Bay Ridge Express

Not surprised at all... if I'm planning to exit from the back and I see a dude chillin hoping to get a free ride, sorry, but I'm going to the front.

My intention was never to argue whether that group advocated for defunding/abolishing the police, or whether it is better to defund/abolish the police, or whether defunding and abolishing the police are the same. However, I have a good idea of what you're talking about--I too see a demographic on social media that advocates for ways the police department could be improved or rethought upon (which includes defunding) and not necessarily abolished. As for what protestors are advocating for, and whether they deserve credit for thinking critically in such a way... I don't know, I haven't talked with any protestors.

What I found fascinating was a video of a BLM protest in Whitestone in which a dude looking like Wolverine tried to attack a group of protestors... then all of a sudden people from the crowd were pleading "call the police!" Granted, I'm pretty sure the protestors simply despised general police brutality, but regardless, the situation is prophetic for what would happen if you were to actually abolish the police as a whole.

Tomorrow's the big day...

I saw it 2 days ago. Makes me think that they're tracking everything on the road now... I wonder what they'll track next. Physical whereabouts? Nah, they've done that already.

Without federal funding, both unemployed commuters and the are in big trouble...

never mind lol, as I was going to say originally, I'm pretty sure that guy is a troll, based on what he's been saying around here...

delete

The straight up loves running the 's reliability into the ground, don't they... 😏

Theoretically, you could have the and all running standard service patterns on weekends. However, I didn't think providing that much service would be necessary, so I chose to let the have no weekend service (as it currently does). Imo, this makes sense since you cover all of the bases of service levels in the simplest way possible. This in turn, would lead to two things: The would have to be rerouted to Astoria instead of 96 to replace the . There would be no direct service between Broadway and 4 Av unless the runs local via Montague. Another option would be to have the run there, but a) that is likely even less popular among Brighton riders and b) an additional merge would be created. Another option would to keep the as is and eliminate the on weekends. However, I'm strongly against that since service levels and reliability on the are way worse on weekends as is.

You should take a picture next time (if you didn't already).

Well, how I feel about this depends on how the other two services ( and ) would run on weekends. I'm assuming it would look something like this: Coney Island-Astoria (instead of 96 St/2 Av) via Sea Beach Lcl, 4 Av Exp, Manhattan Bridge (or Montague), Broadway Lcl, Astoria Lcl Unchanged Whitehall St-Forest Hills via Broadway Lcl, Queens Blvd Lcl No weekend service Which would make the ( K ) the primary service on 4 Av Lcl: 95 St-Chambers. Of course that means there would be no direct access to Broadway without the so maybe it would be a fine idea. However, I'm not too sure if riders would like this idea (alongside having to transfer to the for faster, more direct service between Brooklyn and Manhattan w/o Montague Tunnel). Perhaps someone else could weigh in. It has to do with transfers as well. Broadway service gives you easy access to the Lexington Av Line (59/Lex) and 7 Av Line (Times-42) without needing to transfer multiple trains. However, I do believe that the "just walk an extra block" argument could apply more to stations in Lower Manhattan/Lower Midtown Manhattan, where aside from Union Square and Washington Square, most stations are pretty close together and there wouldn't be much of a need to transfer.

Queens Blvd riders occasionally advocate for Broadway access despite all of our deinterlining proposals... are there any (possibly other) specific reasons you would advocate for this? (Also, as you proposed, I would say that connecting Queens Plaza and Queensboro could make the reroute more bearable for riders).

Speaking of deBlasio, I remember back when he rode the for probably the first time in his life a year or two ago... And with the transit projects that he's proposing, he just wants to make a name for himself with that waterfront streetcar... And despite bickering with Cuomo over who's responsible for the , they both have the same attitude regarding the whole operation.

Continuous air flow through the subway vents helps limit viral particles from spreading: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/10/nyregion/nyc-subway-coronavirus.html Two ventilation units help fully replace air in the car with outside air, on average, every 3 min and 20 seconds

I read this article recently: https://www.amny.com/transit/mta-may-turn-to-broken-windows-strategy-to-keep-windows-on-7-train-intact/ MTA may turn to ‘broken windows strategy’ to keep windows on 7 train intact Highlights: After suffering $300,000 of damages in the subways from more than 400 cases of vandals smashing windows, the MTA says it is considering teaming up with NYPD to implement a “broken windows strategy” in order to bring the situation under control. MTA Chief Safety Officer Pat Warren said on Saturday that a tough-on-crime approach will be needed, in a supplement to their effort of increased surveillance, to end the repeated attacks on their infrastructure and their already enfeebled pocketbook from COVID-19. Not only that, but the MTA is running low on their stockpile of replacement windows. Whether or not the NYPD will deploy plainclothes officers to guard the subways, Warren declined to speculate on who is repeatedly busting the glass which ranges between three-eighths to a half-inch in thickness. While the MTA cannot surmise as to a motive for someone to do this, they say the most recent incident cost taxpayers and riders up to $10,000.

I encourage you guys to attend these workshops. They may be boring, but at least they may ensure that the new AirTrain never gets built. ----- The Federal Aviation Administration released its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed LaGuardia Airport AirTrain, and has opened its public comment period on Friday, Aug. 21. The website lists a total of five upcoming public workshops and hearings — which will not be held in person due to COVID-19 — within a three-day period. Information on how to register and comment on the project is available, including how residents can send on-the-record comments by U.S. Mail, email, and through a web comment form. The virtual public comment period for the DEIS will be 45 days long, and will end Oct. 5 at 5 p.m. There will be two public workshops on Tuesday, Sept. 22 from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. and Wednesday, Sept. 22 from 7 to 9 p.m. with public hearings following after. There will be an additional public hearing from 2 to 4 p.m. on Thursday, Sept. 24. Individuals may register for the FAA’s Zoom Webinars, or tune in during the livestream on their YouTube and Facebook accounts. The FAA notified the Queens Public Library that branches can download the DEIS documents for residents who are not online. Residents without internet access can call the project hotline at (855) 542-3479 to submit formal comment on the project and/or receive a dial-in number to listen to the workshop or hearing of their choice. The DEIS examines the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Access Improvement Project at LaGuardia Airport (LGA). The study examined the current proposed plan of an above-ground automated people mover from Willets Point to LGA terminals. Specifically, it examined the air train with “three APM stations; passenger walkway and circulation systems connecting the APM stations to transportation facilities; an APM operations, maintenance, and storage facility and parking structure for airport, APM, and Metropolitan Transportation Authority employees; three traction power substations; utilities infrastructure; and various connected actions to allow construction and operation of the proposed LGA Access Improvement Project.” The 34-page long Executive Summary is divided into subheads detailing purpose and need of the project, the proposed action of the current plan, timeframe of the project, request for federal funding, alternatives actions (including the current plan, no action alternative, and other examined routes), affected environment, environmental consequences and cumulative impacts, among others. The FAA is conducting the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the LGA AirTrain because the Port Authority plans to request funding for the AirTrain under the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) program. The FAA’s EIS study is in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), which requires the FAA to identify and publicly disclose the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Gov. Andrew Cuomo first proposed the people mover in 2015, which was then said to cost about $450 million; but the cost is now up to $2 billion. The AirTrain has become a highly contested project within Queens grassroots organizations, but also has the support of economic organizations, including the Queens Chamber of Commerce. In June, several local groups called for Congress not to direct COVID-19 federal stimulus funds for the Port Authority toward the project, with particular concerns over the project’s environmental impacts on the immediate community. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently voiced her agreement with the local groups, much of which are within her district. As previously reported, the transit agency is considering stalling the project due to months of loss of revenue as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. ----- https://www.amny.com/transit/you-can-make-your-case-for-or-against-proposed-laguardia-airport-airtrain/

1. As I stated, it refers to that general area (I'd say somewhere from W 37 to W 27) if we're going to be talking about that part of Coney Island. It's like an unofficial "sub-neighborhood." I don't think there are any clear borders, though. 2. The schedule says Sea Gate-Coney Island. You're right about that, though.

That is a question I've always had. Sea Gate refers to the private community west of the bus terminal, yet it also roughly refers to the area slightly east of there (I'm guessing, so as to not confuse it with the "main" part of Coney Island e.g. subway terminal, beach & boardwalk). I understand why the B74 says it (since it terminates in both of those areas) but should the B36? I'm not exactly sure. At least, it's clearly more acceptable to have the B36 display its destination as "Coney Island" since it runs to Sheepshead Bay and the area is still not technically "Sea Gate," I guess.

Imo they really should do Atlantic Ticket style fares for all LIRR stations in the city (including PW's). I don't recall why I said this, but I assume that was a mistake. Considering the lack of proximity to other lines, it would probably be best to keep the Parkchester-PBP segment. Yes, you're right that it would make things worse for those who directly depend on the (assuming that both the AND run on the 4 Av Lcl). However, if one were to include a Nassau St service on the 4 Av Lcl, the should probably terminate at Whitehall and run solely in Manhattan and Queens (with some rush hour trips to 95, since after all, that is the point of the split... to increase reliability on the ). And during rush hour, the only real merge would be at the Montague Tunnel. Additionally, added tph on the 4 Av Local between the and (whatever other Nassau St service running to/from 95 St) would lead to a net benefit, largely because most of the travel done on the line is either A) between 4 Av Local stations or B) from a 4 Av Local station to the express stations with the (and even other expresses at Atlantic) and vice versa. The only real loss would be for riders who depend directly on service between Brooklyn stations and Lower Manhattan stations (which is not that many people). Regardless, with a dedicated Nassau St service that doesn't have to go through Queens Blvd and enhanced terminal operations at 95, the 4 Av Lcl could be much more reliable.

You responded to the wrong thing. I agree with the Bergen St idea.

I'm not sure, imo this makes sense since the Q46 specifically runs via Union Tpke.

1. I would be fine with this if 1) it stops at more stations, preferably: Euclid Av, either Utica/Nostrand, Jay St, and then all Manhattan stations, 2) it just continues on the route up to 207 St, 3) the price is reduced from $6.75, and 4) it doesn't interfere with merging/delays on the or (and we all know how well that would go). 2. Would this hypothetical operate via West End or Brighton in Brooklyn? 3. I don't see how the would be forced to run via the line here. 4. Agreed. 5. How so? By building a new lower level with B Division standards? Such a proposal, while it may be useful, would not be easy to build and is not worth constructing right now. 7. I would argue that high frequency at all stations > skip-stop 9. Would bypass too many (important and useful, residential) stations. I could see the possibility of 1-2 or rush hour trips at some point, however. 11. How would this super-express run (by "super-express" I'm assuming it could run under something like --> from Queensboro Plaza, LIRR ROW, then merge onto Northern Blvd, 68 St, BQE E, and GCP if you're proposing something other than peak express on the Astoria Line)? 12. Brighton riders prefer Broadway. 14 and 16. The would be too long there, and I'm pretty sure Rockaway was reduced to a shuttle for a reason... 15. Why? 20. Calling it the would just confuse riders since it's not actually a peak express. You would just bring back the . 21. And on what route would this line run, exactly? 23. Unnecessary, both in terms of instituting a and calling it the 16, for the same reasons as the .

These b/os have been playing lots of "games" before the pandemic even started... I can't tell you how many times I had to wait 20+ min for the B8 to get started at 95/4 only for it to not pick up passengers and then see it on BT 'in service' at 92/Ft Hamilton...

WtF is even being said here? Lol! Sounds like robot code more than English. If @MHV9218 hadn't pointed out the minus, I would've legitimately thought this was plain gibberish.