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.
Sign in to follow this  
BrooklynBus

Future SBS Routes

Recommended Posts

Guess I'll kick-start the discussion here....

 

I don't really read the SBS threads, but where along Woodhaven/Cross Bay are people talking about having SBS along?

(I mean, between what two points/areas)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I'll kick-start the discussion here....

 

I don't really read the SBS threads, but where along Woodhaven/Cross Bay are people talking about having SBS along?

(I mean, between what two points/areas)

 

Between Queens Center and the Rockaways.

 

http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20130411/woodhaven/select-bus-service-proposed-for-woodhaven-boulevard

 

I would agree with it.

 

Possible Stops

Queens Center Mall (M)(R)

Penelope Avenue

Metropolitan Avenue

Myrtle Avenue

Jamaica Avenue (J)(Z)

Atlantic Avenue

Liberty Avenue (A)

157th Avenue

Jamaica Bay Refuge

Noel Road

Beach 98th Street

Beach 108th Street

Beach 116th Street

Edited by cotb16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have ever driven along Woodhaven or Cross Bay, you would know what a horrible idea this is.  There is just not enough bus traffic to justify the loss of a traffic lane.  You can drive all the way from Myrtle Ave to Queens Blvd and see only one or two buses in the opposite direction.  You also hardly pass a bus in the direction you are going.  So are cars and trucks supposed to move at 10 mph while the bus lane has a vehicle once every 4 or 5 minutes? Does that really make any sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have ever driven along Woodhaven or Cross Bay, you would know what a horrible idea this is.  There is just not enough bus traffic to justify the loss of a traffic lane.  You can drive all the way from Myrtle Ave to Queens Blvd and see only one or two buses in the opposite direction.  You also hardly pass a bus in the direction you are going.  So are cars and trucks supposed to move at 10 mph while the bus lane has a vehicle once every 4 or 5 minutes? Does that really make any sense?

They should add rocket launchers and nitrox to the buses while they are at it the buses on woodhaven aren't even that slow to be honest they run as fast as and sometimes FASTER than the car traffic!!!! For this SBS to even work a bus route over the belt would need to be made along with linden blvd with a woodhaven stop to connect to the main woodhaven lines to create diversity of travel markets that can actually become feasible alternatives to driving. Otherwise this won't end well at all. Plus would Q53/52 at their current service levels even be enough to handle the new surge of riders that would swarm the SBS? Artics would become a must.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Between Queens Center and the Rockaways....

Alright, thanks....

 

If you have ever driven along Woodhaven or Cross Bay, you would know what a horrible idea this is.  There is just not enough bus traffic to justify the loss of a traffic lane.  You can drive all the way from Myrtle Ave to Queens Blvd and see only one or two buses in the opposite direction.  You also hardly pass a bus in the direction you are going.  So are cars and trucks supposed to move at 10 mph while the bus lane has a vehicle once every 4 or 5 minutes? Does that really make any sense?

My personal favorite is getting stuck between Eliot & QB (northbound)......

 

A Q53 SBS? I don't know about that one

The Rockaways end of it is news to me....

 

I've heard mentions here & there about SBS along Woodhaven (never paid any real amount of attention to it)...

I figured the northern terminal "station" would be up around QB, but I didn't know what the southern terminal station was supposed to be.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eastern Queens needs SBS all over the place, and the Q43 is a good start. Q44, Q46, and Q65 would be a bigger prize, and some of the routes could have Hylan-style traffic signal priority (all the ones on narrow two-lane roads: Q17, Q25, Q27).

 

It'll be really interesting to see how they do Hillside SBS, because there are other non-SBS LTDs on that route that also see heavy ridership (Q17, Q36)



If you have ever driven along Woodhaven or Cross Bay, you would know what a horrible idea this is.  There is just not enough bus traffic to justify the loss of a traffic lane.  You can drive all the way from Myrtle Ave to Queens Blvd and see only one or two buses in the opposite direction.  You also hardly pass a bus in the direction you are going.  So are cars and trucks supposed to move at 10 mph while the bus lane has a vehicle once every 4 or 5 minutes? Does that really make any sense?

 

The loss of a single lane on any one road is not going to lead to Carmageddon - people will find alternate routes or just not make the trip by car.

 

If LA can close the 405 for a weekend and San Francisco and a bunch of other places can tear down downtown freeways without negatively impacting traffic, then there's no need to get super worked up over the loss of a ten-foot car lane.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. These constant anti-SBS blogs make it seem like the loss of one lane for cars will cause utter chaos. This is totally biased, and it then leaves the prospect of screwing over bus riders, which isn't a good thing either. I'm sure more people use the B46 than actually drive along Utica Avenue in that same year. Frankly, unless you're north of Caroll Street (which isn't a long stretch up to Fulton) Utica Avenue is pretty wide and i don't see SBS causing that much of an issue. Plus, there is already a rush hour only bus lane on Utica which doesn't cause too many issues except around Eastern Parkway. (keep in mind, this is only one intersection). And, Woodhaven Blvd has dedicated service roads for much of it's length. If these service roads are given to buses, I doubt traffic would get that much worse. There are alternate routes in the area after all.

 

Mostly, this just seems like you having an issue with the MTA trying to brand routes as SBS just to increase bus ridership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the buses on woodhaven aren't even that slow to be honest they run as fast as and sometimes FASTER than the car traffic!!!! For this SBS to even work a bus route over the belt would need to be made along with linden blvd with a woodhaven stop to connect to the main woodhaven lines to create diversity of travel markets that can actually become feasible alternatives to driving. Otherwise this won't end well at all.

My position exactly. First of all there has to be enough buses to justify an exclusive lane. There isn't on Woodhaven. You can drive it for two miles and not see a single bus in each direction. 

 

sounds like OVERKILL!!!!!!!! NITRIX EXPRESS Q53

Exactly. 

 

My personal favorite is getting stuck between Eliot & QB (northbound)......

That's not even that bad. Southbound going over the LIRR bridge south of Metropolitan is worse. You used to have the 88th Street alternative which I would use when there was a delay, so DOT changed some street directions to make it harder to use. You could save 5 minutes by doing that.  Then they banned the switch to the service road at Union Turnpike creating a new merge and bottleneck because sometimes the left lane is blocked by cars waiting to make a left turn so you have a second merge. That made the situation even worse. 

 

If another lane is reserved for SBS, then there might only be one lane left, depending how they design it.  From what they have already done to cause needless congestion, I just don't trust them to not create more. 

 

The loss of a single lane on any one road is not going to lead to Carmageddon - people will find alternate routes or just not make the trip by car.

 

If LA can close the 405 for a weekend and San Francisco and a bunch of other places can tear down downtown freeways without negatively impacting traffic, then there's no need to get super worked up over the loss of a ten-foot car lane.

Your problem is that you speak theoretics and know absolutely nothing about Woodhaven Bouevard. Just because something happened or did not happen in LA has nothing to do with this. And it was only for one weekend when many trips are discretionary, not a permanent change, so the two situations are not comparable. Also, there are no alternative routes except for the Van Wyck and the BQE, both of which are much more congested than Woodhaven. Currently Woodhaven is the fastest alternative of the three. With SBS, all three would be just as slow. The only alternative would be driving an extra 20 or 30 minutes or to not make the trip at all. For many trips mass transit would still take an additional ten minutes. All this so bus riders could save 5 minutes at best? Come on now. 

 

I agree. These constant anti-SBS blogs make it seem like the loss of one lane for cars will cause utter chaos. This is totally biased, and it then leaves the prospect of screwing over bus riders, which isn't a good thing either. I'm sure more people use the B46 than actually drive along Utica Avenue in that same year. Frankly, unless you're north of Caroll Street (which isn't a long stretch up to Fulton) Utica Avenue is pretty wide and i don't see SBS causing that much of an issue. Plus, there is already a rush hour only bus lane on Utica which doesn't cause too many issues except around Eastern Parkway. (keep in mind, this is only one intersection). And, Woodhaven Blvd has dedicated service roads for much of it's length. If these service roads are given to buses, I doubt traffic would get that much worse. There are alternate routes in the area after all.

 

Mostly, this just seems like you having an issue with the MTA trying to brand routes as SBS just to increase bus ridership.

 

You also know nothing about these specific situations either. I do. First of all, there is no reason to make driving inconvenient on Woodhaven Boulevard, when you can help mass transit much more by reactivating the Rockaway Line a few blocks away. Second SBS on Woodhaven is overkill and woud minimally help bus riders since the buses move fast as it is. No one is screwing over bus riders. 

 

So why slow down other traffic by 50%?  It just makes no sense here. People just won't switch from the car to the bus because that won't make sense for most trips.  That was discussed in one of the article's links. Third, what about the parts of Woodhaven without service roads?  They are also proposing to remove lanes there too. 

 

Utica Avenue is another story. Yes it is wide until Carroll St. But it is also exceedingly slow for all traffic.  SBS could be a good idea there if it is designed properly to minimally impact other traffic and there is proper enforcement. I'm not sure of either. Also, there is no reason for SBS at all north of Eastern Parkway. The real problem is double and illegal parking. If we could eliminate that, you woudn't even need SBS. I used to take the B46 daily. When no one would illegally park between Carroll St and Eastern Parkway, you would save 5 minutes in just those three blocks.  But there was never any enforcement.  That was the problem. If SBS eliminates double parking, and you could handle the left turns, which I would have to see the details of to be convinced it would work, you do not create bus bulbs to impede traffic, and it were not proposed north of Eastern Parkway, then I would support SBS for Utica Avenue. There are just too many ifs to approve it as proposed. 

 

As I stated, I am not against SBS per se, I don't like the planning process and the measuring techniques that exaggerate success. Those are my problems with SBS. 

Edited by BrooklynBus
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on what I'm seeing in this thread, Select Bus Service could apply to MTA Bus lines as well?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your problem is that you speak theoretics and know absolutely nothing about Woodhaven Bouevard. Just because something happened or did not happen in LA has nothing to do with this. And it was only for one weekend when many trips are discretionary, not a permanent change, so the two situations are not comparable. Also, there are no alternative routes except for the Van Wyck and the BQE, both of which are much more congested than Woodhaven. Currently Woodhaven is the fastest alternative of the three. With SBS, all three would be just as slow. The only alternative would be driving an extra 20 or 30 minutes or to not make the trip at all. For many trips mass transit would still take an additional ten minutes. All this so bus riders could save 5 minutes at best? Come on now. 

 

 

You also know nothing about these specific situations either. I do. First of all, there is no reason to make driving inconvenient on Woodhaven Boulevard, when you can help mass transit much more by reactivating the Rockaway Line a few blocks away. Second SBS on Woodhaven is overkill and woud minimally help bus riders since the buses move fast as it is. No one is screwing over bus riders. 

 

So why slow down other traffic by 50%?  It just makes no sense here. People just won't switch from the car to the bus because that won't make sense for most trips.  That was discussed in one of the article's links. Third, what about the parts of Woodhaven without service roads?  They are also proposing to remove lanes there too. 

 

Utica Avenue is another story. Yes it is wide until Carroll St. But it is also exceedingly slow for all traffic.  SBS could be a good idea there if it is designed properly to minimally impact other traffic and there is proper enforcement. I'm not sure of either. Also, there is no reason for SBS at all north of Eastern Parkway. The real problem is double and illegal parking. If we could eliminate that, you woudn't even need SBS. I used to take the B46 daily. When no one would illegally park between Carroll St and Eastern Parkway, you would save 5 minutes in just those three blocks.  But there was never any enforcement.  That was the problem. If SBS eliminates double parking, and you could handle the left turns, which I would have to see the details of to be convinced it would work, you do not create bus bulbs to impede traffic, and it were not proposed north of Eastern Parkway, then I would support SBS for Utica Avenue. There are just too many ifs to approve it as proposed. 

 

As I stated, I am not against SBS per se, I don't like the planning process and the measuring techniques that exaggerate success. Those are my problems with SBS.

 

Don't assume we know nothing about Woodhaven Blvd just to advance your point. You don't know what we know, and while I respect the work you have done with the TA in the past, it doesn't mean you are the one authority on these issues.

 

Anyway, Woodhaven Blvd is a 10 lane street. There is no way in hell that removing one lane will make the traffic situation (which is only bad south of Jamaica Avenue) that much worse. You can't say that with a straight face. I agree with reactivating the Rockaway RoW, but then comes issues of connecting it to a line to Manhattan for example, and clearing the RoW can be expensive. Also, consider the possible opposition from the residents. While they are unjustified, it will take a few years to throw them out of court, so a quicker solution is necessary. You also underestimate the bus traffic on Woodhaven. The Q11/21 and Q52/53 combined have a better frequency than just 4-5 minutes, and the passenger traffic is also very high.

 

As for Utica Avenue, I also used to use the B46 quite often, so I also know what I'm taking about. Utica Avenue is only a traffic nightmare at the Eastern Parkway intersection, and better enforcement can help remedy this issue. If the B46 were to get SBS, I would only have dedicated bus lanes between Fulton Street and Flatbush Avenue along Utica, as Malcolm X Blvd is definitely too small for it, and Broadway doesn't need it. It's possible north of Eastern Parkway if traffic enforcement is increased.

 

I disagree with your notion of lack of planning for SBS, with the exception of the S79 SBS (which did feel rushed) there seemed to be an ample amount of planning for the Bx12 and M15.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on what I'm seeing in this thread, Select Bus Service could apply to MTA Bus lines as well?

Also, what would anyone think of a Q44 select bus service?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not even that bad. Southbound going over the LIRR bridge south of Metropolitan is worse. You used to have the 88th Street alternative which I would use when there was a delay, so DOT changed some street directions to make it harder to use. You could save 5 minutes by doing that.  Then they banned the switch to the service road at Union Turnpike creating a new merge and bottleneck because sometimes the left lane is blocked by cars waiting to make a left turn so you have a second merge. That made the situation even worse. 

 

If another lane is reserved for SBS, then there might only be one lane left, depending how they design it.  From what they have already done to cause needless congestion, I just don't trust them to not create more.

I wasn't asking you if it was that bad.... Nor was I aware that this was a pissing contest....

Yeah there are other stretches of Woodhaven that are worse..... Never denied that....

 

....and miss me with the whole misdirecting of irritation because others disagree with your position.

 

Don't assume we know nothing about Woodhaven Blvd just to advance your point.

You don't know what we know, and while I respect the work you have done with the TA in the past, it doesn't mean you are the one authority on these issues.

 

You also underestimate the bus traffic on Woodhaven. The Q11/21 and Q52/53 combined have a better frequency than just 4-5 minutes.....

Beat me to it.... Thank you... and that's exactly how that post of his came off too...

 

What's funny about his rant to me is that I wasn't going against his position anyway....

While I don't care much for SBS' in general, I'm not going to go apeshit over Woodhaven blvd in particular.....

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, Woodhaven Blvd is a 10 lane street. You also underestimate the bus traffic on Woodhaven. The Q11/21 and Q52/53 combined have a better frequency than just 4-5 minutes, and the passenger traffic is also very high.

 

As for Utica Avenue, I also used to use the B46 quite often, so I also know what I'm taking about. Utica Avenue is only a traffic nightmare at the Eastern Parkway intersection, and better enforcement can help remedy this issue. If the B46 were to get SBS, I would only have dedicated bus lanes between Fulton Street and Flatbush Avenue along Utica, as Malcolm X Blvd is definitely too small for it, and Broadway doesn't need it. It's possible north of Eastern Parkway if traffic enforcement is increased.

 

I disagree with your notion of lack of planning for SBS, with the exception of the S79 SBS (which did feel rushed) there seemed to be an ample amount of planning for the Bx12 and M15.

 

Woodhaven Boulevard is not a ten lane street. Only a few blocks are ten lanes. 90% of it is eight lanes. Going under the LIRR south of the LIE is only 6 lanes as is the bridge over the LIRR tracks south of Metropolitan.  Those are the bottlenecks. Installing a bus lane there would have impacts all the way up to 63rd Drive on the north and down to Myrtle Avenue on the south. Also, it's not as simple as installing a bus lane in the service road.  The entire street would be redesigned with the malls eliminated where they exist, and the service roads only esist for half of the street. Currently trucks must use the service roads. If bus lanes are put there, that means trucks move over to the main road reducing auto capacity and greatly slowing traffic. And as I said, buses won't even save that much time. I also would be opposed to reducing the number of Limited stops if that is what they are planning.

 

If there are so many buses on Woodhaven, who do I hardly see any when I am driving? Because most of the time the buses do not run frequently.  Every four or five minutes for a bus is does not warrant an exclusive bus lane.  If it is also an HOV lane, that is another story, and that might work.

 

Utica Avenue - Eastern Parkway is not the only problem.  As I stated the entire street is exceedingly slow.  It is also very bad between Tilden and Farragut Roads with the double parking from all the auto related establishments.  Only on Sundays when they are closed, does traffic move well there. You say you know the area so how could you propose an exclusive lane "from Fulton to Flatbush", when north of Carroll there is only one lane in each direction?  Are you proposing to ban parking completely because that will never fly with the merchants?

 

The planning for the M15 and Bx12 was not rushed. In fact, it took way too long.  What is being rushed now is trying to get 7 new routes up and running in the next few years.  They should proceed with planning the Utica route, but they should take the time to get it right and also proceed with studying the three Laguardia routes.  I  have not looked at the Webster Ave route, so I have no opinions on it.

Edited by BrooklynBus
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. These constant anti-SBS blogs make it seem like the loss of one lane for cars will cause utter chaos. This is totally biased, and it then leaves the prospect of screwing over bus riders, which isn't a good thing either. I'm sure more people use the B46 than actually drive along Utica Avenue in that same year. Frankly, unless you're north of Caroll Street (which isn't a long stretch up to Fulton) Utica Avenue is pretty wide and i don't see SBS causing that much of an issue. Plus, there is already a rush hour only bus lane on Utica which doesn't cause too many issues except around Eastern Parkway. (keep in mind, this is only one intersection). And, Woodhaven Blvd has dedicated service roads for much of it's length. If these service roads are given to buses, I doubt traffic would get that much worse. There are alternate routes in the area after all.

 

Mostly, this just seems like you having an issue with the MTA trying to brand routes as SBS just to increase bus ridership. 

I don't think he is complete anti-SBS but he is more for how do I say COMPLETE SBS with feeders. As in feeder style BRT which unlike SBS by corridor would stand to take many cars off the road. Like If woodhaven gets SBS without feeders then it only hurts car traffic as they still don't have an alternative. BUT If woodhaven were to get feeder style spoke hub SBS like SBS on woodhaven THEN new routes that link JFK to woodhaven and linden blvd you would stand to take a whole lot more cars off the road. For example his B19 proposal is not by accident it is needed to justify woodhaven SBS cause then linden motorists actually have a transit option should SBS eff up driving. So a linden blvd route to jfk with a woodhaven stop then another Belt parkway line would help even more which even ties into my B84 proposal. In addition if one of the woodhaven routes went to LGA then you would see a significant drop in car traffic heck why you think I wanted Q38 penelope to go to flushing it's not by chance you know it's so woodhaven riders have a DIRECT connection to flushing NOT MEANDERING BUT DIRECT Q58 that does NOT mean you sorry your too slow. There is a reason Q88 would benefit with a LTD and it's indirectly tied to woodhaven. Look at south brooklyn residents who use woodhaven blvd you can't just tell them use B83 to (J) that is SLOW. 

 

My position exactly. First of all there has to be enough buses to justify an exclusive lane. There isn't on Woodhaven. You can drive it for two miles and not see a single bus in each direction. 

 

 

Exactly. 

 

 

That's not even that bad. Southbound going over the LIRR bridge south of Metropolitan is worse. You used to have the 88th Street alternative which I would use when there was a delay, so DOT changed some street directions to make it harder to use. You could save 5 minutes by doing that.  Then they banned the switch to the service road at Union Turnpike creating a new merge and bottleneck because sometimes the left lane is blocked by cars waiting to make a left turn so you have a second merge. That made the situation even worse. 

 

If another lane is reserved for SBS, then there might only be one lane left, depending how they design it.  From what they have already done to cause needless congestion, I just don't trust them to not create more. 

 

 

Your problem is that you speak theoretics and know absolutely nothing about Woodhaven Bouevard. Just because something happened or did not happen in LA has nothing to do with this. And it was only for one weekend when many trips are discretionary, not a permanent change, so the two situations are not comparable. Also, there are no alternative routes except for the Van Wyck and the BQE, both of which are much more congested than Woodhaven. Currently Woodhaven is the fastest alternative of the three. With SBS, all three would be just as slow. The only alternative would be driving an extra 20 or 30 minutes or to not make the trip at all. For many trips mass transit would still take an additional ten minutes. All this so bus riders could save 5 minutes at best? Come on now. 

 

 

You also know nothing about these specific situations either. I do. First of all, there is no reason to make driving inconvenient on Woodhaven Boulevard, when you can help mass transit much more by reactivating the Rockaway Line a few blocks away. Second SBS on Woodhaven is overkill and woud minimally help bus riders since the buses move fast as it is. No one is screwing over bus riders. 

 

So why slow down other traffic by 50%?  It just makes no sense here. People just won't switch from the car to the bus because that won't make sense for most trips.  That was discussed in one of the article's links. Third, what about the parts of Woodhaven without service roads?  They are also proposing to remove lanes there too. 

 

Utica Avenue is another story. Yes it is wide until Carroll St. But it is also exceedingly slow for all traffic.  SBS could be a good idea there if it is designed properly to minimally impact other traffic and there is proper enforcement. I'm not sure of either. Also, there is no reason for SBS at all north of Eastern Parkway. The real problem is double and illegal parking. If we could eliminate that, you woudn't even need SBS. I used to take the B46 daily. When no one would illegally park between Carroll St and Eastern Parkway, you would save 5 minutes in just those three blocks.  But there was never any enforcement.  That was the problem. If SBS eliminates double parking, and you could handle the left turns, which I would have to see the details of to be convinced it would work, you do not create bus bulbs to impede traffic, and it were not proposed north of Eastern Parkway, then I would support SBS for Utica Avenue. There are just too many ifs to approve it as proposed. 

 

As I stated, I am not against SBS per se, I don't like the planning process and the measuring techniques that exaggerate success. Those are my problems with SBS. 

LA has more traffic than NYC and a better freeway network than NY which has a shitastic highway network. I understand the rockaway line would be much better than this so I somewhat agree but traffic won't get that much worse however if what you say is true this will negatively affect reliability on routes like the Q29 and Q10 as motorists would cram those roads right?

I do believe some Q11s should take BM5's route into brooklyn. and transfer south howard beach segment to Q112.

Also, what would anyone think of a Q44 select bus service?

Hmm let's start with Q94 super LTD first and see how that works out have it serve jamacia then kew gardens express skips flushing then serves 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I agree that BrooklynBus is biased against buses... Why do you feel the need to ram trains down people's throats?  The (MTA) does not have infinite monies around and I see nothing wrong with trying to give passengers IMMEDIATE relief rather than trying to plan train service for the distant future which is expensive and unpredictable.  Not every situation requires train service and sometimes SBS is sufficient enough.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woodhaven Boulevard is not a ten lane street. Only a few blocks are ten lanes. 90% of it is eight lanes. Going under the LIRR south of the LIE is only 6 lanes as is the bridge over the LIRR tracks south of Metropolitan.  Those are the bottlenecks. Installing a bus lane there would have impacts all the way up to 63rd Drive on the north and down to Myrtle Avenue on the south. Also, it's not as simple as installing a bus lane in the service road.  The entire street would be redesigned with the malls eliminated where they exist, and the service roads only esist for half of the street. Currently trucks must use the service roads. If bus lanes are put there, that means trucks move over to the main road reducing auto capacity and greatly slowing traffic. And as I said, buses won't even save that much time. I also would be opposed to reducing the number of Limited stops if that is what they are planning.

 

If there are so many buses on Woodhaven, who do I hardly see any when I am driving? Because most of the time the buses do not run frequently.  Every four or five minutes for a bus is does not warrant an exclusive bus lane.  If it is also an HOV lane, that is another story, and that might work.

 

Utica Avenue - Eastern Parkway is not the only problem.  As I stated the entire street is exceedingly slow.  It is also very bad between Tilden and Farragut Roads with the double parking from all the auto related establishments.  Only on Sundays when they are closed, does traffic move well there. You say you know the area so how could you propose an exclusive lane "from Fulton to Flatbush", when north of Carroll there is only one lane in each direction?  Are you proposing to ban parking completely because that will never fly with the merchants?

 

The planning for the M15 and Bx12 was not rushed. In fact, it took way too long.  What is being rushed now is trying to get 7 new routes up and running in the next few years.  They should proceed with planning the Utica route, but they should take the time to get it right and also proceed with studying the three Laguardia routes.  I  have not looked at the Webster Ave route, so I have no opinions on it.

 

I like how you ignored my comment about your tone. Debate, don't dismiss.

 

Even 6 lanes is much wider than other streets that are proposed or currently have SBS. Fordham Road is only about 4 lanes, and 1st and 2nd Avenues are also only 4 (even though they are one-way), so I don't see the problem here. I don't know when you are along Woodhaven Blvd, but I always see a quite a few buses along the Woodhaven, so we obviously have different experiences. As for reducing the amount of LTD stops, if they do that, then they need to increase the amount of Q11/Q21 buses between Pitkin Avenue and Queens Center. This would offset the loss of some lesser used limited stops.

 

Utica Avenue is really anything but slow, so I don't see where you're coming from with that argument. Anyone who uses the B46 on a daily basis can vouch for me, the real trouble spot is Utica/Eastern, and all that area can be fixed with better parking. And frankly, I've never seen that much of a problem with auto retailers double parking; they tend to use the sidewalk (which is a issue for pedestrians). As for merchant issues, the bus lane north of Carroll could be daytime only, so merchants have time to receive shipments early in the morning. There are ways to compromise, which you are seeming to ignore.

 

Like VG8 said, while reactivating the Rockaway RoW is a good plan, and I'm not disagreeing with that, the money isn't there ATM to do that, because while the line is somewhat intact, you're going to have to deal with legal settlements to get rid of those who illegally placed their backyards on the RoW, and then there's the cost of rebuilding the stations/clearing the track of trees.

 

Even though it seems you were once a champion of buses, it seems like now you just want to shove people on trains. We need to make trains less crowded, not more crowded. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I agree that BrooklynBus is biased against buses... Why do you feel the need to ram trains down people's throats?  The (MTA) does not have infinite monies around and I see nothing wrong with trying to give passengers IMMEDIATE relief rather than trying to plan train service for the distant future which is expensive and unpredictable.  Not every situation requires train service and sometimes SBS is sufficient enough.

woodhaven is near trains and that train would benefit more people in the long run however SBS on other corridors like hillside and even utica would do wonders for people woodhaven doesn't need SBS it's just marketing to draw in more riders than current service can handle.

 

I like how you ignored my comment about your tone. Debate, don't dismiss.

 

Even 6 lanes is much wider than other streets that are proposed or currently have SBS. Fordham Road is only about 4 lanes, and 1st and 2nd Avenues are also only 4 (even though they are one-way), so I don't see the problem here. I don't know when you are along Woodhaven Blvd, but I always see a quite a few buses along the Woodhaven, so we obviously have different experiences. As for reducing the amount of LTD stops, if they do that, then they need to increase the amount of Q11/Q21 buses between Pitkin Avenue and Queens Center. This would offset the loss of some lesser used limited stops.

 

Utica Avenue is really anything but slow, so I don't see where you're coming from with that argument. Anyone who uses the B46 on a daily basis can vouch for me, the real trouble spot is Utica/Eastern, and all that area can be fixed with better parking. And frankly, I've never seen that much of a problem with auto retailers double parking; they tend to use the sidewalk (which is a issue for pedestrians). As for merchant issues, the bus lane north of Carroll could be daytime only, so merchants have time to receive shipments early in the morning. There are ways to compromise, which you are seeming to ignore.

 

Like VG8 said, while reactivating the Rockaway RoW is a good plan, and I'm not disagreeing with that, the money isn't there ATM to do that, because while the line is somewhat intact, you're going to have to deal with legal settlements to get rid of those who illegally placed their backyards on the RoW, and then there's the cost of rebuilding the stations/clearing the track of trees.

 

Even though it seems you were once a champion of buses, it seems like now you just want to shove people on trains. We need to make trains less crowded, not more crowded. 

only way to make trains less crowded is higher capacity and better buses duplicates don't count. But many instances bus service can be upgraded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have ever driven along Woodhaven or Cross Bay, you would know what a horrible idea this is.  There is just not enough bus traffic to justify the loss of a traffic lane.  You can drive all the way from Myrtle Ave to Queens Blvd and see only one or two buses in the opposite direction.  You also hardly pass a bus in the direction you are going.  So are cars and trucks supposed to move at 10 mph while the bus lane has a vehicle once every 4 or 5 minutes? Does that really make any sense?

 

You could do it during rush hours only when bus ridership is highest. Plus, the buses may run every 4-5 minutes, but if on average, every bus has say, 50 people, times say, 15 buses per hour, that's 750 people. Add in the express buses, and you could be talking about 900 people per hour or so. When you factor in increased ridership, you could be talking about 1200 people per hour.

 

What's the normal capacity of a lane of traffic on a corridor like Woodhaven?

 

They should add rocket launchers and nitrox to the buses while they are at it the buses on woodhaven aren't even that slow to be honest they run as fast as and sometimes FASTER than the car traffic!!!! For this SBS to even work a bus route over the belt would need to be made along with linden blvd with a woodhaven stop to connect to the main woodhaven lines to create diversity of travel markets that can actually become feasible alternatives to driving. Otherwise this won't end well at all. Plus would Q53/52 at their current service levels even be enough to handle the new surge of riders that would swarm the SBS? Artics would become a must.

 

They almost always add service when they make a route SBS so that shouldn't be an issue.

 

Even 6 lanes is much wider than other streets that are proposed or currently have SBS. Fordham Road is only about 4 lanes, and 1st and 2nd Avenues are also only 4 (even though they are one-way), so I don't see the problem here. I don't know when you are along Woodhaven Blvd, but I always see a quite a few buses along the Woodhaven, so we obviously have different experiences. As for reducing the amount of LTD stops, if they do that, then they need to increase the amount of Q11/Q21 buses between Pitkin Avenue and Queens Center. This would offset the loss of some lesser used limited stops.

 

Offhand, I can't think of any stops that would really (likely) be eliminated, though.

 

Even though it seems you were once a champion of buses, it seems like now you just want to shove people on trains. We need to make trains less crowded, not more crowded. 

 

I don't see how you could realistically force people onto trains in this instance. Woodhaven runs north-south, while the subway lines run east-west. Other than a few limited instances (if you were able to backtrack through Jamaica, which would still take longer even factoring in traffic on Woodhaven), you wouldn't be "shoving people onto trains".

 

I'm still not seeing any inconsistancy. His opinion has always been to encourage people to use certain modes over others, because some modes are more efficient at moving people than others. However, the people should be encouraged, and not forced. If people are making roundabout trips on the subway, or if they're packing onto overcrowded lines, or if they're using the subway, or if they're being forced to use the subway, when they'd really prefer a bus (for instance, the elderly), that's a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the (MTA) approves this proposal, let's them test the implementation and see where it goes from there. I've been to Woodhaven myself and I can say that not even the rush hour traffic would be cluttered by a bus lane on each direction. No matter how many lanes you can count it, Woodhaven is still big enough being than it's one of the majorities of roads in New York City. I'm not saying that the entire duration of Woodhaven has to have bus lanes all the way. Let the (MTA) make the analysis and study to prove the plan to grow into a success like the Bx12 and M15. Not even those routes have bus lane threw their entire runs. I really don't see the problem here.

Edited by Metro CSW
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

woodhaven is near trains and that train would benefit more people in the long run however SBS on other corridors like hillside and even utica would do wonders for people woodhaven doesn't need SBS it's just marketing to draw in more riders than current service can handle.

He specifically mentioned reactivation of the LIRR branch... If it was so vital for the community, they would've been pushing for it a long time ago.  In any event, even if it's activated, it does NOTHING in the here and now to deal with the transportation issues that the community has and won't for years to come, not to mention a cost that the (MTA) may not be able to afford right now.  SBS in the meantime at least serves to alleviate some of the problems in the community, is cheaper and can be up and running sooner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how you could realistically force people onto trains in this instance. Woodhaven runs north-south, while the subway lines run east-west. Other than a few limited instances (if you were able to backtrack through Jamaica, which would still take longer even factoring in traffic on Woodhaven), you wouldn't be "shoving people onto trains".

 

I'm still not seeing any inconsistancy. His opinion has always been to encourage people to use certain modes over others, because some modes are more efficient at moving people than others. However, the people should be encouraged, and not forced. If people are making roundabout trips on the subway, or if they're packing onto overcrowded lines, or if they're using the subway, or if they're being forced to use the subway, when they'd really prefer a bus (for instance, the elderly), that's a problem.

He wants to say that the Rockaway RoW nearby is a reason to not have a Woodhaven SBS. That probably wasn't clear...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasn't Rockaway reactivation been studied to death already multiple times? And hasn't it failed to get past a feasibility study every single time?

 

I mean it's great that there's a train line that's sort of still there, but the line needs to be brought into ADA compliance, you need to bore a tunnel to the Queens Boulevard Line portals, you need to rip out the trees and weeds and restore the bridges (because there are trees growing on top of bridges, and there is no way that is still strong enough to hold trains). Not to mention there's probably a huge capacity mismatch between any of the Queens Boulevard lines and the potential ridership of a reactivated Rockaway line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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