B44 +SelectBusService+

[BreeddekalbL]

have they set a date on b44 sbs or is it still listed as end of the year?

[bobtehpanda]

I am not saying that it is not a good idea to eliminate so many limited stops. I just question eliminating a stop when the distance between SBS stops will be a mile or more.

 

For example, on Monday I'm going to Staten Island to pick up my new car. The closest S79 stop is about a half mile from where I need to get off which means I probably will have to wait for an S78 that will balance out the time I saved on the SBS. From the map, it looks like its over a mile between SBS stops at that point. In this situation, you can change for the S78 for the same fare. On Nostrand Avenue it might cost you another fare and if you now take the SBS and walk to Avenue R your trip will now take longer using the local than it did when you used the Limited.

 

In some cases, everyone is so focused on the SBS that relatively few people take the Local, and the Local ends up being faster by having less people on the bus. (That might actually be the point, since they probably want to manage passenger distribution better.)

 

MTA and DOT do have the option of adding SBS stops once it's done though, since it's not super permanent (unlike the obnoxiously long gap between 72nd and 86th on the SAS, which doesn't exist anywhere else on the system).

 

The placing of the stops does look weird though, especially on my Frequent Transit map (Warning: Shameless plug)

 

[qjtransitmaster]

In some cases, everyone is so focused on the SBS that relatively few people take the Local, and the Local ends up being faster by having less people on the bus. (That might actually be the point, since they probably want to manage passenger distribution better.)

MTA and DOT do have the option of adding SBS stops once it's done though, since it's not super permanent (unlike the obnoxiously long gap between 72nd and 86th on the SAS, which doesn't exist anywhere else on the system).

 

The placing of the stops does look weird though, especially on my Frequent Transit map (Warning: Shameless plug)

 

That gap is pretty interesting and well not much to say there. I like your map design it looks like WMATA's new design bus maps. I am curious what would your map look like with just subway and rail/ express bus and LTD lines only and B7 due to design of that route. Want the challenge of mapping it?

[Mysterious2train]

They've almost finished constructing the bus bulb at Church & Nostrand Aves.

And as I went down Rogers Ave, they're almost finished the bulbs at Ave D and Clarkson Ave

 

A noticeable change from the M15. By building the bus bulbs for the B44 first and foremost I'm assuming the DOT is aiming to avoid the delays with the former [which, as of a few months ago (some 2 years since the start of SBS service) the M15 still only had 1 of its 12 planned bus bulbs (at the 1 Av and 2 St stop) built. 

[BreeddekalbL]

quick question with the  sbs running along rogers does the  on rogers  stay the same or will there be changes?

[Fresh Pond]

Its gonna stay the same

[Interested Rider]

I agree with Fresh Pond as nothing will change as last week I took the B/44 southbound from Avenue L and the traffic was just as bad as usual. I saw the agents there a couple of weeks ago and I thought things will change but it seems they were there one day and gone the next.  

 

 

[bobtehpanda]

I agree with Fresh Pond as nothing will change as last week I took the B/44 southbound from Avenue L and the traffic was just as bad as usual. I saw the agents there a couple of weeks ago and I thought things will change but it seems they were there one day and gone the next.  

 

Pretty much every SBS lane in the city is camera-enforced, so it's not going to be as big of a problem.

 

The other SBS implementations also worked out loading zones for trucks, but I don't know if that has been done with the B44 SBS.

[BrooklynIRT]

the B44 south of the Junction is FUBAR and will always be FUBAR until Plaza Auto Mall is demolished and they congestion price the crap out of Nostrand Ave.

 

bob, thanks but no thanks for your words. the fact of the matter is that these problems need to be fixed by means other than enforcement.

[bobtehpanda]

That gap is pretty interesting and well not much to say there. I like your map design it looks like WMATA's new design bus maps. I am curious what would your map look like with just subway and rail/ express bus and LTD lines only and B7 due to design of that route. Want the challenge of mapping it?

 

Thank you for the compliment.

However, I would like to point out that this is not a map request thread, nor am i taking requests.

 

Is there an implementation date for B44 SBS?

[BreeddekalbL]

Thank you for the compliment.

However, I would like to point out that this is not a map request thread, nor am i taking requests.

 

Is there an implementation date for B44 SBS?

 

thats what i would like to know

[peacemak3r]

the B44 south of the Junction is FUBAR and will always be FUBAR until Plaza Auto Mall is demolished and they congestion price the crap out of Nostrand Ave.

 

bob, thanks but no thanks for your words. the fact of the matter is that these problems need to be fixed by means other than enforcement.

 

Bogus, that's not the only traffic problem below the Junction, what about the parents double/triple parking at the JHS between Ave K and Ave L?! What about the trucks double parked between Ave H and Ave I? Singling out Plaza Auto Mall, typical.

[Mysterious2train]

The current implementation date is sometime this fall. With the bus bulbs being built it looks like it's gonna happen for real this time and won't be pushed back again.

[qjtransitmaster]

Bogus, that's not the only traffic problem below the Junction, what about the parents double/triple parking at the JHS between Ave K and Ave L?! What about the trucks double parked between Ave H and Ave I? Singling out Plaza Auto Mall, typical.

to be honest this SBS is just rocket launchers being added to an already quick B44 LTD.

[BrooklynIRT]

what about the parents double/triple parking at the JHS between Ave K and Ave L?! What about the trucks double parked between Ave H and Ave I? Singling out Plaza Auto Mall, typical.

 

yes, because they cause a lot more problems than the other groups you mentioned.

 

for the other problems try physically separating one side of the road from the other, license revocation for double parking on streets where buses run, elimination of parking spaces so trucks actually have places to sit while doing their business without blocking traffic, etc.

 

not that I expect the citizenry and government to actually see the writing on the wall and agree to any of these things. for now.

[Gorgor]

yes, because they cause a lot more problems than the other groups you mentioned.

 

for the other problems try physically separating one side of the road from the other, license revocation for double parking on streets where buses run, elimination of parking spaces so trucks actually have places to sit while doing their business without blocking traffic, etc.

 

not that I expect the citizenry and government to actually see the writing on the wall and agree to any of these things. for now.

 

Calm down with the anti-car attitude.  License revocation, really?  So double parking is a much worse offense than running a red light?  Double parking and standing in a bus stop are not a moving violations; the ticket is issued to the car, not to the person. 

 

Yes, double parking is annoying but they should just raise the fines.  Also, taking away too many parking spots will cause outrage in the neighborhoods.

[BrooklynIRT]

raise the fines to what? enforcement is such a band aid solution with the way things are now. eliminating double parking except that which is done in an emergency is part of taking mass transit seriously and trying to make buses faster/free-flowing so that people stop complaining about how slow buses are.

 

and commercial vehicles making deliveries to stores do not deserve to be ticketed when they have no legal place to park and more loading zones with longer hours are needed. or somewhere for them to go without blocking traffic.

 

I am not going to debate which offense is worse; at the very least the same penalty should be levied for double parking on streets where buses run as is levied for running red signals, I suppose.

 

it is a lot easier to avoid double parking on a street where a bus runs than it is to avoid running a red signal. yes, license revocation should be considered because people operating personal vehicles should know better than to engage in selfish and easily avoidable behavior like double parking on bus streets. and double parking also creates dangerous road conditions. if they do not know better, they should not be on the road because driving is a big responsibility. again, it is very easy to avoid double parking on a street where a bus runs.

 

double parking is also very bad if emergency vehicles (especially those carrying patients in critical condition to hospitals) have places to go and have to fight double parked vehicles to get where they need to go in addition to fighting all the moving traffic and whatnot.

 

if it is going to be construed that people who run red signals should have their licenses revoked, fine. I am not sure about that, but I do not wish to discuss running red signals as the debate will become too messy. we can just go with whatever you say should be the penalty for running a red signal and then continue discussing what should be the penalties for double parking on streets where buses run.

 

I am not saying running a red signal is not a big deal. it is a big problem. I just feel it is better off discussed separately.

[Gorgor]

raise the fines to what? enforcement is such a band aid solution with the way things are now. eliminating double parking except that which is done in an emergency is part of taking mass transit seriously and trying to make buses faster/free-flowing so that people stop complaining about how slow buses are.

 

and commercial vehicles making deliveries to stores do not deserve to be ticketed when they have no legal place to park and more loading zones with longer hours are needed. or somewhere for them to go without blocking traffic.

 

I am not going to debate which offense is worse; at the very least the same penalty should be levied for double parking on streets where buses run as is levied for running red signals, I suppose.

 

it is a lot easier to avoid double parking on a street where a bus runs than it is to avoid running a red signal. yes, license revocation should be considered because people operating personal vehicles should know better than to engage in selfish and easily avoidable behavior like double parking on bus streets. and double parking also creates dangerous road conditions. if they do not know better, they should not be on the road because driving is a big responsibility. again, it is very easy to avoid double parking on a street where a bus runs.

 

double parking is also very bad if emergency vehicles (especially those carrying patients in critical condition to hospitals) have places to go and have to fight double parked vehicles to get where they need to go in addition to fighting all the moving traffic and whatnot.

 

if it is going to be construed that people who run red signals should have their licenses revoked, fine. I am not sure about that, but I do not wish to discuss running red signals as the debate will become too messy. we can just go with whatever you say should be the penalty for running a red signal and then continue discussing what should be the penalties for double parking on streets where buses run.

 

I am not saying running a red signal is not a big deal. it is a big problem. I just feel it is better off discussed separately.

 

I assume that you are too young to have a license, correct?  You don't seem to understand how driving and licenses work.

 

Double parking violations will always be tied to the car, not the person.  If a car is left unattended in a bus lane there's no way to prove who parked it there.  Additionally, if you're double parked then you are completely still which causes no threat of injury or death to anyone, but is just a huge pain in the ass. 

 

Let me just make this clear, I am strongly against double parking in bus lanes, however it should never be tied in with licenses.

 

I've double parked plenty of times on streets where buses run, never in a bus lane, to drop off/pick up passengers and to load/unload packages and heavy things.  Yes, it's illegal, but how else am I supposed to do that when there's no parking spots nearby?  I never impede the flow of traffic; there's always one usable lane to my left and buses have never had an issue getting by, but if I were to turn onto a narrow side street then it would be difficult for cars to pass by, and forget about a truck or van getting through.  Bus lanes are different though; I would never stop in it except to drop off/pick up people, which is legally allowed. 

 

When they were presenting the ideas of different types of bus lanes, I really liked the one where the bus lanes were in the center median and traffic was on either side.  That would be the only way to ensure that buses don't get delayed by traffic, however that would royally screw up traffic and left turns so I understand why it didn't go through.

[BrooklynIRT]

for whatever all of this is worth:

 

I have had a license for two years, I drive the family car only when asked to (usually to prevent somebody from having to drive all the way upstate in traffic, by driving them to/from a nearby MNRR station so they can ride the MNRR to/from upstate), I am never owning a car once I move out (before anybody says I am a hypocrite for being opposed to car ownership when a body has no good reason to own one; which I do not and hopefully never will), and if they really wanted to get hardcore about it they would make it so that somebody (whether it is the one who double parked on a bus street or a friend of the one who double parked on a bus street) would have to give the authorities their license information and then the authorities would revoke somebody's license.

 

whether or not the two friends want to agree about whose license should be revoked is another story. hopefully they would be able to figure out who deserves to have the license revoked.

 

none of this applies in an emergency situation (like if you double parked on a bus street to pull someone out of a burning building or whatever).

 

if it is true that you do not double park in bus lanes, good. too bad not everyone else is like you and there is nothing the citizenry or the government will do about it.

 

also it still causes a problem on any street where a bus runs. see Nostrand Ave (with the future bus lanes or without), Flatbush Ave, Ave "U", Kingsbridge Road. I consider it very important for buses to be able to make as many green signals as possible, especially in places where the signals are so unhelpful. see bidirectional Nostrand Ave.

 

sure you can park somewhere without impeding traffic (sitting in any lane anywhere counts as impeding traffic because the road cannot flow as freely as possible if one lane is unusable, and free flow is very important for buses needing to stay on schedule and move quickly). block a hydrant, preferably not on a bus street since sometimes hydrants located at corners help buses get around vehicles waiting to make left turns. if you have to do it on some side street, then lug the stuff to/from the car and the house/store/wherever and get a trustworthy person to watch the car and move it if the authorities show up. use cell phones to communicate in case the person had to move the car elsewhere. just do not double park on a bus street and try not to block a hydrant on a bus street.

 

"Additionally, if you're double parked then you are completely still which causes no threat of injury or death to anyone, but is just a huge pain in the ass."

 

can you dissect my commentary about ambulances and patients in critical condition and tell me how you can stand by your statement about injury or death?

[bobtehpanda]

I'm just going to point out that the problem with the parking is a classic example of textbook supply and demand. Parking is provided at an artificially low rate (I'm not sure if Nostrand and Rogers are metered or not, but if they are, even the city rate isn't that high compared to an off-street garage), and thus demand for it is much higher than supply due to the low cost, causing double parking and congestion.

 

The best solution would be to charge a market-rate price for spots such that there will always be one to two places open on every block (which is actually what DOT is doing with its ParkSmart program in certain sections of the city), but since people complain about paying pocket change for a spot they shouldn't really be occupying for more than two hours at most, this is never going to happen, not with our pandering City Council.

 

The SBS bus lane cameras will deter people on Nostrand, just as they have on Hylan, 34th, Second and First Avenues, and Pelham Parkway. The fines are going higher and higher these days, and it's extremely difficult to have a ticket thrown out in court when there is video and photographic evidence of a violation. A camera is sustained, automated enforcement, and that will deter people from double parking on Nostrand. (They'll probably move to side streets to do it.)

[BrooklynIRT]

yes, the cameras will help. agreed with you on that. it would be nice if buses could flow as freely as trains though.

 

Nostrand and Rogers are metered. not that it makes much of a difference when it comes to artificially low rates, as you said.

 

just gotta keep fighting these battles..

[Gorgor]

for whatever all of this is worth:

 

I have had a license for two years, I drive the family car only when asked to (usually to prevent somebody from having to drive all the way upstate in traffic, by driving them to/from a nearby MNRR station so they can ride the MNRR to/from upstate), I am never owning a car once I move out (before anybody says I am a hypocrite for being opposed to car ownership when a body has no good reason to own one; which I do not and hopefully never will), and if they really wanted to get hardcore about it they would make it so that somebody (whether it is the one who double parked on a bus street or a friend of the one who double parked on a bus street) would have to give the authorities their license information and then the authorities would revoke somebody's license.

 

whether or not the two friends want to agree about whose license should be revoked is another story. hopefully they would be able to figure out who deserves to have the license revoked.

 

none of this applies in an emergency situation (like if you double parked on a bus street to pull someone out of a burning building or whatever).

 

if it is true that you do not double park in bus lanes, good. too bad not everyone else is like you and there is nothing the citizenry or the government will do about it.

 

also it still causes a problem on any street where a bus runs. see Nostrand Ave (with the future bus lanes or without), Flatbush Ave, Ave "U", Kingsbridge Road. I consider it very important for buses to be able to make as many green signals as possible, especially in places where the signals are so unhelpful. see bidirectional Nostrand Ave.

 

sure you can park somewhere without impeding traffic (sitting in any lane anywhere counts as impeding traffic because the road cannot flow as freely as possible if one lane is unusable, and free flow is very important for buses needing to stay on schedule and move quickly). block a hydrant, preferably not on a bus street since sometimes hydrants located at corners help buses get around vehicles waiting to make left turns. if you have to do it on some side street, then lug the stuff to/from the car and the house/store/wherever and get a trustworthy person to watch the car and move it if the authorities show up. use cell phones to communicate in case the person had to move the car elsewhere. just do not double park on a bus street and try not to block a hydrant on a bus street.

 

"Additionally, if you're double parked then you are completely still which causes no threat of injury or death to anyone, but is just a huge pain in the ass."

 

can you dissect my commentary about ambulances and patients in critical condition and tell me how you can stand by your statement about injury or death?

 

The situation with double parking there must be worse than I thought.  On the Upper East Side during the day it's rare for there not to be a car double parked on any given block along 72nd, 79th, and 86th Streets, the major crosstown streets, and it effectively reduces the street to one lane each direction, yet it still moves.  That's what I think of when I think about double parking.  And I withdraw what I said about the last part of injury or death.  What I meant by that was running a red light puts everyone around you at risk from being hit by cross traffic.

 

bobtehpanda brought up a good solution actually.  People's attitude about double parking will not change because if they need something nothing's going to deter them from stopping to go into the store or do whatever they need to do.  If they cannot find a spot then they're just going to leave their car on the street while they go in.  Creating more parking spaces or increasing the availability of parking spaces would move all of those double parked cars into legal parking spaces.

 

Also, if the double parking issue is as bad as it seems, why doesn't the NYPD just station traffic agents there during the day to write tickets all the time?  I remember years ago the NYPD stationed a cop on the Upper East Side to catch drivers ignoring a no left turn sign at 79th/York.  The cop would just park half way down the block and stop any car that made an illegal turn, which must have generated so much money and also made sure that those drivers that got stopped would never do it again.  If people get tickets for double parking then they will be much less likely to do it again because it sure isn't worth risking getting fined $100+.

[BrooklynIRT]

a good bit of money and resources being spent to implement solutions (which tend to be band-aids) when this money and resources could be spent on other parts of NYPD (to fight real crimes), among other things. and there are the annoying politics involved with the neighborhoods having to have clout if they want NYPD to fix their problems and so on and so forth.

 

they would probably be doing some serious spending if they stationed traffic agents in places at all times or whatever.

 

there are a lot of drivers around, and there are only so many who care about getting double parking tickets; even if most of them do care, you will still have a decent number of people double parking and blocking roads. the cameras do help more than cops making rounds and writing tickets, but still.

 

of course they could create more parking lots or garages, but I am sure communities would have something to say about that (parking lot could be a muggers' haven at night, why build a parking lot when we want a store or residences or a park here, etc). I would have something to say about it, but all things considered I suppose I would just compromise/go along with it since the fact that the government and citizenry do almost nothing about these problems has incensed me so much.

 

I am not so sure about that since in the long run it would be better to have more park lands or whatever than dedicate all of this space to automobiles. I would like to see more greenery. maybe not stores or residences, but definitely greenery. this is not meant to be a disparaging comment against automobiles, but there is no getting around the fact that they take up a good deal of space.

[qjtransitmaster]

I'm just going to point out that the problem with the parking is a classic example of textbook supply and demand. Parking is provided at an artificially low rate (I'm not sure if Nostrand and Rogers are metered or not, but if they are, even the city rate isn't that high compared to an off-street garage), and thus demand for it is much higher than supply due to the low cost, causing double parking and congestion.

 

The best solution would be to charge a market-rate price for spots such that there will always be one to two places open on every block (which is actually what DOT is doing with its ParkSmart program in certain sections of the city), but since people complain about paying pocket change for a spot they shouldn't really be occupying for more than two hours at most, this is never going to happen, not with our pandering City Council.

 

The SBS bus lane cameras will deter people on Nostrand, just as they have on Hylan, 34th, Second and First Avenues, and Pelham Parkway. The fines are going higher and higher these days, and it's extremely difficult to have a ticket thrown out in court when there is video and photographic evidence of a violation. A camera is sustained, automated enforcement, and that will deter people from double parking on Nostrand. (They'll probably move to side streets to do it.)

true cameras are the perfect solution to that genrrates money for real BRT LOL.

[Gorgor]

If the double parking problem is as bad as you make it out to be, the revenue from tickets should generate much more money than what they'd be spending on additional traffic agents.