Comments on: World-Class Avenues for the East Side: What Great BRT Looks Like

By: gecko

gecko — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 10:30:03 +0000

#51 Giffen, “Yes, American buses are ghetto as hell. But it doesn’t have to be that way.”

Large vehicle transit is the difficult way to do mobility. Small vehicle transit is many times easier and includes distributed on-demand potential.

By: Giffen

Giffen — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:37:43 +0000

“I don’t think it’s unreasonable to call the hardware, ride, speed, or aesthetic of American buses generally, ghetto as hell.”

Yes, American buses are ghetto as hell. But it doesn’t have to be that way.

By: Kaja

Kaja — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:40:37 +0000

Way to steal Cap’n Transit’s schtick!

If the point is that busses /can/ be done ‘well’, I’ll relent for sake of sparing us all the fight; but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to call the hardware, ride, speed, or aesthetic of American busses generally, ghetto as hell.

Streetcars are glorious because they’re like busses but without, in no particular order of importance: the fume-spewing rattling engine; the incessant lurching; the extreme delays due to traffic out of the driver’s control; the additional delays of payment-while-boarding; the jackasses exiting out the front door.

What I think of the people riding the bus is neither here nor there yet; we’ve got such fundamental crap to overcome with busses.

By: Giffen

Giffen — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 05:20:35 +0000

“I still insist buses are ghetto transit…”

When was the last time you rode the bus in Western Europe?

By: Kaja

Kaja — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 00:13:52 +0000

Haha, good point. (I live in Brooklyn and I never, ever go to the Upper East Side, or really above 14th street.)

By: Cap'n Transit

Cap'n Transit — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 17:34:43 +0000

Aside from the likely bit that it probably /is/ more valuable, since folks with cars typically have income and folks on the bus typically don’t

When was the last time you rode the bus on the Upper East Side?

By: Kaja

Kaja — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:23:31 +0000

> Have we made a societal decision that those car commuters’ time is more valuable than the bus commuters’?

Aside from the likely bit that it probably /is/ more valuable, since folks with cars typically have income and folks on the bus typically don’t — no, I don’t think we made a societal decision. An utterly nonrepresentative government did it on its own, largely for their personal benefit.

The government is the problem, and only very rarely will government be the solution. This is one of the beauties of the Bloomberg administration, and JSK’s department in particular: they’re exceptions to the rule that the state is stultifying, dumb, and carefree.

I still insist busses are ghetto transit and I am only interested in this so far as it’s a precursor to restoration of streetcars.

You will never win conservatives so long as you pitch this in terms of Thinking Of The Poor People. You /will/ win conservatives if you point out how it’s the /government/ that’s been screwing over the poor people.

By: BicyclesOnly

BicyclesOnly — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:24:45 +0000

Bryce, good point on the bike boxes and the sidewalks. While the First and Second Avenue sidewalks are busy, they are still wider than some that are at least as busy (for example, Lex and Madison) and on most blocks they lack the peddler, newspaper giveaway box, and other activity that competes for space with pedestrians (though there may be more restauarnt cafe activity that makes up for this).

I am curious where you get the 9’6″ figure for the traffic lanes, whether you think 6 lanes for parking/moving private motor traffic could/should be preserved, and if so, how a bus lane and bike lane fit in the 13′ left from the total 70′-wide space left after th 6 lanes X 9.5′ = 57′.

Is there some kind of AHSTO (sp?) or other consensus standard that says, “to move 4 lanes of urban traffic at speeds of up to 30 MPH safely, the lanes must be at least X width?

By: Bryce

Bryce — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:50:03 +0000

Both 1st and 2nd are grossly over-sized as is. They need to be narrowed. Curbside bus lane, used for both express and local service, with passing every few blocks. Widening the sidewalk is very expensive (new stormwater gates, plumbing, etc), so we should try and avoid that if this is going to ever get built. However, bumpouts near intersections are relatively cheap, and would allow buses to “pull over” as the road would be narrowed. Outside of bus lanes should be bike lane, with a 1-way on first and second. When cycling, encouraging the directionally-challenged (food delivery guys on jalopy bikes) to travel the correct direction. Outside bike lane should be parking, much like on 8th & 9th aves, to protect buses, bikes, and gives pedestrians a crossing island. Narrow car lanes to 9’6″ and widen crosswalks. Bikes will occasionally need to make right turns, and should be accommodated with bike boxes. This also gives pedestrians more protection.

Final note – encourage NYPD to enforce bus/bike/pedestrian safety! Blocking the box = huge fine + pts on license!

By: Gene

Gene — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:51:42 +0000

What you do not want in NYC is what we got in Boston: a bus line that is BRT in name only but is no better than standard urban bus service. I suggest you advocate for grade separated lanes, prepaid fares allowing for all doors boarding, traffic signal priority, and bus stop shelters that are heated in winter and protect from the elements. Without those essentials you are looking at a BRT branded bus that delivers service like any other slow urban bus. Just saying based on the Boston experience with the so-called Silver Line bus from downtown to Roxbury.

By: Peter Smith

Peter Smith — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:47:18 +0000

i, for one, am ecstatic that someone is apparently pushing for real bicycle infrastructure along a BRT route. miracle. let’s do it!

same holds true for any LRT route — we have to increase the capacity of our transit corridors, which means we have to get rid of the least efficient modes of transportation (private automobiles) in favor of the more efficient ones (walking and biking).

By: gecko

gecko — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:53:53 +0000

#38 V “never heard of these powered tricycles”

First link is funny:
electricity is my friend
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfRMa_u9wm8

ICE Trice Q with BionX electric assist by RBR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEQNWmt-IM8

Kind of embarrassing that no major transit system (including NYC DoT) is not considering this because it is adaptaion of very mature straight forward technology. (Google to your heart’s content on this stuff!)

Eco-footprint of the vehicle is 1% of cars.

Eco-footprint of supporting infrastructure is much less than 1% of cars.

By: zgori

zgori — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:49:25 +0000

I have a hard time imagining any plan that leaves fewer than five lanes available for cars (three for travel and two for parking) actually getting built. On the other hand, they have managed to do some pretty creative things in other parts of the city, so you never know.

By: Urbanis

Urbanis — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:41:39 +0000

I don’t think any city street or avenue should have more than two automobile travel lanes running in the same direction. Please! We people have better things to do with our street space.

By: v

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:22:28 +0000

gecko:

i’ve never heard of these powered tricycles before. sounds a little crazy, but maybe kind of awesome.

By: BicyclesOnly

BicyclesOnly — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:17:30 +0000

We have to redefine the debate, perhaps along these lines:

For decades we’ve devoted twelve lanes of separated highways around the perimeter of Manhattan to facilitate high-speed, low-cost personal rapid transit to the CBD’s by private car, cutting off most access to the precious public waterfront in the bargain. How can a few separated bus lanes that will enable hundreds of thousands on the East Side to have a reasonable commute be “too much to ask for”? Have we made a societal decision that those car commuters’ time is more valuable than the bus commuters’ ?

By: Emily Litella

Emily Litella — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:35:43 +0000

This will not end well. The problem is the unrestricted access and priority that private cars and an army of yellow taxis have to the streets. Expensive and complex street designs can only work if everyone is on-board with it. The whining of one ‘tobbaconist’ losing a few sales to motorists seems to carry the same weight as 500 bus riders trying to save minutes a day getting to work. We are still some years away from seeing forced reduction in auto trips by fuel scarcity, which I beleive is the only thing that will reduce the dominance of large motor vehicles in our so-called democratic society. The powers that be are trying to make a go of improved bus service, but there are serious limits as to what is possible right now. Just look how the state caved to the outcry over a lousy $25 plate surcharge.

By: BicyclesOnly

BicyclesOnly — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:02:17 +0000

True BRT, I’m suggesting that the local bus service remain just as it is on the right hand side of the street. And I don’t mean to inspire a “race to the bottom” to see just how degraded a BRT design we can come up with. But to me the essentials for BRT are: (1) separated lanes (2) preservation of local service (3) protected bike lanes incorporated (4) traffic calming on First and Second Aves. I’d love to do this in a “world class” fashion and I assure you as an advocate I would demand nothing less, but that is a very heavy lift politically and at some point the rubber hits the road and compromises must be made. I have been scolded in the past for airing my willingness to compromise on this site but honestly most of us in this conversation are devoted advocates of change so there is less to be gained by telling each other that we will accept world class, nothing less, than having a space for a frank discussio of what might work within political constraints. DoT knows what world class BRT is and yet they gave us the mediocre Bronx experiment. The fact DoT is calling this SBS and not BRT should tell us something about what DoT is going to let “drop” next month by way of an UES design, regardless of what we are saying to each other on this blog. The point of my proposed alternate design is that in a “worst case scenario” politically (I did use that term), we can preserve the four elements I posit as essential while countering opponents by pointing out that four of five traffic lanes remain.

By: gecko

gecko — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 11:37:41 +0000

There should be a huge volunteer effort to plant a million trees along this small vehicle transit corridor.

Other corridors should be planned reaching out to the remote areas of the five boroughs.

By: gecko

gecko — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 11:19:25 +0000

A 10,000-vehicle small vehicle transit system could be set up on the East Side corridor from the foot of Manhattan to its top.