather than drive to a parking lot to hop on the subway This is one of the main reasons I don't buy your claim of all this park & riding to subways being done in this city.... As for the part about the dinky shuttles.... Well that's your reason for being critical of it, but you're still criticizing what the MTA is "trying" to do with those routes (regardless of any impressions either one of us has and believes)..... So why is it that when it comes to one of your suggestions, questioning/inquiring about demand is pointless & the only way to find out is trying it - But when the MTA tries out these dinky shuttles, you have carte blanche to fire away with the criticisms? (including not expecting... what's that word.... demand.... on 30 min. headways) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 23, 2016 Author Share #18 Posted June 23, 2016 I agree with B35. The people "driving" to the subway are usually folks from the suburbs. I haven't heard of too many people that actually live in the city doing this, and it really is preposterous to compare the LIRR or MNRR (commuter trains to the subway). The subway is associated with URBAN living. MNRR and LIRR are associated with SUBURBAN living, so naturally people will drive to the train. The same is done here in Riverdale, but I don't see people driving to the subway in Kingsbridge, though I have seen people take a taxi is the bus takes too long, which makes sense. Driving to the subway is all sorts of bizarre though. It screams anti-local bus, which most suburbanites are. Outside of Manhattan, local buses have a stigma. When you consider time and distance traveled, there really is not much difference between the Rockaways and the suburbs. A former co-worker of mine who lives in Pelham, drives to the Dyre Avenue Station and takes the train from there. I'm sure he isn't the only one. You saved me a ton of keystrokes with this paragraph w/ the urban-suburban bit..... I mean, for every Sheepshead he brings up, I can bring up the old municipal parking lot (that is now occupied by the triangle junction shopping center, or w/e it's called)..... As big as that damn lot was, that lot stayed empty - there were more abandoned vehicles in that freakin lot than people park & riding in there ---------------- No need to quote the post, because I'm only going to say this much & that's basically it (as far as this particular discussion goes w/ the park & ride bit)...... BrooklynBus, I'm not going to continue to entertain the disingenuousness man..... If you truly believed that there were many people park & riding to subways in this city, then there would have been absolutely zero need to bring up the LIRR to try to fortify your original assertion (as if to say, what, because they're both rail services, then that must mean somehow by default, park & ride will work well in an urban setting for the urban subway - like park & riding working well in a suburban setting for the suburban railroad).... Furthermore, nobody said YOU were talking about subways cutting through suburbs; and this is exactly what I'm talking about with the feigning ignorance.... Like it wasn't obvious that a point was being made with that - regardless if doesn't exactly fit your narrative.... There could be a ton of parking lots for park & rides to the subway being propped up throughout various areas in the city & there would be a rude awakening had when it'd come to pass that those same lots would not get much usage..... Those with cars in this city would much rather drive directly to their destination within city limits, rather than drive to a parking lot to hop on the subway This is one of the main reasons I don't buy your claim of all this park & riding to subways being done in this city.... As for the part about the dinky shuttles.... Well that's your reason for being critical of it, but you're still criticizing what the MTA is "trying" to do with those routes (regardless of any impressions either one of us has and believes)..... So why is it that when it comes to one of your suggestions, questioning/inquiring about demand is pointless & the only way to find out is trying it - But when the MTA tries out these dinky shuttles, you have carte blanche to fire away with the criticisms? (including not expecting... what's that word.... demand.... on 30 min. headways) When you say most of the Junction Parking lot was empty were you looking at the short term or long term parking areas? If it was the short term ones, they might have been under utilized because they were overpriced. Perhaps $6 a day plus the subway fare was just too expensive when express bus was cheaper. The MTA claims there are no ads inside buses because no one wants to advertise inside a bus. Perhaps they are overpriced also. There is always a market for anything if the price is right. You may have misunderstood me. I wasn't saying there is much park and ride in the city. I was saying the demand is high but many are not doing it because there are virtually no park and ride spaces in the city and on street parking is also limited in most areas near subways especially near express stops. The reason I mentioned the LIRR was because they do have the lots and they are well utilized. There are places in the city where they would work just as well. As for the MTA's shuttles, I am critical of them because none are doing as well as the B71 that was discontinued. And if they wanted them to work, they would design them to work, not to terminate them several blocks from major bus connections. The B67 extension falls short of the B32 by about a block. All the MTA was concerned about was saving a bus. The B51 was originally proposed to operate from Grand Army Plaza to Lower Manhattan where there would have been great demand. But the MTA instead chose a shuttle over the bridge and it ultimately failed. The B71 would have great demand through the Carey Tunnel, but the MTA doesn't want successful routes where they will have to run extra service to support that demand. They only want to falsely give the impression they are changing services to meet demand. That's why they are running the shuttles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 23, 2016 Share #19 Posted June 23, 2016 When you consider time and distance traveled, there really is not much difference between the Rockaways and the suburbs. A former co-worker of mine who lives in Pelham, drives to the Dyre Avenue Station and takes the train from there. I'm sure he isn't the only one. When you say most of the Junction Parking lot was empty were you looking at the short term or long term parking areas? If it was the short term ones, they might have been under utilized because they were overpriced. Perhaps $6 a day plus the subway fare was just too expensive when express bus was cheaper. The MTA claims there are no ads inside buses because no one wants to advertise inside a bus. Perhaps they are overpriced also. There is always a market for anything if the price is right. Well yeah but the point still remains that the main people doing such nonsense either live in the suburbs are very close to them in rather isolated suburban areas. A lot of the Rockaways are basically the suburbs... Neponsit and Breezy Point comes to mind. Both are fairly affluent, isolated areas where having a car makes life a lot easier so naturally a lot of them would drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 23, 2016 Author Share #20 Posted June 23, 2016 Well yeah but the point still remains that the main people doing such nonsense either live in the suburbs are very close to them in rather isolated suburban areas. A lot of the Rockaways are basically the suburbs... Neponsit and Breezy Point comes to mind. Both are fairly affluent, isolated areas where having a car makes life a lot easier so naturally a lot of them would drive. And that's exactly why I believe this idea makes a lot of sense. Perhaps done of them who now drive all the way to work would even be encouraged to leave their car in Riis Park and use the bus to the train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 23, 2016 Share #21 Posted June 23, 2016 And that's exactly why I believe this idea makes a lot of sense. Perhaps done of them who now drive all the way to work would even be encouraged to leave their car in Riis Park and use the bus to the train. So we should create parking lots AND bus routes on the premise that some might be encouraged? Aren't you the same guy that complained about express buses?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted June 24, 2016 Share #22 Posted June 24, 2016 And that's exactly why I believe this idea makes a lot of sense. Perhaps done of them who now drive all the way to work would even be encouraged to leave their car in Riis Park and use the bus to the train. So you want people to drive to a bus to a train, which is two transfers right there. And this is assuming that the train they get on takes them directly to their stop. Not that many people even live in the Rockaways. Why are we throwing money at transit in areas that fundamentally cannot support those kinds of service levels? There's already the subway, the bus, and then there's going to be the fifth or so ferry line to the Rockaways even though it has never pencilled out before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 24, 2016 Author Share #23 Posted June 24, 2016 So you want people to drive to a bus to a train, which is two transfers right there. And this is assuming that the train they get on takes them directly to their stop. Not that many people even live in the Rockaways. Why are we throwing money at transit in areas that fundamentally cannot support those kinds of service levels? There's already the subway, the bus, and then there's going to be the fifth or so ferry line to the Rockaways even though it has never pencilled out before. "Not that many" is a relative term. So in your opinion Rockaway doesn't count. I dare to to go to Rockaway and tell them that. If I tell you that "not that many people" are murdered each year, does that mean we don't pay attention to murder anymore? So I really don't understand your point. As far as previous ferries not working, could it be that they were set up to fail which still might be the case. The MTA didn't make any bus changes to accommodate the previous ferry. In fact the residents had to make their own deal with the land owner to get permission to park by the ferry. The city did nothing. The only reason the ferries across the Hudson work is because NY Waterways runs their own free buses that are coordinated with the ferry schedule. De Blasio only wants to start the ferry before reelection time. He could not care less if it fails after a year or two because he can't get a third term if reelected to a second one. He will just say we tried it and that was all we could do. There was just no market for it. If the MTA operates enough buses to serve the ferry that are coordinated with the ferry schedule and then it still fails, then I would agree it was a bad idea. But according to you we shouldn't even try because Rockaway doesn't count. They are just as much as part of the city as whatever neighborhood you live in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted June 24, 2016 Share #24 Posted June 24, 2016 "Not that many" is a relative term. So in your opinion Rockaway doesn't count. I dare to to go to Rockaway and tell them that. If I tell you that "not that many people" are murdered each year, does that mean we don't pay attention to murder anymore? So I really don't understand your point. As far as previous ferries not working, could it be that they were set up to fail which still might be the case. The MTA didn't make any bus changes to accommodate the previous ferry. In fact the residents had to make their own deal with the land owner to get permission to park by the ferry. The city did nothing. The only reason the ferries across the Hudson work is because NY Waterways runs their own free buses that are coordinated with the ferry schedule. De Blasio only wants to start the ferry before reelection time. He could not care less if it fails after a year or two because he can't get a third term if reelected to a second one. He will just say we tried it and that was all we could do. There was just no market for it. If the MTA operates enough buses to serve the ferry that are coordinated with the ferry schedule and then it still fails, then I would agree it was a bad idea. But according to you we shouldn't even try because Rockaway doesn't count. They are just as much as part of the city as whatever neighborhood you live in. If you pick somewhere to live because it's isolated and away from the city, there are obvious consequences to that. It's the same reason why Staten Island will never have a rail tunnel; its geography doesn't permit a cost and time-effective rail tunnel crossing the harbour. The subsidy for the ferries was ridiculously high, at something like $20 a person, and that was at the high fare that was being charged. Unless you could triple or quadruple ridership on the ferry, it wouldn't really have worked. Ferry ridership is only high when you have lots of people living within walking distance of the ferry; no one takes the bus to the Jersey City ferries. (SI is an anomaly because almost every single local bus route serving half a million people feed into St. George.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted June 24, 2016 Author Share #25 Posted June 24, 2016 If you pick somewhere to live because it's isolated and away from the city, there are obvious consequences to that. It's the same reason why Staten Island will never have a rail tunnel; its geography doesn't permit a cost and time-effective rail tunnel crossing the harbour. The subsidy for the ferries was ridiculously high, at something like $20 a person, and that was at the high fare that was being charged. Unless you could triple or quadruple ridership on the ferry, it wouldn't really have worked. Ferry ridership is only high when you have lots of people living within walking distance of the ferry; no one takes the bus to the Jersey City ferries. (SI is an anomaly because almost every single local bus route serving half a million people feed into St. George.) Rockaway is isolated only because the city chose to have it isolated. If the owners of the hotels in Coney Island chose not to build railways to get people to their hotels, it would be just as isolated today as Rockaway is. As for the high subsidy to operate the ferry, you are correct. It is very high. But remember that the boats were less than half full. Those who took it loved it. It was a great quick ride. But after initial implementation, the city didn't spend a dime to promote it. But they have money for Vision Zero TV ads. Many Rockaway residents had no way to get to the ferry unless they were able to drive. Even if you owned a car, another family member may gave needed it to get to their job. Plus as I said no buses connecting to it. So if it were promoted and there were buses to it that met the ferry schedule, you could have doubled that ridership cutting the subsidy in half. And Staten Island doesn't have a rail tunnel because it is a very low priority for the politicians. If it weren't for Robert Moses, there wouldn't even feel a bridge to it. Does it make sense to spend billions for a rail link to LaGuardia that will only benefit Long Islanders? Most LGA users go to and from midtown and this "improvement" will not even make the trip faster for them. It's a pet Cuomo project so it will get built. The real estate interests will also get the Brooklyn Queens Connector built although that project makes no sense either because a bus line could do the exact same thing at an average speed of 12 mph. So don't try to bake it appear that something is built only because it names sense. Projects are built because the "right" people are supporting it. If there were a "Robert Moses" today with enormous power or if it would benefit a powerful group like real estate interests or bankers, that rail tunnel also would be built unless there were scree opposition to it like Staten Island doesn't want it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.