Jump to content


Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

JerBear

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    84
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Excellent

About JerBear

  • Rank
    Poster

Profile Information

  • Location
    Queens
  1. Hey BrooklynBus, have you read Street Fight by Janette Sadik-Khan? I skimmed it, and I plan on reading it. She gets into details about the fights over the PPW bike lane and the Times Square renovation, and... Select Bus Service! I would be interested to see your review of the book.
  2. The comments from that article are interesting. For those Transit employees or former Transit employees on here: are they really clock-watching bureaucrats unwilling to take on the hard challenges? Could what was done in Houston happen here if someone (Cuomo comes to mind) backed it?
  3. Exactly. See this is my problem with all the 'improvements' going on: they're fixing the wrong things. Take everybody that is working on Wi-Fi and charging on buses and assign them all to fix bus bunching. They did the Northeast Queens Bus Study last year, but did they actually follow up on any of it? Even then, the report downplayed bunching like it wasn't a big deal. It is a big deal, people. Why can't you fix it?
  4. But that's why it's useful... The perception that an express rider is inconvenienced if someone is sitting in the pair of seats with them. "Lawdy, I had someone sit next to me on the bus all the way to work today, heaven help me!" So now every time I hear a politician (Rozick did it recently) say that we need 'improved' express service in eastern Queens, I wonder how many of the constituent complaints include people who think they should get two seats to themselves. I hear stories of how packed Staten Island express buses are, and we need more buses so that people get two seats to themselves here in Queens? Too bad Transit doesn’t publish the subsidies per route, because that would be really interesting to see. If an express run has less than a half a load on average going into the city and back, then cut it and give the bus to Staten Island.
  5. My first instinct is to say "Yes!" because I can never remember which express buses are peak service versus more like regular service back and forth. But whenever I do ride an express bus, everybody else seems to be a regular daily commuter. There aren't any impromptu or incidental trips on express buses. I don't go "Oh, I don't feel like using the local bus and the subway today, maybe I'll take the express bus", but I do occassionally decide to pay extra for the LIRR if I feel like it. So what I feel is that any use of express service has to be premeditated. That's why I don't even want to see the routes on the borough bus maps. If the service isn't there when I expect it should be there, don't lie to me by putting it on the map. So, on second thought, I think they should make them all "X" routes because of the premeditation required.
  6. You confused me, so I had to go back and re-read and re-look at this. It's a problem with the maps that Transit uses. Can't we get some color drawings done in Illustrator or something? The bus currently goes northbound through Northern & Broadway, doing a weird left turn that isn't allowed for anybody but that bus. Now that I think about it, I wonder if DOT doesn’t like the bus making that turn and asked the MTA to change it for safety reasons. But yeah, currently, the southbound doesn’t go that way. So there is one northbound stop without the mirroring southbound stop. They're bringing them close together with this change and getting rid of the weird turn.
  7. http://nypost.com/2015/11/23/riders-snubbed-as-cuomo-vetoes-metrocard-expansion/
  8. Now we got ourselves a ball game! One of the articles I read said that the MTA would study heavy rail and other modes like a busway. And they have 14 months, not 10, to complete it. The North East Queens Comprehensive Bus Study only had one public workshop, but I heard that the MTA also talked to the transportation committees of the community boards. But for Queensrail/Queensbusway they're going to need to have multiple meetings. They should start scheduling them already. Do a couple of different kinds. One about rail. One about buses. One about station placement.
  9. I am waiting with baited breath to see if Senator Addabbo was able to keep the millions in the budget as deals were made. We should know tomorrow, right? I assume since the deals were just reached and they have to sign it on (or is it before?) Friday. But then one article mentioned that the Governor can do something like a line-item veto. It would be really interesting if the Governor were to kill the study. Then we could find out if everytime we talk about "The MTA did this..." and "The MTA said that..." if we really mean "The Governor decided...". I am still irked that he vetoed the 2-free-transfers bill.
  10. I did read it when you first posted it a few weeks ago, but then got too busy to respond, then I glanced back at it recently. I don't care if anyone thinks DOT proves a case or not. I liked the BRT I rode in Cleveland, and until DOT does something like that, their buses are always going to fall short of my desires. So they can't prove their case to me. And I want to believe that the RBB can be reactivated. It feels like you and the QPTC put a lot of effort into convincing anyone reading your stuff that SBS on Woodhaven is going to be a disaster, but it's just not very compelling. But of course. I've never seen an actual organization chart, I guess I just assume that there's a big floor full of planners, engineers, and designers split into groups of subways and buses and trains and bridges and tunnels. But yeah, Strategic Planning sounds like they would do what I am thinking. Did they write the reinvention report from a couple years back?
  11. I didn't see anything new in the report. Most of it is stuff that is just accusations with no ability to work through because they're too vague or generalized (any mention of DOT addresses it as an organization but assigns it the cohesive thinking and motivation of an individual, when any organization is going to have internal conflicts and lack of vigorous alignment) or the definitions and level of detail are getting in the way (you and I have a different understanding of what DOT means by 'corridor' and I still don't understand why you insist on confusing SBS with BRT, as everyone else I have talked to about it knows that that the $400 million plan is not BRT and the reason for it costing more than the initial plan is that the initial plan didn’t involve ripping up every inch of asphalt over a 10+ mile stretch of road). There are things I agree with you on like no reason for 24-hour bus lanes. But overall the rebutal doesn’t convince me of anything other than that the QPTC can't move from an interesting idea to a solid detailed plan or strategy and are instead just detractors. If it was just a bunch of citizens crying outrage, that would be one thing. But with a strong force like you, a former director of bus planning, I then expect a plan. I want to see drawings, I want to see sketches. I have read a fair amount on these boards and other websites about what it would take to reactivate the RBB, but some of it seems beyond me because I am not an engineer or a pure transit enthusiast who knows how train switches work and what a bellmouth is. So I would expect an organization like the QPTC to put together a well-thought-out, comprehensive, detailed analysis that would lay the ground work for future studies like the upcoming feasibility study. You said that the MTA Bus Company has been speaking with you about some of your ideas lately. What if you and Phil could sit with the Rail Planning division and hand them a document and say: "Now that Goldfeder has required you to do this study, we want you to get as much done as you can in 10 months, so we've put together this document with all the pertinent issues covered in great detail. Read it, learn from it, check our work. Hire an engineering firm to go do the physical inspection of the state of the right-of-way, but as far as programming and planning, we have a solid first draft right here and we will do whatever we can to help you prove that this reactivation is feasible."
  12. I don't personally think it's a big deal that some lackey at DOT was too busy taking liberal arts classes instead of technical writing and therefore made a professional mistake. I hope that he was given a stern talking to. But for me this issue is one of "do unto others as you would have done unto you", "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", "don't point out the splinter in your neighbor's eye but miss the log in yours", "judge not lest ye be judged", and "for however you judge others it shall be judged against you." You can't make a spelling mistake in a document where you mockingly point out someone else's spelling mistake.Not to be pedantic, but I noticed while reading through the rebutal the missing space in Mayor de Blasio's last name and the superfluous comma in the sentence: "DOT's failure to understand such a basic transportation concept, casts doubt on their ability to perform a competent transportation study." The sentence "One has to ask why Myrtle Avenue was chosen as the typical business location along Woodhaven Boulevard when there are only a handful of business there?" needs either a colon after the first four words or a period at the end. And the second-to-last word in that sentence should be plural. So there's spelling and more... My personal favorite sentence is: "DOT switched plans using a bait and switch after once communities showed interest in their original plan." I am used to many people touching the meat of a report/study/document, with just one or two responsible for adding on front matter and back matter like an appendix or a glossery. There are definitely many software programs that one can use to create documents that don't do spell check, especially if it's software specifically meant to be a pretty published visual, much better than the crap look of MS Word. So you make it look good but lose the spell check. I can't believe how much gets published that hasn't been proofread, but that's a whole other can of worms. Yes it was. Both, actually. In the press release, bottom of the first page: " QPTC explained which questions were and were not answered in their own 35-page document available on the QPTC website at http://www.qptc.org/rebutal.html." In the rebutal itself, second page: " This document is available on the internet at: http://www.qptc.org/rebutal.html" Absolutely. But it's not like it was something like THX1138. It's clearly just a misspelling of 'rebuttal'.
  13. And Goldfeder's state website described a hearing last month, including: "Prendergast responded by saying that the agency has been reviewing additional resiliency and expansion opportunities, including the Rockaway line..." So the answer is, we were talking about whether DOT was studying reactivation but we missed whether or not the MTA was studying reactivation. I just read through Goldfeder's press release. I really wish he had given a longer period of time to allow for the feasibility study. How real of a feasibility study can they do in 10 months? The North East Queens Comprehensive Bus Study wasn't released until 18 months after Senator Avella got the law approved to tell them to do the study. The Staten Island Comprehensive Bus Study is slated to take longer than a year. BrooklynBus: what can we expect from the MTA with only 10 months to procure a consultant, do millions of dollars worth of study activities, and write up the report?
  14. I just saw the Queens Chronicle article about Goldfeder putting millions into the state budget to force the MTA to study reactivating the RBL. BrooklynBus: did you get this done?
  15. It's definitely lipstick on a pig, well, a potbellied pig. It's Disneyfication: http://humantransit.org/2009/04/the-disneyland-theory-of-transit.html

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.