What Really Causes Traffic Congestion

[ttcsubwayfan]

They are to blame when they don't address problems tat need to be addressed like routing deficiencies, refusing to consider suggestions from the public and looking for excuses to dismiss those suggestions. Their inconsistency of logic is unbelievable. They are also at fault for not providing more service when additional service is possible and needed. Why should some trains be overcrowded at 10PM when everyone should get a seat?

 

I remember when I was in New York in August, I was travelling back from Battery Park at around 8 PM. I got on an R32 A train and was shocked to find it crowded, I had seen no such conditions last time I was in the city, in August 2010 and had not seen these conditions in Toronto either... usually, seats are plentiful at that time. The only other city where I have seen consistent crowding into the night was Prague, in the Czech Republic. 

[BrooklynIRT]

 

 

Well too bad. It needs to be done. I already see a few businesses getting deliveries overnight. Some of them have employees there and some don't.

 

easier said than done. I have gotten to the point where I see no point in directly asking the government for these things (I tried that so many times before, making phone calls to God knows how many officials in Brooklyn about Plaza Auto Mall and standing in Sen. John L. Sampson's office while one of the people working in his office spent a half hour detailing a solution to the PAM problem and telling me absolutely nothing I did not already know); I will never own a car and will forever avoid using cars at all costs and either the rest of the citizenry or government will wake up and see the writing on the wall (meaning more people avoid using/owning cars at all costs, since they take up curb space that we want used for loading zones, overnight or not, instead) or I just gotta stand by and don't cry, watching while the world dies...human nature prevents many of these things we want done from getting done.

 

a lot of apathy and ignorance on the parts of the citizenry and government when it comes to these problems. but this is human nature. remember my last few posts in the B44 SBS thread and do yourself a favor: do not hold your breath expecting to win this war against human nature. and apathy. and ignorance. unless enough [influential] people join the fight. but I do not expect that to happen either.

 

and I agree 100% with WillD's posts in the parallel thread on subchat.

[bobtehpanda]

Oh yeah, and let's not talk about the jaywalkers. Happens sometimes here, but it mostly happens in Nassau County. At least, that's what I learned from Long Islanders after that NICE accident in Hempstead.

 

In all fairness, in Long Island signalized intersections with crosswalks are few and far between, and those that do are regulated by those god-awful push buttons (is it really so bad to have the crosswalk light green when the cars parallel are given the right of way?). The sidewalks, where they exist, are also barely three feet wide. So let's not pretend that walking in Nassau County is heaven of any sort.

[Vistausss]

In all fairness, in Long Island signalized intersections with crosswalks are few and far between, and those that do are regulated by those god-awful push buttons (is it really so bad to have the crosswalk light green when the cars parallel are given the right of way?). The sidewalks, where they exist, are also barely three feet wide. So let's not pretend that walking in Nassau County is heaven of any sort.

 

So you saying you should cross the street without looking, causing accidents like that NICE accident? Because that's what I was getting at.

 

Also, I did see lots of sidewalks in Brett's on-board movies where he was filming out of the window.

[BrooklynBus]

Not just buses... streets too. Now let's blame the city council for crowded street.

What are you trying to say?

[Roadcruiser1]

At this rate we are going to come to a solution that Robert Moses proposed 55 years ago. Build more highways.

[B35 via Church]

 

@BrooklynBus: Is the really to blame here? Less service or not, the TPH on most lines is quite high.

 

They are to blame when they don't address problems tat need to be addressed like routing deficiencies, refusing to consider suggestions from the public and looking for excuses to dismiss those suggestions. Their inconsistency of logic is unbelievable. They are also at fault for not providing more service when additional service is possible and needed. Why should some trains be overcrowded at 10PM when everyone should get a seat?

Nah man, this is looking like another way for you to blame the MTA for something....

 

While I agree with this statement by itself, I'm still not seeing the direct correlation b/w the [MTA being inadequate, stubborn, and frugal with service] & [traffic congestion].... I suppose the notion is, is that if there was more service provided by the MTA, traffic would be less congested - which that, I can not agree with.... The MTA can't do anything about the many folks that drive that want no part of public transportation.... These are the people that are going a long way into clogging our roads.....

[BrooklynIRT]

why does brooklynbus never mention the dreaded induced demand theory of transportation in any of his statements about this stuff (traffic and all the rest of it)?

 

if you believe the dreaded induced induced demand theory of transportation, then you see that there is a direct correlation b/w bus service cuts and traffic congestion. according to the dreaded theory, if you decrease the number of buses on a given route, the number of private vehicles along that bus route will increase b/c people will make private vehicle trips that take advantage of the new capacity created by the elimination of buses (really any vehicles, but in this case I am being specific since this is about buses or lack thereof) on the route.

 

or at least it applies in places where there is much congestion.

[BrooklynIRT]

At this rate we are going to come to a solution that Robert Moses proposed 55 years ago. Build more highways.

that makes it worse. induced demand.

 

as apathetic and ignorant as the government and citizenry can be, I think they know much better than to do such a thing (more highways) in NYC considering what a mistake it was to promote the private vehicle (partially by building highways) starting half a century ago...I remember one time when brooklynbus said Brooklyn got screwed when it came to highways since it has so few.

 

for a while I thought he may have been somewhat right due to the amount of traffic on some roads in Brooklyn.

 

once I learned about induced demand, that notion that he may have been somewhat right went right out the window.

 

roads beget roads. =)

 

[ScreechyFlange]

Fish... Fish everywhere.

[BrooklynBus]

Nah man, this is looking like another way for you to blame the MTA for something....

 

While I agree with this statement by itself, I'm still not seeing the direct correlation b/w the [MTA being inadequate, stubborn, and frugal with service] & [traffic congestion].... I suppose the notion is, is that if there was more service provided by the MTA, traffic would be less congested - which that, I can not agree with.... The MTA can't do anything about the many folks that drive that want no part of public transportation.... These are the people that are going a long way into clogging our roads.....

Some people may choose to drive into the City say to see a Broadway show in the evening rather than take the train because they don't want to have to put up with crowded subways. That is where the increased congestion comes in and why the MTA may be partially to blame. Of course you can't blame them for the stubborn drivers who refuse to use mass transit under any circumstances. You can also blame them for not operating express buses on the weekends as to why some may choose to drive into the city.

 

Also to Brooklyn IRT, no one is talking about building more highways today. The Robert Moses thinking of the 1930s has long been out of favor. The induced demand theory only holds true when building a completely new road. If you add a lane for a short distance to eliminate a bottleneck, which is the most we do these days, that does not increase demand. As proof, I offer you the new ramp that was added to the BQE southbound in the 1980s near the Battery Tunnel eliminating a merge from three lane to two. Previously, traffic was bumper to bumper for 12 hours a day. Without that merge, traffic now only crawls for two hours a day and the rest of the time moves at 40 mph. According to your theory, adding that lane would have eventually resulted in bumper to bumper traffic again and that never happened in the 30 years since it was built.

[Roadcruiser1]

that makes it worse. induced demand.

 

as apathetic and ignorant as the government and citizenry can be, I think they know much better than to do such a thing (more highways) in NYC considering what a mistake it was to promote the private vehicle (partially by building highways) starting half a century ago...I remember one time when brooklynbus said Brooklyn got screwed when it came to highways since it has so few.

 

for a while I thought he may have been somewhat right due to the amount of traffic on some roads in Brooklyn.

 

once I learned about induced demand, that notion that he may have been somewhat right went right out the window.

 

roads beget roads. =)

 

As long as you add congestion pricing and tolls it might balance it out..........

[B35 via Church]

why does brooklynbus never mention the dreaded induced demand theory of transportation in any of his statements about this stuff (traffic and all the rest of it)?

 

if you believe the dreaded induced induced demand theory of transportation, then you see that there is a direct correlation b/w bus service cuts and traffic congestion. according to the dreaded theory, if you decrease the number of buses on a given route, the number of private vehicles along that bus route will increase b/c people will make private vehicle trips that take advantage of the new capacity created by the elimination of buses (really any vehicles, but in this case I am being specific since this is about buses or lack thereof) on the route.

 

or at least it applies in places where there is much congestion.

In fairness, that is what he's saying, just in the opposite order - that there is a direct correlation b/w increased traffic congestion & lack of mass transit.... My thing is, I don't think there's enough of it that's attributed to the lack of mass transit, to pin blame on the MTA for overall traffic congestion we have in this city....

 

Some people may choose to drive into the City say to see a Broadway show in the evening rather than take the train because they don't want to have to put up with crowded subways. That is where the increased congestion comes in and why the MTA may be partially to blame. Of course you can't blame them for the stubborn drivers who refuse to use mass transit under any circumstances. You can also blame them for not operating express buses on the weekends as to why some may choose to drive into the city.

Outside of being stubborn (why are you deeming those that choose to drive & refuse to consider taking mass transit, stubborn?), that's my very point - Of course you can't blame the MTA for the drivers that refuse to take mass transit.... That is not an MTA problem.... The essence of my argument is that these are the vast majority of motorists that contribute to traffic congestion in this city....

 

If I have a disdain for something & refuse to delve in it (in this case, mass transit), that wouldn't make me stubborn.....

(It would be like calling VG8 stubborn for refusing to take local buses over express buses... which it isn't)

 

Anyway, you're pretty much making the point that traffic congestion is/maybe partially the MTA's fault, due to motorists opting to use their personal vehicles (where they would normally use mass transit otherwise).... In rebuttal, I'm pretty much saying that even if every single one of those motorists were to use mass transit (if the MTA provided more/better service than what it does in general, on weekdays & weekends that is), the traffic congestion problem in this city would still be absolutely horrid.... This is why I cannot pin fault on the MTA for that..... But that's just me.

 

 

Although eloquently put, I kinda have to agree with:

I think human nature is mostly to blame for traffic congestion.

[Vistausss]

@BrooklynBus: Sure, blame 'em for no express buses on the weekends. As if express buses are gonna solve the problem. There's a reason they cut back on express bus weekend service: not enough demand. Most express buses on weekends were quite empty.

 

More service >= more people using public transportation.

[Gorgor]

If the MTA actually wants to get people who drive to take transit then they not only need more frequent service, but more reliable service as well. 

 

Right now (Saturday at 9:45AM) if I wanted to go crosstown from York Avenue to Broadway I would have to walk to the corner, wait up to 10 minutes for a bus, and then sit on the bus for 20-25 minutes.  If I went downstairs and got in my car, I could be on the west side before the bus even shows up.

 

Now this would be if my start and end destinations were along one bus route only.  Almost all my trips crosstown are L-shaped trips, which means that I would need to wait for two buses and then sit through their slow routes, so a 15 minute car ride could turn into a 45 public transportation adventure.  Most of the time I don't stay more than an hour, two tops, and there's always metered spots available.

 

Keep in mind that meters south of 96th Street are $3.50 per hour per car, whereas public transportation is $5.00 round trip per person, or $12.00 round trip per person if you take the express bus.  For a family of four that already owns a car, the cost effectiveness of driving far outweighs that of taking public transportation.

[BrooklynBus]

If the MTA actually wants to get people who drive to take transit then they not only need more frequent service, but more reliable service as well. 

 

Right now (Saturday at 9:45AM) if I wanted to go crosstown from York Avenue to Broadway I would have to walk to the corner, wait up to 10 minutes for a bus, and then sit on the bus for 20-25 minutes.  If I went downstairs and got in my car, I could be on the west side before the bus even shows up.

 

Now this would be if my start and end destinations were along one bus route only.  Almost all my trips crosstown are L-shaped trips, which means that I would need to wait for two buses and then sit through their slow routes, so a 15 minute car ride could turn into a 45 public transportation adventure.  Most of the time I don't stay more than an hour, two tops, and there's always metered spots available.

 

Keep in mind that meters south of 96th Street are $3.50 per hour per car, whereas public transportation is $5.00 round trip per person, or $12.00 round trip per person if you take the express bus.  For a family of four that already owns a car, the cost effectiveness of driving far outweighs that of taking public transportation.

I agree with everything you said.

 

To B35: I wasn't trying to pin a lot of the blame on the MTA because congestion is largely not their fault. I was only saying a portion was their fault like under 35%. I disagree with you about drivers being stubborn by refusing to delve into something. I call that stubborn. If you try something and don't like it, That's one thing, but not to give something a chance is stubborn. A few years ago, a neighbor of mine took a subway for the first time in 30 years and remarked to me: "Do you know there is no more grafitti on the trains?". It wasn't that bad."

 

I also don't see how you can say if everyone used mass transit, congestion would still be horrible. Yes only a small portion of CBD traffic is private cars, but their elimination would make a dent in reducing congestion.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If the MTA actually wants to get people who drive to take transit then they not only need more frequent service, but more reliable service as well. 

 

Right now (Saturday at 9:45AM) if I wanted to go crosstown from York Avenue to Broadway I would have to walk to the corner, wait up to 10 minutes for a bus, and then sit on the bus for 20-25 minutes.  If I went downstairs and got in my car, I could be on the west side before the bus even shows up.

 

Now this would be if my start and end destinations were along one bus route only.  Almost all my trips crosstown are L-shaped trips, which means that I would need to wait for two buses and then sit through their slow routes, so a 15 minute car ride could turn into a 45 public transportation adventure.  Most of the time I don't stay more than an hour, two tops, and there's always metered spots available.

 

Keep in mind that meters south of 96th Street are $3.50 per hour per car, whereas public transportation is $5.00 round trip per person, or $12.00 round trip per person if you take the express bus.  For a family of four that already owns a car, the cost effectiveness of driving far outweighs that of taking public transportation.

Well I'll agree with you on the waiting factor, but give me a break on the cost nonsense.  Your car needs gas in order to run even if it's just Crosstown so while that cost may be that high for the trip it still is a cost that you need to include.  There's also insurance and maintenance for the car, something you don't have to pay for with the bus.   Also, a lot of people use Unlimited MetroCards so the cost really wouldn't be $6.00 each way or $2.50 each way per person.  Now I think about my trips to Whole Foods in the city.  Walking from my apartment to the bus is 10 minutes tops maybe less depending on how fast I walk and which way I go and so on.  Waiting for the bus is maybe 5 minutes tops since I have BusTime.  The trip is roughly 30 minutes going and coming.  If I had to use a car, I would certainly park it in one of the garages here, so I'd have to walk to the garage, get the car out and then be on my way, which would be a good 20 minute commute or more once I did all of that each way and found parking in the city, so in my case unless I was going somewhere outside of the city the car wouldn't be that much more of an advantage, especially since I usually use an unlimited Express Bus Metrocard.

 

My B/O friend joked that the express bus was like my cab.

[BrooklynIRT]

brooklynbus, what you said in response to my post about induced demand is the opposite of what bobtehpanda told me about induced demand when I proposed a bus bridge over Nostrand Ave around the Junction for the B44 SBS a month or two ago (thread titled "what needs to be done in the NYC mass transit world". the Brooklyn Bridge is just one example that helps your argument; you have any more?

 

Gorgor and brooklynbus (responding to posts 40 and 41), it is quite evident to me that you two are not interested in avoiding owning or using cars at all costs, which would be effective in pushing the government/MTA to improve mass transit and add more service if more people did it. as I have said before, if you want to be players in a mass transit revolution, you either avoid owning or using cars at all costs or find some other effective way(s) of being revolutionaries.

 

if you do not want to be players in this revolution, keep doing what you do. keep saying that x, y, and z need to be done while you yourselves discuss these problems to death without making active efforts to solve or mitigate them.

 

part of being a revolutionary is making some sacrifices. one of them, in this case, is dealing with mass transit and not using cars even if it adds a half hour or so to your trip b/c if more people did that, the government would feel more pressure to fix mass transit instead of relying on the fact that people run away from many of the problems with mass transit by using cars, which basically says to the government: we do not need you to fix our mass transit problems, because we are going to use cars and thus we will avoid putting pressure on you to fix our mass transit system, because we are using cars so we can avoid using the transit system. we took a heavy burden off your back, so continue to let mass transit twist in the wind. we do not care enough about it to pressure you to fix it.

 

Gorgor, I said back in the B44 SBS thread that using mass transit is expensive for families if the family has a car and depends on whether unlimited or PPR MCs are used. if there is no car in the household, I think the likelihood of all household members over 44" tall using unlimited MCs rather than PPRs is very high.

 

broadway shows..do people not usually go to these things using trains traveling in the reverse peak direction? if you ride trains in the reverse-peak direction, the crowding is not a big deal until you get into Manhattan.

 

even if it were, this goes back to the point about being a player in the revolution, making sacrifices, change starts with the individual, etc etc.

 

you want this stuff to change? understand that change starts with the individual and if you want these things to change and be a player in this revolution, you need to have a thick skin and be willing to deal with certain things. this also depends on how young a person is and what gender the person is.

[Turbo19]

brooklynbus, what you said in response to my post about induced demand is the opposite of what bobtehpanda told me about induced demand when I proposed a bus bridge over Nostrand Ave around the Junction for the B44 SBS a month or two ago (thread titled "what needs to be done in the NYC mass transit world". the Brooklyn Bridge is just one example that helps your argument; you have any more?

 

Gorgor and brooklynbus (responding to posts 40 and 41), it is quite evident to me that you two are not interested in avoiding owning or using cars at all costs, which would be effective in pushing the government/MTA to improve mass transit and add more service if more people did it. as I have said before, if you want to be players in a mass transit revolution, you either avoid owning or using cars at all costs or find some other effective way(s) of being revolutionaries.

 

if you do not want to be players in this revolution, keep doing what you do. keep saying that x, y, and z need to be done while you yourselves discuss these problems to death without making active efforts to solve or mitigate them.

 

part of being a revolutionary is making some sacrifices. one of them, in this case, is dealing with mass transit and not using cars even if it adds a half hour or so to your trip b/c if more people did that, the government would feel more pressure to fix mass transit instead of relying on the fact that people run away from many of the problems with mass transit by using cars, which basically says to the government: we do not need you to fix our mass transit problems, because we are going to use cars and thus we will avoid putting pressure on you to fix our mass transit system, because we are using cars so we can avoid using the transit system. we took a heavy burden off your back, so continue to let mass transit twist in the wind. we do not care enough about it to pressure you to fix it.

 

Gorgor, I said back in the B44 SBS thread that using mass transit is expensive for families if the family has a car and depends on whether unlimited or PPR MCs are used. if there is no car in the household, I think the likelihood of all household members over 44" tall using unlimited MCs rather than PPRs is very high.

 

broadway shows..do people not usually go to these things using trains traveling in the reverse peak direction? if you ride trains in the reverse-peak direction, the crowding is not a big deal until you get into Manhattan.

 

even if it were, this goes back to the point about being a player in the revolution, making sacrifices, change starts with the individual, etc etc.

 

you want this stuff to change? understand that change starts with the individual and if you want these things to change and be a player in this revolution, you need to have a thick skin and be willing to deal with certain things. this also depends on how young a person is and what gender the person is.

I could not agree more.

 

Just one thing though. You seem to mention to both Gorgor and BrooklynBus that utilizing public transit is a sacrifice, but in my experience it's the contrary. After relying on public transit for so long I've learned to make it as seamless as possible. When done right long commute and wait times can be avoided. Even Via's post above elaborates on how easy it can be in comparison to auto ownership.

 

Additionally in regard to families you are correct. I and two other family members generally go for the monthly unlimited option that the local TA offers. Even at $35 monthly (or $105 in total) it pales in comparison to the cost of a personal auto.

[BrooklynIRT]

I may have done that to try to make it clear that I was acknowledging their side (recognizing that they may see it as a sacrifice).

 

the few times I operate the family car (which is only when I absolutely have to, which is only when I am asked to and, all things considered, the reason for which I have to operate the vehicle is a good one), I consider it a sacrifice in some ways b/c it goes against what I stand for and I tend to find myself in situations in which I am dealing with lots of nonsense from scofflaw motorists on these roads.

 

this is why I never drive home via Kingsbridge Road from the Fordham MNRR station when I have to pick up a family member there. always go via Webster and then Mosholu Pkwy since there are so many double parked vehicles on Kingsbridge (which is worse for the buses than it is for the private vehicles, including any I am [always reluctantly] occupying or operating) and one time I had hell to pay when I was trying to circumvent one (a private vehicle), while my left turn signal was on, and not a single one of the many vehicles coming down in the left lane wanted to let me in so I forced my way in and got honked at.

 

I do not even care if the family member gets upset about me not following a route he considers more direct (Kingsbridge). Webster is quick anyway. less traffic and whatnot. straighter too.

 

I could not care less about being honked at, but the double parked vehicle on the busy street and the vehicles not wanting to let me in the left lane were absolutely disgusting.

 

neither the family car nor any other car or private vehicle will be with me once I have housing of my own, just to be clear.

 

but yeah, I can come up with several ways of depicting private vehicle travel as a sacrifice too, and at the end of the day

transit >>>>>>>>>>>>> private vehicles in my book.

 

and one just has to make sure one lives in neighborhoods where the transit network is good enough for one not to need to own or use cars, if one desires to never own or use cars. and the "urban core", which consists of much of Manhattan, Willamsburg, LIC, DUMBO, Downtown Brooklyn, Park Slope, and Brooklyn Heights are not the only places in NYC where one can live car-free and live well.

[BrooklynIRT]

As long as you add congestion pricing and tolls it might balance it out..........

they should congestion price a lot of streets with heavy bus lines, regardless of whether they make more highways or not. Nostrand Ave, Flatbush Ave, Utica Ave, Fordham Rd, Kingsbridge Rd, Concourse, Pelham Pkwy maybe, Broadway b/w W 262 St and W 168 St (the Bx9 could use some help there, and the Bx7 and M100 need it desperately with the chronically craptastic traffic conditions in Wash. Hts), Church Ave, Rogers Ave, Bedford Ave.

 

one serious beef I have with cars in this city is that if less street space were dedicated to parked vehicles, we might be able to kill off double parking on bus streets and might be able to have more bus lanes.

 

bidirectional Nostrand Ave (not the part south of "V", not the part b/w Kings Hwy and Gerritsen) comes to mind since parking has to be eliminated to put bus lanes there (which have to be next to the curb. I like offset ones better, but the B44 deals with much garbage south of JCT and fewer vehicles, whether it has to be fewer parked vehicles or fewer moving vehicles, on Nostrand south of JCT would help the B44. it would also make it much easier to put SBS stops at "L" and "R" without slowing down the SBS too much).

[bobtehpanda]

I agree with everything you said.

 

To B35: I wasn't trying to pin a lot of the blame on the MTA because congestion is largely not their fault. I was only saying a portion was their fault like under 35%. I disagree with you about drivers being stubborn by refusing to delve into something. I call that stubborn. If you try something and don't like it, That's one thing, but not to give something a chance is stubborn. A few years ago, a neighbor of mine took a subway for the first time in 30 years and remarked to me: "Do you know there is no more grafitti on the trains?". It wasn't that bad."

 

I also don't see how you can say if everyone used mass transit, congestion would still be horrible. Yes only a small portion of CBD traffic is private cars, but their elimination would make a dent in reducing congestion.

 

Actually, most of the congestion in the CBD is our oversized taxi fleet, since they just drive around and never stop to park or anything. During the taxi strikes, taxi service actually improved, since the remaining taxis moved much more efficiently and were able to carry much more people. Unfortunately, reducing taxi medallions is not a feasible plan to reduce congestion because those things sell for millions these days.

 

Part of the problem with congestion is that NYPD won't get off their bums and enforce. We know three things about driving in New York today.

 

Speeding is the number one cause of accidents in New York.

Speeding occurs a lot. So does double parking.

Last year, NYPD gave out more tickets to people on bicycles than to speeders last year.

 

If NYPD is not going to step up to the plate, then it is more than appropriate for DOT to step in to take measures that calm traffic.

 

I would also like to point out that due to signal retimings, measured driving time on affected parts of Prospect Park West were only increased by a few seconds, and the roadway actually carries 7.8% more vehicles during peak congestion. Narrowing a road does not make it more congested if it smooths traffic flow. Radar guns also marked a drastic decrease in speeding - the proportion dropped from 75% to less than 20% of drivers. So while slower moving traffic may make it seem like the road is more congested, that is not necessarily the case.

 

Plus, given how popular biking in the city is becoming, it is not unreasonable that lanes be provided for such road users - dedicated facilities (which are only three feet wide, might I add) allow riders to avoid using the sidewalk. (This assumes that the lanes are not blocked, which they usually are by NYPD vehicles giving out tickets.) Dedicated space for everyone is beneficial to all.

[B35 via Church]

To B35: I wasn't trying to pin a lot of the blame on the MTA because congestion is largely not their fault. I was only saying a portion was their fault like under 35%.

 

I disagree with you about drivers being stubborn by refusing to delve into something. I call that stubborn. If you try something and don't like it, That's one thing, but not to give something a chance is stubborn. A few years ago, a neighbor of mine took a subway for the first time in 30 years and remarked to me: "Do you know there is no more grafitti on the trains?". It wasn't that bad."

 

I also don't see how you can say if everyone used mass transit, congestion would still be horrible. Yes only a small portion of CBD traffic is private cars, but their elimination would make a dent in reducing congestion.

- About you blaming the MTA regarding traffic congestion, that much I got.... I didn't get the inkling that you were largely blaming the MTA at all.....

 

- Lol... This is ridiculous.... The people that choose to drive over taking mass transit in any aspect aren't stubborn for choosing to drive.... You characterizing those people as stubborn, is nothing more than a shaming tactic for those motorists not considering taking mass transit.... I guess the people that take mass transit that have the means to purchase a car, but haven't, is stubborn for not purchasing a car too, using that logic....

 

As far as your friend not taking the subway in 30 years, well what was his reason(s) for not using it?

 

- Seriously now....

I never remotely said anything to the effect of "if everyone used mass transit, congestion would still be horrible"....

 

I said if every single motorist that's out here using their personal vehicle where they would normally use mass transit otherwise, the traffic congestion problem in this city would still be absolutely horrid.... The motorists that outright refuse to take mass transit don't factor into that category, because they would not be the ones "normally using mass transit otherwise".... So I couldn't possibly have been talkin about everyone (in this case meaning, all motorists)....

 

 

Anyway, you're pretty much making the point that traffic congestion is/maybe partially the MTA's fault, due to motorists opting to use their personal vehicles (where they would normally use mass transit otherwise).... In rebuttal, I'm pretty much saying that even if every single one of those motorists were to use mass transit (if the MTA provided more/better service than what it does in general, on weekdays & weekends that is), the traffic congestion problem in this city would still be absolutely horrid....

My words, verbatim.

[BrooklynIRT]

but wait, where would they normally use mass transit otherwise? can you give an example of a situation in which a motorist opts or would opt to use their personal vehicle where they would normally use mass transit otherwise?

 

I actually can see where he is coming from when he talks about stubbornness. I am not sure what was wrong with that; one of the definitions of stubborn is "fixed or set in purpose or opinion," and those who choose to drive rather than use mass transit even if the transit network(s) in their neighborhood(s) serve(s) them well seem stubborn to me for making that choice regardless of what anybody tells them. they are fixed in their purpose of avoiding mass transit and driving all the time.

 

the same way I stubbornly choose to take buses to a bowling alley in the Bronx even though it takes an hour and change to get there rather than drive the family car 20 minutes or so to get to a bowling alley in Yonkers. I do it mainly b/c I hate using cars. I am fixed in my purpose of avoiding car use and using mass transit to go wherever I want to go.

 

also the parking situation is getting a little hard around here, and of course it is now worse with out of towners on summer vacations and whatnot taking up parking spaces. my other reason for not using the car dwarfs the parking reason in my mind though.

[B35 via Church]

but wait, where would they normally use mass transit otherwise? can you give an example of a situation in which a motorist opts or would opt to use their personal vehicle where they would normally use mass transit otherwise?

Read Brooklyn Bus' [post #36], first paragraph..... That's what I was addressing.

 

It's not for me to give examples, because blaming the MTA for traffic congestion isn't my argument.

 

 

I actually can see where he is coming from when he talks about stubbornness. I am not sure what was wrong with that; one of the definitions of stubborn is "fixed or set in purpose or opinion," and those who choose to drive rather than use mass transit even if the transit network(s) in their neighborhood(s) serve(s) them well seem stubborn to me for making that choice regardless of what anybody tells them. they are fixed in their purpose of avoiding mass transit and driving all the time.

 

 

the same way I stubbornly choose to take buses to a bowling alley in the Bronx even though it takes an hour and change to get there rather than drive the family car 20 minutes or so to get to a bowling alley in Yonkers. I do it mainly b/c I hate using cars. I am fixed in my purpose of avoiding car use and using mass transit to go wherever I want to go.

 

also the parking situation is getting a little hard around here, and of course it is now worse with out of towners on summer vacations and whatnot taking up parking spaces. my other reason for not using the car dwarfs the parking reason in my mind though.

What I see as being wrong with that is, Who's to say these people have to take mass transit though? Just because it exists.... Calling those people stubborn, to me, is basically an anti-car disposition.....

 

That's what I'm getting at.