B44 +SelectBusService+

[BrooklynIRT]

When it comes to being fair to cars, remember: [Lack of parking spaces] and [having the choice to utilize the personal automobile over mass transit] have zero to do with each other.

 

BrooklynBus, that quoted part of post #1224 was not directed specifically at you, just to clear that up. You can address it if you want, though.

[BrooklynBus]

I have no problem with removing parking spaces to get traffic for cars and buses moving faster. The problem I have with SBS is just saying the buses are traveling faster and more people are using that route, so therefore it is a success without even trying to measure the inconvenience caused to others as if that just doesn't matter. Also just assuming the added ridership come from new riders and new trips without any analysis if all they did was shift from other buses or trains which does not result in added revenue. And finally neglecting to look at passengers entire trips including walking. If the bus trip was reduced by five minutes because of SBS, but it now takes ten extra minutes to walk to or from the bus, a person's trip is worse, not better.

[qjtransitmaster]

@B35 via Church

 

I am pro-transit of course. I am pretty much pro-choice except when it comes to taking your car into Midtown which should be avoided as much as possible. But I do understand the need to do that occasionally. If people want to pay the high price for that privilege, I have no problem with it. But most of all I am about being fair. That is one of the reasons why I am against tolling the free bridges. If you want to equalize the tolls, then place modest tolls on all the bridges and keep it that way. But to give no one a choice when entering Manhattan by charging high tolls everywhere and continuing to raise them every two years is just ridiculous especially when some are just passing through Manhattan to get elsewhere. Whenever I make a statement about being fair to cars on Sheepsheadbites, there is a group of people who jump all over me accusing me of being pro-auto and anti-transit.

 

It's all about having a balanced transportation system. You try to improve travel for everyone, not intentionally hurting one mode just to promote another. Like reducing street capacity making auto travel more difficult just to appease bike riders, or saying any wide street is suitable for Select Bus Service without doing any further analysis like saying since Woodhaven Blvd has six lanes we can automatically take away two. Or X street has four lanes so we can convert two to bike lanes. Case closed. Well it's not that simple.

Why not cross bronx express lanes that go non stop from NJ to the bruckner and I-295?

[BrooklynBus]

Why not cross bronx express lanes that go non stop from NJ to the bruckner and I-295?

You mean for buses? That highway is so jam packed mst of the time, if you reduce auto capacity you would be adding at least 45 minutes to commutes. If you expect drivers to switch to buses, that won't happen because the origins and destinations are too diverse. Even if you had a good park and ride at one end of the trip, what would happen at the other end? You woud need something like zip car or a cab.

[qjtransitmaster]

You mean for buses? That highway is so jam packed mst of the time, if you reduce auto capacity you would be adding at least 45 minutes to commutes. If you expect drivers to switch to buses, that won't happen because the origins and destinations are too diverse. Even if you had a good park and ride at one end of the trip, what would happen at the other end? You woud need something like zip car or a cab.

No I mean for through traffic including cars and trucks.

[BrooklynBus]

No I mean for through traffic including cars and trucks.

There is no room to add new lanes so I really don't understand what you are asking. The left two lanes are the through lanes since I believe all city's are on the right. If that is not the case, then the middle lane is te through lane. But if the road is jammed because of too much traffic, what difference does it make?

 

We need better rail transit for freight (and a new Hudson River freight tunnel) to remove some of those trucks, which would leave more room for other vehicles.

[bobtehpanda]

There is no room to add new lanes so I really don't understand what you are asking. The left two lanes are the through lanes since I believe all city's are on the right. If that is not the case, then the middle lane is te through lane. But if the road is jammed because of too much traffic, what difference does it make?

 

We need better rail transit for freight (and a new Hudson River freight tunnel) to remove some of those trucks, which would leave more room for other vehicles.

 

I believe Nader was actually able to push for a feasiblity study of the Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel, but the wild card in that project if it ever gets going is Maspeth, since they hate the idea more than anything else.

[BrooklynIRT]

I believe Nader was actually able to push for a feasiblity study of the Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel, but the wild card in that project if it ever gets going is Maspeth, since they hate the idea more than anything else.

Now why is this?

[qjtransitmaster]

Now why is this?

Cause they want rail service for passengers?

[BrooklynBus]

Cause they want rail service for passengers?

No. Typical NIMBY. They don't want the noise of trains.

[bobtehpanda]

Now why is this?

 

 

No. Typical NIMBY. They don't want the noise of trains.

That's actually incorrect. Every plan for a Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel includes a transshipment terminal at Maspeth. The location is the most logical point; much of the neighborhood is already industrial, and the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, Long Island Expressway, and Queens Blvd are all in the area, allowing for trucks to provide speedy last-mile delivery. The downside of this, however, is that Maspeth residents do not like the idea of large amounts of trucks constantly going through the area and bringing noise and air pollution. They aren't wrong; Harlem, Hunts Point, and Chinatown all suffer from high rates of car accidents, air pollution, noise pollution, and all the deletrious health effects that come with the territory, including significantly elevated rates of asthma.

[BrooklynIRT]

Has anybody considered using freight trams in place of commercial trucks for those last mile deliveries?

[bobtehpanda]

Has anybody considered using freight trams in place of commercial trucks for those last mile deliveries?

 

Well, for starters you'd need to build tram tracks to every loading dock and business in New York, which would be a huge capital expense in and of itself. Even then, a robust freight tram network does not exist anywhere today, even in cities that maintained their prewar tram networks; only Dresden maintains a single cargo tram line between Volkswagen plants. Trams are largely incompatible with today's model of containerized shipping, and on average American stores handle many more goods than their European counterparts in the inner areas of cities.

[B35 via Church]

Lol at this so called debate while eating popcorn. These threads in the bus forums have degraded into pure warfare now I just play spectator as people make proposals then the extreme tug o war begins. This 3 way between you and  BrooklynIRT and Brooklynbus with extremes on both sides and lack of creativity then the smart ones like Brooklynbus and bobtehpanda with reasonable stances what data do you have to actually disprove the need for transit expansion. And @BrooklynIRT if you make driving conditions worse you indirectly make transit worse cause buses rely on roads!!! Especially express buses ever hear of the concept park& ride.

 

Problem with you 2 is B35 underestimates demand while BrooklynIRT overestimates demand transit must strike a balance. Since before I decided that proposals are useless without data even my previous bus ideas. Which is what makes planning so damn difficult data is needed. However Since I had more data on Westchester I tended to sound a bit better but sadly this is mostly a NYC forum. I did restructure my rapid NYC ideas based on DHs and how they work but I am not even close to finished. 

What you're playing, is the fence with this whole getting data bit......

 

Lol @ you of all people quantifying what a reasonable stance is.... To me, that means absolutely nothing coming from you.... Nothing.

For whatever the reason, you're still stuck on this "creativity" shit... People have real commutes to have to worry about, shit isn't a game.....

 

You're also not paying attention here, QJT...

"Transit expansion" & the demand for transit isn't the debate b/w myself & BrooklynIRT here - it's the anti-car attitude BrooklynIRT possesses that I have a problem with..... This idea of getting people out their cars by just about any means necessary to take mass transit - which has squat to do with demand...... Demand is a whole 'nother subject.....

 

BrooklynBus made posts much later (which to me) was a less "extreme" (since that's the word you wanna use) version of BrooklynIRT's position..... He went further in expounding that he's (also) pro-choice, so my problem really isn't with BrooklynBus, per se.....

 

I'm not arguing against being pro-transit (which would be the other extreme/the opposing position to BrooklynIRT).....

So really, get your facts straight....

 

I would disagree that I am ignorant of how many persons want nothing to do with mass transit. On the contrary, I am well aware of such persons.

Your "on the contrary" statement there isn't the contrary of what I'm accusing you of......

I don't doubt that you're not aware of such persons; I'm doubting how many of such persons you think exist.... Based on your commentaries & your basic position in all this.....

 

Sorry about the posts being all over the place, bobtehpanda. Among the posts I have made within that last 12 hours, the ones I hope you did not miss include 1207, 1210, 1217, and the present one (1220).

 

In what ways do I imply that I am more "educated" than others? Again, the level of formal education somebody has attained is not what I had in mind when I posted the FDR quote.

 

As for smacking of a holier-than-thou attitude, I would like you to expand on that statement. I do not really follow it. I did ask about the "educated" thing, to which the "holier-than-thou" thing is connected though, so your answer to the first question might just be the answer to this request ("I would like you to expand on that statement.") or be very similar to the answer to this request.

Yeah, Your position/posts doesn't strike me as being holier than thou at all; you don't come off as a know-it-all to me.....

[BrooklynIRT]

Let us not forget about latent demand or those who do not currently own or use cars, B35 via Church.

 

Your "on the contrary" statement there isn't the contrary of what I'm accusing you of......

I don't doubt that you're not aware of such persons; I'm doubting how many of such persons you think exist.... Based on your commentaries & your basic position in all this.....

 

What makes you think I do not recognize that trying to accomplish what I want to accomplish (like discouraging personal auto use, especially by discussing this with people in my generation and younger, many of whom do not currently own or use cars but may be wealthy enough to afford one at some point) is as difficult as trying to move mountains?

 

Not like there is no point in trying to do this anyway, AFAIK:

 

-If people are more dependent on the transit system, perhaps there will be more of an incentive for them to band together and push for improvements, such as bus routes that go where they want to go and not accepting any dinky routes/route proposals. But this has to be something most of the people genuinely want for it to have a chance of working out.

2) Perhaps..... But How is that working out for us (NYC patrons) so far?

Not very well I suppose, but do you think enough people are involved in pushing for improvements?

In this city? Not in the slightest....

 

[B35 via Church]

Let us not forget about latent demand or those who do not currently own or use cars, B35 via Church.

 

 

What makes you think I do not recognize that trying to accomplish what I want to accomplish (like discouraging personal auto use, especially by discussing this with people in my generation and younger, many of whom do not currently own or use cars but may be wealthy enough to afford one at some point) is as difficult as trying to move mountains?

 

Not like there is no point in trying to do this anyway, AFAIK:

 

For starters, I'm not talking about the people that don't have cars....

Use your noodle here for a second....It'd be pretty stupid to bring up that you're trying to get people out of their cars - that don't even have cars......

 

As far as latent demand, I'm not forgetting that....

Let me make this crystal clear - Latent demand can emanate from folks that have cars, or those that don't.... What I'm honing in on as far as your position is concerned - Is the fact that you'd aim to get the amount of people you'd wish to, out of their cars & onto mass transit....  Let's not come on here & pretend that you're all of a sudden considering latent demand from folks that do not have cars, in your anti-car rhetoric.....

 

As for your question, that's a simple answer....

The fact that you actually believe you can accomplish such a task, with as many motorists there are on the roads in this city.... Which is why I dub your position/stance as nothing more than that of existing in a transit utopia.... 

 

Yeah, I'd say there was no point in you posting those successive quotes..... It doesn't illustrate that you don't believe your pipe dream isn't a daunting task.... Your bolding of that statement highlights that   - "If more people are dependent on the transit system" can include those that do not own cars... What's funny about that particular quote/snippet of yours is that, the current masses of mass transit riders are doing a poor job at banding together & pushing for better mass transit... So what in all that is holy, is making you think that the folks that you'd try to persuade to dump their personal vehicle, would a] dump their vehicle to begin with & b] join in such a unified fight/push in the first place? That is exactly why I said what I said in those two snippets of mine, in reply to your comments that preceded them......

 

The people you should really be aiming that type of a comment at (the one you bolded), are the current folks that take mass transit that remain silent, not the folks that you wanna try to get out of their cars....

[BrooklynIRT]

I am not trying to get those who do not even have cars, out of cars.
 

Let's not come on here & pretend that you're all of a sudden considering latent demand from folks that do not have cars, in your anti-car rhetoric.....

 
Do you think that in my "anti-car rhetoric" I am considering those who already have cars, without considering those who do not?
 

As for your question, that's a simple answer....
The fact that you actually believe you can accomplish such a task, with as many motorists there are on the roads in this city.... Which is why I dub your position/stance as nothing more than that of existing in a transit utopia....

 
Why does it have to be a "transit utopia?" What about the fact that bicycle travel would be safer and more viable if there were fewer motorized vehicles on the roads?
 

Yeah, I'd say there was no point in you posting those successive quotes.....

 
I should have written "not like there is no point in discussing transportation issues with people in my generation and younger, AFAIK" The "no point" was not referring to the posting of those quotes in post #1240. Sorry if there was any confusion.
 

The people you should really be aiming that type of a comment at (the one you bolded), are the current folks that take mass transit that remain silent, not the folks that you wanna try to get out of their cars....

 

Already trying. I have had plenty of arguments about transportation with people in my age group at my university, most of whom do not have cars. And I have heard plenty of 'reasons' for personal automobile use from them. And I tell them about all the external impacts of personal automobile use. And I tell them that we should fight for transportation improvements instead of saying "forget about the transit system and get a car."

 

Not that everybody who gets a car forgets about the transit system. BrooklynBus has stated before that owning a car for whatever number of years he has owned one has not prevented him from advocating for transit improvements. I believe that, but obviously advocating for mass transit has been a lifetime mission of BrooklynBus'.

 

Trainmaster5 has also stated that a person can advocate for mass transit and own a car. In theory this is true, but most people, whether they own cars or not, are not really motivated to improve mass transit. These people have "better things to do" and/r "not enough time" and/r "are too busy" to worry about this stuff.

 

"Forget about the transit system and get a car" reminds me of a statement one of my HS classmates posted on Facebook years ago that went something like "I finally got a car. F**K YOU SUBWAY."

[Culver]

Saturday evening may not be the best judge of headways, but I took the B44 SBS and the ride was actually relatively fast.

I did not see almost any locals, however. I had a decent wait to transfer from the B44 and in the time saw three more southbound SBS buses pass and not one local. Holy shit is all I can say on that. Are they *trying* to kill off the local?

[B35 via Church]

I am not trying to get those who do not even have cars, out of cars.

Yeah, I should hope not......

 

Do you think that in my "anti-car rhetoric" I am considering those who already have cars, without considering those who do not?

Lol, of course !

 

Why does it have to be a "transit utopia?" What about the fact that bicycle travel would be safer and more viable if there were fewer motorized vehicles on the roads?

Already explaned that in multiple posts.... Yet & again, a city with millions of people funneling in/out/within it with a minimal amount of cars & damn near everyone taking mass transit is nothing short of a transit utopia..... Not sure what it is you don't get about that..... 

 

Stop it with the bringing up of bikes already... You'd get even less people to dump their cars & pedal it out to wherever they have to go....

Ever tried going shopping & securing bags onto a bike.... I mean, let's get real here....

 

I should have written "not like there is no point in discussing transportation issues with people in my generation and younger, AFAIK"

The "no point" was not referring to the posting of those quotes in post #1240. Sorry if there was any confusion.

yeah, np....

 

Already trying. I have had plenty of arguments about transportation with people in my age group at my university, most of whom do not have cars. And I have heard plenty of 'reasons' for personal automobile use from them. And I tell them about all the external impacts of personal automobile use. And I tell them that we should fight for transportation improvements instead of saying "forget about the transit system and get a car."

 

Not that everybody who gets a car forgets about the transit system. BrooklynBus has stated before that owning a car for whatever number of years he has owned one has not prevented him from advocating for transit improvements. I believe that, but obviously advocating for mass transit has been a lifetime mission of BrooklynBus'.

 

Trainmaster5 has also stated that a person can advocate for mass transit and own a car. In theory this is true, but most people, whether they own cars or not, are not really motivated to improve mass transit. These people have "better things to do" and/r "not enough time" and/r "are too busy" to worry about this stuff.

 

"Forget about the transit system and get a car" reminds me of a statement one of my HS classmates posted on Facebook years ago that went something like "I finally got a car. F**K YOU SUBWAY."

 

Bold statement #1: Well that's obvious; Of course folks who obtain some vehicle doesn't forget about the transit system....

I'd go as far as to say, the ones that used mass transit beforehand remember it even more - With the fact they don't have to 100% rely on it anymore   .

 

Bold statement #2: Yeah, yours truly is one of them.... BrooklynBus is another.... Quite sure there are many more on this forum.

Not sure why you're aiming this at me (or the first bolded statement either, for the matter)....

 

I'm starting to get the sense that you think I'm pro-car, anti-transit - Because I don't agree with your "extreme" (as QJT would say) pro-transit views..... If so, I'm telling you now, it's not the case..... I'm just not the MF-er going, *dump your car & take mass transit*... Simple as that.

 

Last statement: Lol, sounds like something a suburbanite would say... Or at the very least, someone that aint used to nothin...

FWIW, when I started driving, I can honestly say I never had that attitude... I mean, there are some (well, many, but for the benefit of the doubt) particular places that are simply a PITA to get to using mass transit... That should go w/o saying.... 

 

 

Saturday evening may not be the best judge of headways, but I took the B44 SBS and the ride was actually relatively fast.

I did not see almost any locals, however. I had a decent wait to transfer from the B44 and in the time saw three more southbound SBS buses pass and not one local. Holy shit is all I can say on that. Are they *trying* to kill off the local?

Earlier today, I walked from the junction, home.... Due to the fact that I didn't wanna put up w/ the B35 (or the dollar cab) from rogers after the fact.... Wanted to take the local to Snyder so I can just shoot (walk) across snyder to the crib.... No dice, just kept seeing artics for the 10 mins or so I was waiting.... Could've taken the to church, but TBH, I've always felt taking the train from junction to church av (or via versa) was a waste.... It's almost always a walk, or the B44/41 from church to the junction.....

 

Same deal when I was in manhattan earlier... Had to make a stop around 23rd st. after coming back from Jersey (PABT).... Wasn't gonna take the N/R those couple stops, so I just walked to 7th & took the M20 instead (luckily for me, the bus was right there).....

[BrooklynIRT]

Lol, of course !

 

Perhaps I have unintentionally given off the impression that I am only considering those who already have cars, without considering those who do not, on these forums. In real life, I am not sure if people with whom I have had arguments similar to those I have had on the the internet believe that I am only considering those who already have cars, without considering those who do not. Most of the people with whom I have had these arguments in real life have been people who do not have cars or driver's licenses.

 

Already explaned that in multiple posts.... Yet & again, a city with millions of people funneling in/out/within it with a minimal amount of cars & damn near everyone taking mass transit is nothing short of a transit utopia..... Not sure what it is you don't get about that..... 

 

Stop it with the bringing up of bikes already... You'd get even less people to dump their cars & pedal it out to wherever they have to go....

Ever tried going shopping & securing bags onto a bike.... I mean, let's get real here....

 

What if making bicycle travel more viable is one aspect of my position? What about making bicycle travel more viable so that it is easier for people to avoid riding overcrowded mass transit vehicles or slow or indirect mass transit routes to their destinations? Yes, I have gone shopping and secured bags to my bicycle. I would never do any kind of bulk shopping at a place like Costco using a bicycle, but just getting one or two bags of items from some local supermarket is manageable for me.

 

Bold statement #1: Well that's obvious; Of course folks who obtain some vehicle doesn't forget about the transit system....

I'd go as far as to say, the ones that used mass transit beforehand remember it even more - With the fact they don't have to 100% rely on it anymore  .

 

How many of these people advocate for or improve mass transit? How many of these people have no intention of advocating for or improving mass transit?

 

Bold statement #2: Yeah, yours truly is one of them.... BrooklynBus is another.... Quite sure there are many more on this forum.

Not sure why you're aiming this at me (or the first bolded statement either, for the matter)....

 

I was not necessarily aiming those statements at you; I was just following up what I said about people saying "forget about the transit system (or, to amend this based on your response to bold statement #1, 'forget about advocating for or improving mass transit') and get a car."

 

I'm starting to get the sense that you think I'm pro-car, anti-transit - Because I don't agree with your "extreme" (as QJT would say) pro-transit views..... If so, I'm telling you now, it's not the case..... I'm just not the MF-er going, *dump your car & take mass transit*... Simple as that.

 

I do not think you are anti-transit, especially given all the posts you have made about improving the transit system.

 

Last statement: Lol, sounds like something a suburbanite would say... Or at the very least, someone that aint used to nothin...

 

I think that person has always lived in Brooklyn; I get the impression that he is in Kensington or something (near the ). He was in military school for a bit.

[BrooklynIRT]

FWIW, when I started driving, I can honestly say I never had that attitude...

Were you a mass transit advocate prior to getting a driver's license or a personal automobile of your own?

[B35 via Church]

 

What if making bicycle travel more viable is one aspect of my position? What about making bicycle travel more viable so that it is easier for people to avoid riding overcrowded mass transit vehicles or slow or indirect mass transit routes to their destinations? Yes, I have gone shopping and secured bags to my bicycle. I would never do any kind of bulk shopping at a place like Costco using a bicycle, but just getting one or two bags of items from some local supermarket is manageable for me.

 

 

How many of these people advocate for or improve mass transit? How many of these people have no intention of advocating for or improving mass transit?

1- What do you mean making bicycle transit more viable; I mean you already have bike lanes that Mayor Moneybags (Bloomberg) went nuts infesting NYC with - That a plethora of bike users in this city don't even use!! Not to mention that bicyclists actually pose more of a threat to pedestrians than motor vehicles do..... Case you didn't notice, yeah, Bicyclists get the luxury (yes, the luxury) of riding on the sidewalks AND the streets.... Motor vehicle operators don't have that option.... So how more viable can bike travel really get; Have them go airborne ?!

 

Your overall position/rhetoric has too many holes in it... and like I said before, it begins with the foundation of why you (said you) became anti-car in the first place..... This aspect of your position you're bringing up here that deals with the masses interchangably (which is basically what you're saying, when you bring up folks using bikes to avoid problematic mass transit routes) using bicycles & mass transit, with as few cars on the road as possible, to get to their destinations, is nothing short of ridiculous to me.....

 

To sum it up, you are on here actually implicating bicycles can be/should be more useful than cars - esp. for as many people that already use cars (whether these folks use/advocate for mass transit or not)..... I mean, what are you gonna suggest next as an option for those with cars, to abandon using their cars for commuting purposes? Scooters? Helicopters? Airplanes? Jet Packs?

 

Where does it stop with you......

 

 

2- Honestly, I believe the percentage of the amount of people differs in the suburbs, compared to urban areas.....

 

In other words.... You're gonna have more folks that have cars that happen to live in some urbanized area, be more apt to using & advocating for mass transit..... Folks in the suburbs, in general, you are not gonna get near as many of them advocating for mass transit...... 

 

So there is no *one size fits all* answer to these questions; QoL (quality of life) definitely comes into play here - Which is apparent that such a factor is grossly devoid from your position.... I would compare some suburban areas to some urban areas in regards to the level of transit advocacy vs. the need for a car by patrons in those differing areas, but that'd be too easy & quite frankly, a waste of time......

 

I can already/immediately guess what your reply to this is gonna be - Single out those that live in the suburbs & focus more on getting those that live in urbanized areas (out of their cars & onto mass transit)..... You can attempt to do that, but then that would throw a complete monkeywrench in your anti-car rhetoric.....

 

 

 I do not think you are anti-transit, especially given all the posts you have made about improving the transit system.

Were you a mass transit advocate prior to getting a driver's license or a personal automobile of your own?

Lemme try to bridge the gap b/w these 2 comments....

 

I started posting on RD back sometime in the summer of '05; started lurking there sometime in late 04....

Didn't stop to think there were forums that specially focused/discussed NYC transit (esp. in depth) in my high school & collegiate years....

 

So yeah, to answer your question, Yes, I was a mass transit advocate before I got my license...

[BrooklynIRT]

1- What do you mean making bicycle transit more viable; I mean you already have bike lanes that Mayor Moneybags (Bloomberg) went nuts infesting NYC with - That a plethora of bike users in this city don't even use!! Not to mention that bicyclists actually pose more of a threat to pedestrians than motor vehicles do..... Case you didn't notice, yeah, Bicyclists get the luxury (yes, the luxury) of riding on the sidewalks AND the streets.... Motor vehicle operators don't have that option.... So how more viable can bike travel really get; Have them go airborne ?!

The viability of bicycle travel on most roads is compromised by motor vehicle operators who operate motor vehicles recklessly or dangerously, or simply without being careful or alert enough to avoid collisions (honest mistakes, if we want to call them that). Speaking from my standpoint as a bicycle user, bicycle lanes that are not physically separated from motorized vehicle traffic are not very significant to me and do not significantly increase the viability of bicycle travel. They are merely painted lines on the road, and people often double park in them.

 

I prefer to use unidirectional roads because they have superior traffic signalling systems to bidirectional roads, regardless of whether they have bicycle lanes or not, especially those with a single traffic lane. Typically, the lower the number of lanes on the road, the better it is for a bicycle rider.

 

Luxury of riding on the sidewalks and the streets..well, cars are allowed to use grade-separated freeways and grade-separated parkways (and roads that are mostly, but not fully grade-separated, like the Saw Mill Parkway), which bicycles are not allowed to use at all in NYC, AFAIK. A cyclist is also not allowed to ride his/her bicycle, or be in the operating position, which means standing over the seat while pushing the pedals of his/her bicycle or sitting in the seat, while occupying a public sidewalk. This does not hold in an emergency, of course, such as needing to flee a clear and present danger, if the sidewalk is clear enough to be used to flee the danger and no road in the area can be used to flee the danger (just to clearly outline a potentially important exception).

 

Although that was really responding to your comment about "luxury," not your comment about pedestrian safety, to which I respond by asking the following: Do statistics indicate that bicyclists pose more of a threat to pedestrians than motor vehicles in NYC? Do you think that pedestrian accidents would increase or decrease if, in most given land or road areas of NYC, each private automobile on the roads were replaced (one for one) by a bicycle on the roads?

 

Also, do you really believe a greater percentage of NYC residents perceive bicycles as a threat to pedestrians in NYC than perceive private automobiles as a threat to pedestrians in NYC?

 

I will respond further to your question about the viability of bicycle travel by stating that I do not believe that the fact that people may illegally be in the operating position with their bicycles on public sidewalks should be considered a contributing factor to the viability of bicycle travel in NYC.

 

 

To sum it up, you are on here actually implicating bicycles can be/should be more useful than cars - esp. for as many people that already use cars (whether these folks use/advocate for mass transit or not).....

You seem to be placing quite an emphasis on those who already own and/r use cars. I am not necessarily placing an emphasis on that group of people.

 

 

QoL (quality of life) definitely comes into play here - Which is apparent that such a factor is grossly devoid from your position....

How is that?

 

 

I can already/immediately guess what your reply to this is gonna be - Single out those that live in the suburbs & focus more on getting those that live in urbanized areas (out of their cars & onto mass transit)..... You can attempt to do that, but then that would throw a complete monkeywrench in your anti-car rhetoric.....

What monkey wrench would that throw into my "anti-car rhetoric" and why might this be significant? Do my statements, which reflect my position, necessarily have to be labeled as "anti-car rhetoric?"

[B35 via Church]

The viability of bicycle travel on most roads is compromised by motor vehicle operators who operate motor vehicles recklessly or dangerously, or simply without being careful or alert enough to avoid collisions (honest mistakes, if we want to call them that). Speaking from my standpoint as a bicycle user, bicycle lanes that are not physically separated from motorized vehicle traffic are not very significant to me and do not significantly increase the viability of bicycle travel. They are merely painted lines on the road, and people often double park in them.

 

I prefer to use unidirectional roads because they have superior traffic signalling systems to bidirectional roads, regardless of whether they have bicycle lanes or not, especially those with a single traffic lane. Typically, the lower the number of lanes on the road, the better it is for a bicycle rider.

 

Luxury of riding on the sidewalks and the streets..well, cars are allowed to use grade-separated freeways and grade-separated parkways (and roads that are mostly, but not fully grade-separated, like the Saw Mill Parkway), which bicycles are not allowed to use at all in NYC, AFAIK. A cyclist is also not allowed to ride his/her bicycle, or be in the operating position, which means standing over the seat while pushing the pedals of his/her bicycle or sitting in the seat, while occupying a public sidewalk. This does not hold in an emergency, of course, such as needing to flee a clear and present danger, if the sidewalk is clear enough to be used to flee the danger and no road in the area can be used to flee the danger (just to clearly outline a potentially important exception).

 

Although that was really responding to your comment about "luxury," not your comment about pedestrian safety, to which I respond by asking the following:

 

Do statistics indicate that bicyclists pose more of a threat to pedestrians than motor vehicles in NYC? Do you think that pedestrian accidents would increase or decrease if, in most given land or road areas of NYC, each private automobile on the roads were replaced (one for one) by a bicycle on the roads?

 

Also, do you really believe a greater percentage of NYC residents perceive bicycles as a threat to pedestrians in NYC than perceive private automobiles as a threat to pedestrians in NYC?

 

I will respond further to your question about the viability of bicycle travel by stating that I do not believe that the fact that people may illegally be in the operating position with their bicycles on public sidewalks should be considered a contributing factor to the viability of bicycle travel in NYC.

Yeah, and how many pedestrians do you see walking on freeways & parkways.... Poor comparison to the fact that there is much of nothing stopping bicyclists from riding on the streets AND the sidewalks (which was the point)......

 

Bike lanes being separated from motor vehicle traffic? You surely are thinking in a utopic realm w/ all of this....  Explain how you would go about doing that.... Also, you can prefer to bike it out on uni-directional roads as much as you'd like.... Fact of the matter is, we're not talking about you - We're talking about the masses of folks you think you can get to abandon their cars for bicycles (in this case), along w/ mass transit....

 

Your questions....

- I don't know if any such stat exists... Wasn't speaking from any statistical point of view anyway; I was speaking from the vantage point of what I've read & heard from enough people (AFAIC) regarding bicycles maneuvering on sidewalks.....

- I absolutely do think there would be an increase of pedestrian accidents, if there were an equal replacement of cars to bikes on the road.... Again, there are very weak/loosely enforced laws when it comes to bicycling (in NYC anyway)..... This also answers your question regarding bicycles being perceived more as a threat to NYC patrons..... Sure, some motor vehicle jumping the curb can do far more damage to a person if said person gets struck, but with as many bikes riding on the sidewalks (one of many reason I'm glad I don't work in lower manhattan anymore, but w/e), how can you not believe that bikes are more of a threat to peds......

 

Now when you see cars driving on sidewalks all willy-nilly, let me know...... Then I'll consider if cars are more of a threat to pedestrians.

And please don't argue the idiots that get struck by motorists while texting while crossing the street, or some stupid shit like that.....

 

You seem to be placing quite an emphasis on those who already own and/r use cars. I am not necessarily placing an emphasis on that group of people.

 

How is that?

 

What monkey wrench would that throw into my "anti-car rhetoric" and why might this be significant?

Do my statements, which reflect my position, necessarily have to be labeled as "anti-car rhetoric?"

1- Lol..... Well no shit... What do you think being anti-car is!

Do you even know what you're arguing anymore.... And you wonder why I call what you've been saying, rhetoric.....

 

2- Already explained how QoL factors into this whole thing....

 

3- By you even asking that first question, 1] looks my guess was right, and 2] you ask this as if you're playing devil's advocate or something.... I believe you know the answer to that first question & are doing nothing more than jerking my chain at this point...... As if you don't realize that there are more suburbanites that could give 2 shits about bettering mass transit...... It's easier to argue the rhetoric of trying to get urbanites out of their cars & onto mass transit, compared to suburbanites..... And if you ask me anything along the lines of "how so", that question will go unanswered & you will not be taken serious.....

[BrooklynIRT]

there are very weak/loosely enforced laws when it comes to bicycling (in NYC anyway).....

 

Giving me a perfect opportunity to post the following quote from http://www.carsstink.org:

 

"60. The huge amount of resources required to patrol the roads at even the meager current levels takes away resources from the law enforcement efforts at every other level of society."

 

Reminds me of the resources required to patrol the roads, the ineffectiveness of which, based on statements you made in our exchange about traffic law enforcement on and around January 26th of this year, should be a larger reason for my dissatisfaction with the performance of surface mass transit than the problems private automobile use causes for surface mass transit.

 

Do you even know what you're arguing anymore....

 

Is there evidence that I do not?

 

I believe you know the answer to that first question & are doing nothing more than jerking my chain at this point......

 

To my knowledge, no and no. If we were having this conversation in person, I do not think you would think I were jerking your chain at all.

 

As if you don't realize that there are more suburbanites that could give 2 shits about bettering mass transit......

 

No, I would say the suburbs should pretty much be left alone and none of what I have in mind should be tried there. I still do not have the slightest idea what monkey wrench that would throw into my "anti-car rhetoric" and why might this be significant.

 

One of the problems might be that neither of us has specifically defined "anti-car" or whether it is wrong to be "anti-car," especially when one compares the cost of private automobile use to urban society, the costs of private automobile use to non-private automobile users, and even the costs of private automobile use to other private automobile users, to the benefits every private automobile user derives from private automobile use in an urban setting.