DOT's Bus Lane Trickery

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

There was no comparison being made; I was listing roadways where service roads are present... That much should have been obvious - Even went as far as state that anyone could bring up any scenario where bus lanes are implemented worldwide... Fact of the matter is, I have never heard of any bus lane being on any service road & here you are not only bringing it up, but passing it off as a some sort of plausible option/solution....

You telling me that you watch buses while you're driving, is a reaffirmation of the problem as it pertains to your conclusion of the level of ridership along Woodhaven.....

Profess how many drivers/passengers there are? What difference would it make - You're talking about shifting bus lanes off to the wayside onto the service road!

This entire post is riddled & laced with not only pro-car talking points, but anti-transit talking points as well.... You are not going to convince me with your rhetoric that the Woodhaven blvd. corridor isn't heavily utilized by bus passengers.... You are for the motorist & for the motorist only.... Don't bother conveying that you're not completely against bus lanes, going on to specify that you're against 24 hr. bus lanes & lanes in the main roadway (talk about bastardization) - and in the same breath, denouncing the merit of bus lanes in some cockamamy attenpt to paint Woodhaven blvd as this ill-utilized bus corridor....

Nobody's buying what you're selling here.....

I don't think he has any idea what a service road is. Service roads allow for through traffic on major thoroughfares to avoid interfering with residential traffic in the neighborhoods being passed. If we go with this idea of putting bus lanes in the service roads then folks coming onto the corridor from residential side streets lose entry and parking is lost to folks in the corresponding neighborhoods. Said traffic would then be forced onto the main road and major intersecting streets which he is already complaining about being a problem. 

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

I will only say this. If bus roads on the service road is totally infeasible as you suggest, then why was it one of the three alternatives that were being considered by DOT and presented to the communities? Also, why was it the option overwhelmingly chosen by the communities if they were to have bus lanes at all? 

Shouldn't DOT be required to present only valid options, not ones that are so ridiculous as you claim, that they could just be automatically eliminated? 

Totally implausible as I suggest....

As for those line of questions..... It's because they don't want to overtly come off as being staunchly anti-transit - like you're coming off as in this thread.

18 minutes ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

I don't think he has any idea what a service road is. Service roads allow for through traffic on major thoroughfares to avoid interfering with residential traffic in the neighborhoods being passed. If we go with this idea of putting bus lanes in the service roads then folks coming onto the corridor from residential side streets lose entry and parking is lost to folks in the corresponding neighborhoods. Said traffic would then be forced onto the main road and major intersecting streets which he is already complaining about being a problem. 

Bingo! It's a solution in search of problem....

[BrooklynBus]

1 hour ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

I don't think he has any idea what a service road is. Service roads allow for through traffic on major thoroughfares to avoid interfering with residential traffic in the neighborhoods being passed. If we go with this idea of putting bus lanes in the service roads then folks coming onto the corridor from residential side streets lose entry and parking is lost to folks in the corresponding neighborhoods. Said traffic would then be forced onto the main road and major intersecting streets which he is already complaining about being a problem. 

I know exactly what a service road is and what it's purpose is and you are correct about its purpose. If we put bus lanes in the main road, you will be forcing through traffic onto the service roads, which is exactly what you don't want to do. You would still be allowed to use the service roads for right turns. And local traffic would not be forced onto the main roads since no left or right turns are permitted from the main roads. 

DOT is talking out of both sides of its mouth. On one hand they say three lanes of through traffic will still remain, and on the other hand they say all local traffic will use the service road. If local traffic and through traffic both use the service road, then through and local traffic won't be separated as they say. 

The fact that there is no way to get from the main roads to the service roads without slip lanes is a real problem. It means you will only be able to get off the main road at Atlantic Avenue. Has anyone seen slip lanes being constructed? 

[BrooklynBus]

55 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Totally implausible as I suggest....

As for those line of questions..... It's because they don't want to overtly come off as being staunchly anti-transit - like you're coming off as in this thread.

Bingo! It's a solution in search of problem....

So it is perfectly alright in your opinion for a city agency to present a totally infeasible alternative and tell the community they are seriously considering it? That is called lying. And you have no problem with that? 

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

So it is perfectly alright in your opinion for a city agency to present a totally infeasible alternative and tell the community they are seriously considering it? That is called lying. And you have no problem with that? 

That, is, in fact, actually required by law. When you do a feasibility study you have to include every possible alternative. The SAS alternatives list had some pretty zany things, like swapping the northern segments of the Broadway Line and the Lexington Avenue Line. Because if you don't, then people say "but what about X" and then you have to go through the legwork of proving it was infeasible in court. Kind of like what this is.

I'd like to point out that DOT has been following their legal obligations to the community boards when presenting these options, which is to say that they have no legal obligation to listen to boards consisting of politically appointed hacks that often do not accurately reflect the makeup of their neighborhoods at all.

[WestFarms36]

On 11/3/2017 at 5:25 PM, BrooklynBus said:

 

So tell me how come when I drive on Woodhaven about every other weekend, I can drive all the way from the Belt Parkway to Queens Blvd and pass only three or four buses on all the routes, Q11, Q21, Q52, Q53. In the opposite direction, there are only six buses. And other than on a beach day each bus has about only 20 passengers? I do see crowds of 30 or so at Liberty when there hasn't been a bus for 30 minutes. So if the service is so frequent, where are all the buses? On the service road near Atlantic Avenue where they are not visible? 

Only occasionally do I ever see an express bus and most of them that I see are out of service. 

When I am there occasionally during the week, the situation is similar. I am not there anymore during the rush hours. 

 

It's just soo funny to see how you find Bus Lanes unnecessary, listen just because there is a need of improvements to bus routes, doesn't mean you have to get triggered over Bus Lanes. You are literally campaigning your Anti Transportation etiquette in the wrong place, I hope you try being a daily customer for 3 Months and see how it feels like to be screwed over traffic, probably that will help correct your mind. Just because you have a strong belief in Cars doesn't mean you have to sign up to a Transit Forum and then start whinning about how useful solutions are inconvenient when it comes to buses, especially when an +SBS+ Topic is touched... But if it were a wider expressway, or a Cross Bronx rehab, I know that you'd be the first one supporting it. If you feel that Bus riders are inferior just because you own a car, then you shouldn't be here honestly. You're just throwing all of our peers under the bus. And if you feel that the situation is unnecessary, than why don't you be the one sacrificing your comfort zone to ride a bus with 40+ People, We all deal with it, and we get out alive. Drop the negativity, and stop spectating, and ride the bus or train yourself and see if there is anything unnecessary.

[Deucey]

6 minutes ago, WestFarms36 said:

It's just soo funny to see how you find Bus Lanes unnecessary, listen just because there is a need of improvements to bus routes, doesn't mean you have to get triggered over Bus Lanes. You are literally campaigning your Anti Transportation etiquette in the wrong place, I hope you try being a daily customer for 3 Months and see how it feels like to be screwed over traffic, probably that will help correct your mind. Just because you have a strong belief in Cars doesn't mean you have to sign up to a Transit Forum and then start whinning about how useful solutions are inconvenient when it comes to buses, especially when an +SBS+ Topic is touched... But if it were a wider expressway, or a Cross Bronx rehab, I know that you'd be the first one supporting it. If you feel that Bus riders are inferior just because you own a car, then you shouldn't be here honestly. You're just throwing all of our peers under the bus. And if you feel that the situation is unnecessary, than why don't you be the one sacrificing your comfort zone to ride a bus with 40+ People, We all deal with it, and we get out alive. Drop the negativity, and stop spectating, and ride the bus or train yourself and see if there is anything unnecessary.

To be fair, @BrooklynBus was the director of Bus Planning, or the equivalent title, with  .

[B35 via Church]

3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

So it is perfectly alright in your opinion for a city agency to present a totally infeasible alternative and tell the community they are seriously considering it? That is called lying. And you have no problem with that? 

Nice leading question you got there...

Infeasibility has nothing to do with outright lying....

You are trying to make your problem, my problem & it's not going to happen.... It's already been laid out what my issue is with your rhetoric is about Woodhaven Blvd.... Just like you told me to go take up the title of that article with the editor, why don't you take this so-called lying up with the DOT...... As in, prove that they are so-called lying....

[WestFarms36]

9 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Nice leading question you got there...

Infeasibility has nothing to do with outright lying....

You are trying to make your problem, my problem & it's not going to happen.... It's already been laid out what my issue is with your rhetoric is about Woodhaven Blvd.... Just like you told me to go take up the title of that article up with the editor, why don't you take this so-called lying up with the MTA & the DOT...... As in, prove that they are so-called lying....

It's so funny how BrooklynBus plays with Statistics as if they were his Lego sets...

[BrooklynBus]

On 11/4/2017 at 1:48 AM, Cait Sith said:

 

10pm.

If the buses were crowded at 10 PM, that means the bus was late or they need more service, not SBS. 

 

 

[BrooklynBus]

9 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

That, is, in fact, actually required by law. When you do a feasibility study you have to include every possible alternative. The SAS alternatives list had some pretty zany things, like swapping the northern segments of the Broadway Line and the Lexington Avenue Line. Because if you don't, then people say "but what about X" and then you have to go through the legwork of proving it was infeasible in court. Kind of like what this is.

I'd like to point out that DOT has been following their legal obligations to the community boards when presenting these options, which is to say that they have no legal obligation to listen to boards consisting of politically appointed hacks that often do not accurately reflect the makeup of their neighborhoods at all.

If that is the case, why in the Select Bus Service staff summary, under Alternatives the only alternative listed to the current plan is to make no changes. What aren't the other alternatives mentioned and then ruled out? 

7 hours ago, WestFarms36 said:

It's just soo funny to see how you find Bus Lanes unnecessary, listen just because there is a need of improvements to bus routes, doesn't mean you have to get triggered over Bus Lanes. You are literally campaigning your Anti Transportation etiquette in the wrong place, I hope you try being a daily customer for 3 Months and see how it feels like to be screwed over traffic, probably that will help correct your mind. Just because you have a strong belief in Cars doesn't mean you have to sign up to a Transit Forum and then start whinning about how useful solutions are inconvenient when it comes to buses, especially when an +SBS+ Topic is touched... But if it were a wider expressway, or a Cross Bronx rehab, I know that you'd be the first one supporting it. If you feel that Bus riders are inferior just because you own a car, then you shouldn't be here honestly. You're just throwing all of our peers under the bus. And if you feel that the situation is unnecessary, than why don't you be the one sacrificing your comfort zone to ride a bus with 40+ People, We all deal with it, and we get out alive. Drop the negativity, and stop spectating, and ride the bus or train yourself and see if there is anything unnecessary.

The bus routes and the bus lanes are separate issues. I merely brought up the routes because I was told to us the Q53 instead of driving and was explaining why I couldn't do that. 

I fully sympathize with bus riders who do not like being screwed over by traffic just like I sympathize with drivers who do not like being screwed over by traffic. 

It is also debatable how "useful" the "solutions" are. There is no proof that buses will move any quicker during the off-peak with exclusive lanes than without them. If there is, show it to me. And as for off-Board fare collection if it is so great how come the M86 which does not have exclusive lanes only saves two minutes river to river with passengers paying their fare ahead of time. Two minutes is negligible and not worth the cost of the machines and upkeep. 

I don't believe bus riders are inferior, but you obviously believe people in cars are inferior. You favor saving 10 or 15 minutes tops for like 20,000 bus riders. (The other 10,000 probably just ride a mile to the subway and wouldn't save more than a minute or two) and add 10 to 30 minutes to the trips of 100,000 to 150,000 people in cars. Everyone needs to be treated equally without one segment being ignored. And I have already shown who most of those drivers could not realistically ride the bus.

Just because someone is pro-transit, does not mean he has to be in favor of every dumb transportation decision this city makes. And I do ride the Q53 occasionally.

http://www.qchron.com/editions/queenswide/sbs-will-not-solve-beach-commuter-s-headaches/article_c9144508-c9ec-52a9-b05d-f374ba5c093a.html

7 hours ago, Deucey said:

To be fair, @BrooklynBus was the director of Bus Planning, or the equivalent title, with  .

That is correct. The exact title was "Director, Surface Planning Department." I don't refer to that because no one would know what that means. It technically includes buses and trolleys although trolleys were not operated 25 years. It took several years more for the MTA to change the name to the Department of Buses because the MTA and NYCTA moved so slowly. It took them 25 years to provide free transfers between all bus lines and then another 25 years to add bus subway transfers, and they still haven't corrected 70 year old routing issues.

7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Nice leading question you got there...

Infeasibility has nothing to do with outright lying....

You are trying to make your problem, my problem & it's not going to happen.... It's already been laid out what my issue is with your rhetoric is about Woodhaven Blvd.... Just like you told me to go take up the title of that article with the editor, why don't you take this so-called lying up with the DOT...... As in, prove that they are so-called lying....

 I have been calling the DOT liars for three years now in the many articles and letters to the local papers. And to present an alternative that they claimed would seriously be considered and then automatically ruled out without study is lying. A study would have looked at the traffic implications under both alternatives.

[B35 via Church]

32 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I fully sympathize with bus riders who do not like being screwed over by traffic just like I sympathize with drivers who do not like being screwed over by traffic.....

32 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

Just because someone is pro-transit, does not mean he has to be in favor of every dumb transportation decision this city makes.....

You sympathize with bus riders who doesn't like being screwed over by traffic, but yet you don't want bus lanes on the main road along Woodhaven blvd.... Umm, What !??!!

You want people to believe that you're this balanced & fair person, but your comments in this thread & in your articles convey otherwise... You can claim not to care or whatever, but that's the problem a lot of your readers (on the forums & on your articles/letters) have with you.... It's not that you're this indubitable truth teller as to why you get the flack that you get, that you convinced yourself into believing is the reason..... Now I don't know if everyone that comments on your articles are members of this forum, but if they aren't, then it's not just us on the forums that see what we're seeing out of you....

While that second quotable is true, your commentaries go beyond just not being in favor of every dumb decision regarding public transportation that the MTA comes to decisions upon.... You still have yet to convey to us this big trick that the DOT is fooling people with when it comes to bus lanes..... What pro-transit person goes to the lengths that you have (with your commentaries) to denounce bus lanes?

The more you post (on any medium, whether it be here or elsewhere), the more pro-car, anti-transit you've became over the years.... The sad part (quiet is as kept) is that your jilted demeanor when it comes to the MTA has fueled these anti-transit talking points you're co-signing.... I think I speak for the majority here when I say that we don't want to be bothered reading this type of crap - especially when it's enough bullshit we as transit users have to put up w/ this city from the MTA......

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

The bus routes and the bus lanes are separate issues.....

While true, you have gone out of your way to paint the Woodhaven corridor (the routes that run along it) to not be somehow worthy enough for bus lanes... With blatant embellishments.....

46 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I have been calling the DOT liars for three years now in the many articles and letters to the local papers. And to present an alternative that they claimed would seriously be considered and then automatically ruled out without study is lying. A study would have looked at the traffic implications under both alternatives.

Good.

Now call them out in person - just as you would have liked me to have done with that newspaper editor....

8 hours ago, WestFarms36 said:

....If you feel that Bus riders are inferior just because you own a car, then you shouldn't be here honestly.

Word.....Thank you.... I'm glad you said that... Because if I EVER (and I want anyone reading this post to hold me to this) start going on pro-car, anti-transit rants like what's on display in this thread, my black ass is outta here VOLUNTARILY... Not posting or even lurking on any transit forum again..... While I am doing more driving than I would like to, and while I am fed up with the MTA's antics (especially when it comes to SBS; how often do you see me go on SBS rants anymore?), I'm not going to come on here & commence festering this place w/ pro-car, anti-transit talking points.... and worse, feigning like I'd still give a damn about public transit in the process....

[BrooklynBus]

8 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

You sympathize with bus riders who doesn't like being screwed over by traffic, but yet you don't want bus lanes on the main road along Woodhaven blvd.... Umm, What !??!!

You want people to believe that you're this balanced & fair person, but your comments in this thread & in your articles convey otherwise... You can claim not to care or whatever, but that's the problem a lot of your readers (on the forums & on your articles/letters) have with you.... It's not that you're this indubitable truth teller as to why you get the flack that you get, that you convinced yourself into believing is the reason..... Now I don't know if everyone that comments on your articles are members of this forum, but if they aren't, then it's not just us on the forums that see what we're seeing out of you....

While that second quotable is true, your commentaries go beyond just not being in favor of every dumb decision regarding public transportation that the MTA comes to decisions upon.... You still have yet to convey to us this big trick that the DOT is fooling people with when it comes to bus lanes..... What pro-transit person goes to the lengths that you have (with your commentaries) to denounce bus lanes?

The more you post (on any medium, whether it be here or elsewhere), the more pro-car, anti-transit you've became over the years.... The sad part (quiet is as kept) is that your jilted demeanor when it comes to the MTA has fueled these anti-transit talking points you're co-signing.... I think I speak for the majority here when I say that we don't want to be bothered reading this type of crap - especially when it's enough bullshit we as transit users have to put up w/ this city from the MTA......

While true, you have gone out of your way to paint the Woodhaven corridor (the routes that run along it) to not be somehow worthy enough for bus lanes... With blatant embellishments.....

Good.

Now call them out in person - just as you would have liked me to have done with that newspaper editor....

Word.....Thank you.... I'm glad you said that... Because if I EVER (and I want anyone reading this post to hold me to this) start going on pro-car, anti-transit rants like what's on display in this thread, my black ass is outta here VOLUNTARILY... Not posting or even lurking on any transit forum again..... While I am doing more driving than I would like to, and while I am fed up with the MTA's antics (especially when it comes to SBS; how often do you see me go on SBS rants anymore?), I'm not going to come on here & commence festering this place w/ pro-car, anti-transit talking points.... and worse, feigning like I'd still give a damn about public transit in the process....

I have clearly explained why I am opposed to the bus lanes onWoodhaven. I believe everyone needs to be treated equally. Not making a small improvement for a few bus riders (comparatively) with greater inconvenience for 80 percent of the corridors other motor vehicle anaylysis. Have you ever heard of a cost/benefit analysis? That is what needs to be done for SBS. It would find more harm than good and that's the only reason I oppose it. Not because I put drivers on a pedestal like you do with bus riders and believe the only their needs matter. I am balanced and fair. Go back and read what I have written. You seem to be retaining only what you want to retain. 

And DOT is fooling us with many of the bus lanes. How many times do I have to say buses will not move any faster because of bus lanes between 10 AM and 3 PM, evenings, nights, and weekends. 

Why are they proposing bus lanes on Kings a Highway when their own data shows an average speed of over 20 mph where they want to install bus lanes? The speed limit is 25 mph and the buses have to make stops, so how could they travel any faster with bus lanes? That is the bus lane trickery. Why wouldn't DOT answer that question for me when I posed it to them? 

And yes, I have called them out in person and they did not like it. Trottenberg sheepishly said to me "Allan, you aren't going to yell at me again", when I got up to ask her a question. The deputy commissioner came over to me personally and told me he doesn't appreciate me calling them insincere. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

9 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I have clearly explained why I am opposed to the bus lanes onWoodhaven. I believe everyone needs to be treated equally. Not making a small improvement for a few bus riders (comparatively) with greater inconvenience for 80 percent of the corridors other motor vehicle anaylysis. Have you ever heard of a cost/benefit analysis? That is what needs to be done for SBS. It would find more harm than good and that's the only reason I oppose it. Not because I put drivers on a pedestal like you do with bus riders and believe the only their needs matter. I am balanced and fair. Go back and read what I have written. You seem to be retaining only what you want to retain. 

And DOT is fooling us with many of the bus lanes. How many times do I have to say buses will not move any faster because of bus lanes between 10 AM and 3 PM, evenings, nights, and weekends. 

Why are they proposing bus lanes on Kings a Highway when their own data shows an average speed of over 20 mph where they want to install bus lanes? The speed limit is 25 mph and the buses have to make stops, so how could they travel any faster with bus lanes? That is the bus lane trickery. Why wouldn't DOT answer that question for me when I posed it to them? 

And yes, I have called them out in person and they did not like it. Trottenberg sheepishly said to me "Allan, you aren't going to yell at me again", when I got up to ask her a question. The deputy commissioner came over to me personally and told me he doesn't appreciate me calling them insincere. 

Because we don't have the space for tons of cars. It's that simple. If you're really that annoyed with the DOT, you would tell them to put a cap on Ubers and Lyfts, but you won't do that. In a city with over 8 million people we can't treat drivers with the same amount of priority as those using public transportation, and if we do, no one will get anywhere. You can throw out all of the stats you want. As time goes on, if this city is to continue to be a destination for people to live, we'll need to think for the future, not now, and we will need more bus lanes in the future, so get used to having less priority. Just ask Staten Island how well traffic is there. They widened the SIE to allow for more traffic and it's still a mess. Glad I got the hell out of there when I did.

[BrooklynBus]

8 hours ago, WestFarms36 said:

It's so funny how BrooklynBus plays with Statistics as if they were his Lego sets...

No. It's the MTA and DOT who are playing with statistics. They are still using seven year old data to insist ridership is up by 10 percent on the M15, while ridership between 2012 and 2016 declined by 3 million riders annually before the Second Avenue subway opened. 

If you had followed the arguments on Buschat about this, the counter argument is that only the first year results after SBS is implemented matters and future increases or declines are irrelevant. If you subscribe to that theory, why did the MTA wait 2 1/2 years to release the B44 SBS results? It was because ridership declined after the first year. It also declined after the second year. So what did they do? They quoted only SBS ridership the second year ignoring the decline in the B44 local, to claim a 10 % increase in SBS ridership. And when they couldn't claim that 95 percent of local riders were satisfied with service, they stated local riders were only surveyed before the change, not after. 

And where is the B46 progress report? Could it be because ridership is down by nearly 400,000 riders the past year? 

I am showing the real statistics. The MTA and DOT are the ones playing with them. DOT replaced actual traffic volumes with modeling data after I criticized their data, and then they backdated a presentation.

[BrooklynBus]

7 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Because we don't have the space for tons of cars. It's that simple. If you're really that annoyed with the DOT, you would tell them to put a cap on Ubers and Lyfts, but you won't do that. In a city with over 8 million people we can't treat drivers with the same amount of priority as those using public transportation, and if we do, no one will get anywhere. You can throw out all of the stats you want. As time goes on, if this city is to continue to be a destination for people to live, we'll need to think for the future, not now, and we will need more bus lanes in the future, so get used to having less priority. Just ask Staten Island how well traffic is there. They widened the SIE to allow for more traffic and it's still a mess. Glad I got the hell out of there when I did.

You are correct. We don't have space for tons of cars. That's why the solution is to give people realistic options so they won't drive. And me telling the city to put a cap on Uber and Lyft won't accomplish anything. I am glad you think I have so much power that the city would actually listen to me. 

Since you can't argue my statistics, you won't discuss them and merely conclude bus lanes all over is the solution without any proof they help everywhere. 

Staten Island may still be a mess with the same extra lane but it is certainly much better than before. Remember when they tried a bus lane on the SIE without HOV? It was a disaster. You want people out of their cars? Then tell the MTA they shouldn't be refusing to modify local bus routes to be more effective just because it would cost a little more money. I had one proposed bus route modification rejected for the sole reason they claimed it would cost an additional $50,000 annually which they said they could not afford. I calculated that amount could be offset if the revised bus route attracted only one more fare per trip. But the MTA refused to consider increased ridership and net cost when evaluating route changes. They only look at gross operating costs. Also they inaccurately measured the additional route mileage, so my proposal really had zero increased gross operating costs. 

Operations Planning needs to get off their high horse believing they are the only ones capable of planning refusing to consider outside suggestions even if they are coming from other departments within the MTA. Look at how successful their 30 minute shuttles have been. They are all at the bottom when you look at ridership numbers. On the other hand, the B1 that I created is now the seventh most popular bus route in Brooklyn. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

5 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

You are correct. We don't have space for tons of cars. That's why the solution is to give people realistic options so they won't drive. And me telling the city to put a cap on Uber and Lyft won't accomplish anything. I am glad you think I have so much power that the city would actually listen to me. 

Since you can't argue my statistics, you won't discuss them and merely conclude bus lanes all over is the solution without any proof they help everywhere. 

Staten Island may still be a mess with the same extra lane but it is certainly much better than before. Remember when they tried a bus lane on the SIE without HOV? It was a disaster. You want people out of their cars? Then tell the MTA they shouldn't be refusing to modify local bus routes to be more effective just because it would cost a little more money. I had one proposed bus route modification rejected for the sole reason they claimed it would cost an additional $50,000 annually which they said they could not afford. I calculated that amount could be offset if the revised bus route attracted only one more fare per trip. But the MTA refused to consider increased ridership and net cost when evaluating route changes. They only look at gross operating costs. Also they inaccurately measured the additional route mileage, so my proposal really had zero increased gross operating costs. 

Operations Planning needs to get off their high horse believing they are the only ones capable of planning refusing to consider outside suggestions even if they are coming from other departments within the MTA. Look at how successful their 30 minute shuttles have been. They are all at the bottom when you look at ridership numbers. On the other hand, the B1 that I created is now the seventh most popular bus route in Brooklyn. 

The whole transportation is a disaster thing is a convenient excuse for people to drive which is only exacerbating the problem for those of us that sacrifice and use mass transit. My commute isn't increasing because of anything but more cars on the road, and I support more bus lanes without looking at stats because logic says that one person in a car versus a bus likely means more people are being moved by that bus versus that one person in a car. We need to pass congestion pricing already and get it over with. 

[BrooklynBus]

12 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The whole transportation is a disaster thing is a convenient excuse for people to drive which is only exacerbating the problem for those of us that sacrifice and use mass transit. My commute isn't increasing because of anything but more cars on the road, and I support more bus lanes without looking at stats because logic says that one person in a car versus a bus likely means more people are being moved by that bus versus that one person in a car. We need to pass congestion pricing already and get it over with. 

I am not going to get into a congestion pricing debate with you. As I said before, there are more cars on the road because mass transit is declining and more are getting fed up with it and MTA excuses. You can't expect people to take a two hour mass transit trip when they can make a one hour car trip instead. Why does Kingsborough College have the highest percentage (or number I forget which) of those who drive? It's because for many there us no choice. From Canarsie it's a 20 minute car ride or a 90 minute bus trip. Would you sacrifice by traveling 140 minutes extra everyday? I don't think so. 

Same thing for those coming from Rockaway. Twenty minutes as opposed to three buses, two fares and 90 minutes. 

Two years ago I proposed a B44 SBS branch to Kingsborough and the MTA still is supposedly evaluating it. I even received an in person personal promise from the NYCT President last April that he would personally evaluate it. Follow up requests have resulted only in it is still being evaluated. Two years for a simple suggestion involving a single route? Come on now. I had 12 routes changes in four years with two years of MTA delaying tactics. 

As far as congestion is concerned, the city could do much more without congestion pricing if they really cared. About five years ago I drove into Manhattan from the Queensboro bridge on a Sunday morning when I didn't expect traffic. I got delayed on one block for 20 minutes just after getting off the bridge. Why. Con Edision closed off half of one of the numbered streets so that only four cars could cross First Avenue on each signal. There was virtually no traffic on First Avenue. If this was an emergency repair, a traffic agent could have overridden the signal eliminating that delay. Even if it were an emergency, Con Ed could have informed the city so they could take appropriate action. How often does something like this occur? The fact is the city doesn't care about reducing traffic congestion. They do care about the additional monies they could collect if congestion pricing were in effect which has been estimated to have only a minimum effect on reducing congestion. So don't get your hopes up. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

I am not going to get into a congestion pricing debate with you. As I said before, there are more cars on the road because mass transit is declining and more are getting fed up with it and MTA excuses. You can't expect people to take a two hour mass transit trip when they can make a one hour car trip instead. Why does Kingsborough College have the highest percentage (or number I forget which) of those who drive? It's because for many there us no choice. From Canarsie it's a 20 minute car ride or a 90 minute bus trip. Would you sacrifice by traveling 140 minutes extra everyday? I don't think so. 

Same thing for those coming from Rockaway. Twenty minutes as opposed to three buses, two fares and 90 minutes. 

Two years ago I proposed a B44 SBS branch to Kingsborough and the MTA still is supposedly evaluating it. I even received an in person personal promise from the NYCT President last April that he would personally evaluate it. Follow up requests have resulted only in it is still being evaluated. Two years for a simple suggestion involving a single route? Come on now. I had 12 routes changes in four years with two years of MTA delaying tactics. 

As far as congestion is concerned, the city could do much more without congestion pricing if they really cared. About five years ago I drove into Manhattan from the Queensboro bridge on a Sunday morning when I didn't expect traffic. I got delayed on one block for 20 minutes just after getting off the bridge. Why. Con Edision closed off half of one of the numbered streets so that only four cars could cross First Avenue on each signal. There was virtually no traffic on First Avenue. If this was an emergency repair, a traffic agent could have overridden the signal eliminating that delay. Even if it were an emergency, Con Ed could have informed the city so they could take appropriate action. How often does something like this occur? The fact is the city doesn't care about reducing traffic congestion. They do care about the additional monies they could collect if congestion pricing were in effect which has been estimated to have only a minimum effect on reducing congestion. So don't get your hopes up. 

You keep throwing that up there about how many people have out of the way commutes. Well what about the MILLIONS of us that don't? Are we supposed to sit in traffic because people that just want any excuse to drive insist that they can't take public transportation under any circumstance? The people with such commutes are a small number in the overall scope of things. The bigger problem and concern should be people who are ditching the system because of longer commutes due to congestion when transportation options do exist. We can't cater to every single driver, but we can do more to improve what currently exists.

[BrooklynBus]

7 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You keep throwing that up there about how many people have out of the way commutes. Well what about the MILLIONS of us that don't? Are we supposed to sit in traffic because people that just want any excuse to drive insist that they can't take public transportation under any circumstance? The people with such commutes are a small number in the overall scope of things. The bigger problem and concern should be people who are ditching the system because of longer commutes due to congestion when transportation options do exist. We can't cater to every single driver, but we can do more to improve what currently exists.

You are now contradicting yourself. First you want to limit Uber and Lyft because too many have ditched mass transit for cars causing traffic congestion. Now you say the people ditched the system due to congestion. Train congestion or car congestion? Why would they ditch mass transit because of car congestion? Where did they go?  Into cars causing more congestion? I really don't follow your thinking. 

Where we are in agreement is that much can be done to improve what currently exists. We disagree on how to accomplish this. 

And yes, there are those snobs who won't use mass transit under any circumstances.  Some haven't used it in so long they are still under the impression the system is covered in graffiti. But once the system improves to where they can be assured of getting a seat during the off peak, and not be crowded into a subway car like a sardine at 10 PM, then even they will come back.

But that will never happen as long as the MTA believes things like removing seats and garbage cans, and have no working bathrooms are the answers to improving transit and looking for any excuse to dismiss valid suggestions to improve the system.

Or wasting $5 million to pay off some consultant to study the Utica Avenue line which they have no intention of ever building. That is one reason why the city doesn't want to give the MTA more money, because they waste too much of it. Remember a few years ago when an investigation revealed that track workers frequently work only four hours a day because they are waiting three hours for supplies to arrive? Or the signals scandal where signals passed inspection without being inspected? Until the MTA gets its act together, don't expect too many things to change. 

[checkmatechamp13]

 

On 11/3/2017 at 7:48 PM, BrooklynBus said:

The width of a street does not determine if bus lanes are needed. The frequency of bus service and the amount of other traffic do. The bus lanes would not be so bad if they were in the service roads and were not in effect during non rush hours when the buses are already traveling at average speeds greater than 20 mph. 

To be fair, there is one example I can think of where bus lanes make sense solely because of the width of the street: Richmond Avenue near the SI Mall. The street has 4 lanes in each direction (plus one for parking which nobody ever uses because there's plenty of parking in the parking lots, plus the turning lanes) and it narrows to 3 lanes anyway south of Forest Hill Road. It reduces off-peak speeding (though I do agree with those that say the S79 should be 24/7, but not just for the sake of utilizing the lane)

On 11/4/2017 at 10:56 AM, BrooklynBus said:

I didn't say there weren't other choices besides buses from Sheepshead Bay to Astoria. I was merely answering the question as to why I wasn't riding the Q53 instead of driving. My other choices are a 90 minute to two hour subway trip. A drive there along Woodhaven used to take 45 minutes (and that was even at the end of the rush hour) , it now takes 60 minutes with DOT's "improvements". After SBS during non rush hours it will take at least another ten or 15 minutes, making it only slightly quicker than the subway instead of half the time. The BQE can take from 36 minutes to two or  2 1/2 hours depending on the time of day. 

To be fair, by reducing the relative advantage of car vs. public transit, that might be enough to get somebody to switch to mass transit. 

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Because we don't have the space for tons of cars. It's that simple. If you're really that annoyed with the DOT, you would tell them to put a cap on Ubers and Lyfts, but you won't do that. In a city with over 8 million people we can't treat drivers with the same amount of priority as those using public transportation, and if we do, no one will get anywhere. You can throw out all of the stats you want. As time goes on, if this city is to continue to be a destination for people to live, we'll need to think for the future, not now, and we will need more bus lanes in the future, so get used to having less priority. Just ask Staten Island how well traffic is there. They widened the SIE to allow for more traffic and it's still a mess. Glad I got the hell out of there when I did.

Yes and no. In the regular lanes, traffic is just as bad as it always was. It was fine the first few months after it opened, but eventually, people caught on and took advantage of the additional space and now we're back to square one.

On the other hand, for buses and HOV vehicles, it's wonderful. When I take the X17A in the AM rush, I often see a wall of traffic, but it doesn't affect the bus because of the HOV lane. Same thing when I occasionally get a lift home from work (with 2 other people in the car) and we're passing by tons of people and don't have to merge with them until the lane ends at Victory Blvd.

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

Staten Island may still be a mess with the same extra lane but it is certainly much better than before. Remember when they tried a bus lane on the SIE without HOV? It was a disaster. You want people out of their cars? Then tell the MTA they shouldn't be refusing to modify local bus routes to be more effective just because it would cost a little more money. I had one proposed bus route modification rejected for the sole reason they claimed it would cost an additional $50,000 annually which they said they could not afford. I calculated that amount could be offset if the revised bus route attracted only one more fare per trip. But the MTA refused to consider increased ridership and net cost when evaluating route changes. They only look at gross operating costs. Also they inaccurately measured the additional route mileage, so my proposal really had zero increased gross operating costs. 

What happened was that there was a ton of construction going on at the time, so traffic would've been bad anyway. What they did as a pilot program was allow HOV 2+ vehicles in the lane in addition to buses for the sake of giving some people an alternative. 

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The whole transportation is a disaster thing is a convenient excuse for people to drive which is only exacerbating the problem for those of us that sacrifice and use mass transit. My commute isn't increasing because of anything but more cars on the road, and I support more bus lanes without looking at stats because logic says that one person in a car versus a bus likely means more people are being moved by that bus versus that one person in a car. We need to pass congestion pricing already and get it over with. 

A car lane has capacity to move about 2,000 vehicles per hour (at the critical density of cars. It actually decreases once you get past that). It would be stupid to turn a lane into a bus lane if the net result is that fewer people are getting through that section of the roadway.

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

As far as congestion is concerned, the city could do much more without congestion pricing if they really cared. About five years ago I drove into Manhattan from the Queensboro bridge on a Sunday morning when I didn't expect traffic. I got delayed on one block for 20 minutes just after getting off the bridge. Why. Con Edision closed off half of one of the numbered streets so that only four cars could cross First Avenue on each signal. There was virtually no traffic on First Avenue. If this was an emergency repair, a traffic agent could have overridden the signal eliminating that delay. Even if it were an emergency, Con Ed could have informed the city so they could take appropriate action. How often does something like this occur? The fact is the city doesn't care about reducing traffic congestion. They do care about the additional monies they could collect if congestion pricing were in effect which has been estimated to have only a minimum effect on reducing congestion. So don't get your hopes up. 

If congestion pricing was used to fund the MTA (without taking away another source of revenue), some of that money would be able to provide better alternatives, or just more frequency on crowded routes.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

11 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

You are now contradicting yourself. First you want to limit Uber and Lyft because too many have ditched mass transit for cars causing traffic congestion. Now you say the people ditched the system due to congestion. Train congestion or car congestion? Why would they ditch mass transit because of car congestion? Where did they go?  Into cars causing more congestion? I really don't follow your thinking. 

Where we are in agreement is that much can be done to improve what currently exists. We disagree on how to accomplish this. 

And yes, there are those snobs who won't use mass transit under any circumstances.  Some haven't used it in so long they are still under the impression the system is covered in graffiti. But once the system improves to where they can be assured of getting a seat during the off peak, and not be crowded into a subway car like a sardine at 10 PM, then even they will come back.

But that will never happen as long as the MTA believes things like removing seats and garbage cans, and have no working bathrooms are the answers to improving transit and looking for any excuse to dismiss valid suggestions to improve the system.

Or wasting $5 million to pay off some consultant to study the Utica Avenue line which they have no intention of ever building. That is one reason why the city doesn't want to give the MTA more money, because they waste too much of it. Remember a few years ago when an investigation revealed that track workers frequently work only four hours a day because they are waiting three hours for supplies to arrive? Or the signals scandal where signals passed inspection without being inspected? Until the MTA gets its act together, don't expect too many things to change. 

It's both. The subways are a mess leading to more people to take Uber and Lyft and Uber and Lyft aren't being held to the same costs as yellow taxis are which allows them to slash their prices. Furthermore since there since there is no cap on them and they pay dirt cheap wages (this is especially true of Uber), you have tons of cars on the road competing for fares. An oversaturation to say the least.

10 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

 

To be fair, there is one example I can think of where bus lanes make sense solely because of the width of the street: Richmond Avenue near the SI Mall. The street has 4 lanes in each direction (plus one for parking which nobody ever uses because there's plenty of parking in the parking lots, plus the turning lanes) and it narrows to 3 lanes anyway south of Forest Hill Road. It reduces off-peak speeding (though I do agree with those that say the S79 should be 24/7, but not just for the sake of utilizing the lane)

To be fair, by reducing the relative advantage of car vs. public transit, that might be enough to get somebody to switch to mass transit. 

Yes and no. In the regular lanes, traffic is just as bad as it always was. It was fine the first few months after it opened, but eventually, people caught on and took advantage of the additional space and now we're back to square one.

On the other hand, for buses and HOV vehicles, it's wonderful. When I take the X17A in the AM rush, I often see a wall of traffic, but it doesn't affect the bus because of the HOV lane. Same thing when I occasionally get a lift home from work (with 2 other people in the car) and we're passing by tons of people and don't have to merge with them until the lane ends at Victory Blvd.

What happened was that there was a ton of construction going on at the time, so traffic would've been bad anyway. What they did as a pilot program was allow HOV 2+ vehicles in the lane in addition to buses for the sake of giving some people an alternative. 

A car lane has capacity to move about 2,000 vehicles per hour (at the critical density of cars. It actually decreases once you get past that). It would be stupid to turn a lane into a bus lane if the net result is that fewer people are getting through that section of the roadway.

If congestion pricing was used to fund the MTA (without taking away another source of revenue), some of that money would be able to provide better alternatives, or just more frequency on crowded routes.

It isn't yes or no. It's no because the minute you add more capacity for cars, more people drive and saturate that capacity and you're back at square one. Furthermore, what good is moving 2,000 cars an hour if HUNDREDS more people can be moved? We both know that most of the people driving generally aren't car pooling and it's usually just one person in a car.

[checkmatechamp13]

59 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It isn't yes or no. It's no because the minute you add more capacity for cars, more people drive and saturate that capacity and you're back at square one. Furthermore, what good is moving 2,000 cars an hour if HUNDREDS more people can be moved? We both know that most of the people driving generally aren't car pooling and it's usually just one person in a car.

In the HOV lane, you get a ticket and points if you're caught. So yes, the people using the new HOV lane (which is what most of the "widening" was) are generally carpooling or taking the bus. The HOV lane moves fine. It's the regular lanes that get backed up (and if I'm not taking the X17, I'm physically on the expressway as part of my job, so I know how the traffic flows)

[Cait Sith]

6 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

If the buses were crowded at 10 PM, that means the bus was late or they need more service, not SBS.

Nope, that bus was actually on-time. I checked the schedule beforehand, and bustime after that to see if it was worth catching the bus.

The southbound bus in question arrives at Broadway & 75th at 10:04pm. I would say that he was a minute or two late at Hoffman because a driver cut the bus off at Queens Blvd and made him miss the light.

[B35 via Church]

6 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I have clearly explained why I am opposed to the bus lanes onWoodhaven. I believe everyone needs to be treated equally. Not making a small improvement for a few bus riders (comparatively) with greater inconvenience for 80 percent of the corridors other motor vehicle anaylysis. Have you ever heard of a cost/benefit analysis? That is what needs to be done for SBS. It would find more harm than good and that's the only reason I oppose it. Not because I put drivers on a pedestal like you do with bus riders and believe the only their needs matter. I am balanced and fair. Go back and read what I have written. You seem to be retaining only what you want to retain. 

And DOT is fooling us with many of the bus lanes. How many times do I have to say buses will not move any faster because of bus lanes between 10 AM and 3 PM, evenings, nights, and weekends. 

Why are they proposing bus lanes on Kings a Highway when their own data shows an average speed of over 20 mph where they want to install bus lanes? The speed limit is 25 mph and the buses have to make stops, so how could they travel any faster with bus lanes? That is the bus lane trickery. Why wouldn't DOT answer that question for me when I posed it to them? 

And yes, I have called them out in person and they did not like it. Trottenberg sheepishly said to me "Allan, you aren't going to yell at me again", when I got up to ask her a question. The deputy commissioner came over to me personally and told me he doesn't appreciate me calling them insincere. 

Yes, you've clearly explained why you're opposed to bus lanes... That's not what's being asked of you, nor was that ever in doubt ... At this juncture, it is this bit about you being so fair & the fact of the matter is, is that you're not.... You will get others to believe that you are, when your commentaries start correlating with such a disposition..... Funny how I'm all of a sudden putting bus riders on a pedestal because I don't agree with this crap about putting bus lanes on the freakin service road.... Of course, same old song & dance with you - Allan Rosen, never wrong.....

I'm "retaining" what's being put before me, emanating from you; and apparently, I'm not the only person coming to the same conclusions regarding your rhetoric.... I'm not the problem here..... You're not the only motorist on the planet & they all don't think like you... I also happen to drive & I'm not remotely close to this pseudo pro-transit, anti-transit crap that you're on..... The opposite of the stance of not putting bus lanes on the main road isn't putting bus riders on a pedestal.... Anybody that's truly for the betterment of transit is not going to sit up there & convey that since only 20% of the road users on a given roadway would benefit from bus lanes, so therefore, to hell with putting them on the main road (in this particular case) because 80% represents the majority.... For someone to convey that a roadway having a bus lane on it is indicative of somebody putting bus riders on a pedestal, says enough.... You have shown to be clearly for the motorist throughout this whole ordeal, you have shown virtually no sympathy for bus riders along Woodhaven blvd. throughout this discussion, and someone's supposed to believe that you're fair & balanced?????

You say buses won't move any faster with bus lanes in effect between those times in question... Interesting - so buses are going to move at no better than the same rate that they are now, with much less traffic in front of them.... Gotcha.....

Something else I've found interesting about you over the years is that..... How it is that so many people have it out for you?