Transit advocates, officials rally for more reliable bus service, better routes

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Transit advocates, officials rally in Brooklyn for more reliable bus service, better routes throughout NYC 

 

 

Bus ridership in the city has plummeted 16% since 2002.

BYDAN RIVOLI

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Updated: Wednesday, July 20, 2016, 6:26 PM

 

Bus riders don’t have to suffer through slow buses and uneven, unreliable service.

That’s the word from fed-up transit advocates and elected officials, who rallied Wednesday around a turnaround plan to speed up service.

 

The plan from Transit Center, a policy group, calls for more bus-only lanes and street cameras to catch cars wandering onto the bus paths, boarding at all doors and redesigned, simplified routes. These features are already in use in other cities, with the report citing standout systems in London and Seoul.

 

“The buses are the worst way to get around the city of New York,” state Sen. Dan Squadron (D-Brooklyn) said outside Brooklyn Borough Hall. “That is unacceptable.”

 

As trains see more riders packing themselves into stations each year, bus ridership has plummeted 16% since 2002, though it still serves 1.7 million riders a year.

 

The drop is attributed to frustratingly slow speeds — 7.4 mph on average, according to the report.

While Gov. Cuomo and the MTA in May unveiled a splashy new fleet of buses, equipped with Wi-Fi and USB charging ports, Riders Alliance director John Raskin called it a “valuable but insufficient step” to improving service.

 

“People are voting with their MetroCards to abandon the bus,” Raskin said. “We need to provide good enough bus service that people decide to ride it again.”

 

Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams holds up his MetroCard at a rally for better bus service on Wednesday.  (DAN RIVOLI/NEW YORK DAILY NEWS)

Councilman Ydanis Rodriguez (D-Manhattan), who chairs the Transportation Committee, said that large metropolises in countries like Mexico and Brazil are leaving New York in the dust.

 

Rodriguez said he will hold a Council hearing on improving bus service this year.

 

MTA spokesman Kevin Ortiz said the agency is already studying changes to bus routes in Staten Island, Co-op City in the Bronx and northeastern Queens.

 

“Many of the recommendations in the report are actions the MTA is already taking,” he said in a statement. “MTA is constantly re-evaluating bus routes to improve reliability and to optimize routes in order to serve areas where the demand is highest.”

 

City Transportation Commissioner Polly Trottenberg, also an MTA board member, said she agreed with the report’s suggestions on fixing problems in the bus system.

 

“I hope that the city and the MTA can build on our productive partnership by bringing more dedicated bus lanes and better enforcement to the entire bus fleet — along with innovations like all-door boarding and contactless payment,” she said in a statement.

 

Riders, meanwhile, had little love for the bus.

Councilman Ydanis Rodriguez said that he wants a hearing by this year on improving slow and unreliable bus service at the rally.  (DAN RIVOLI/NEW YORK DAILY NEWS)

“I don't have a car, we rely on the bus service, especially when there is an issue with trains,” said Michael Yakobson, 47, of Bensonhurst.

 

But he voiced complaints common among passengers that buses are chronically late and then bunch up when they do arrive.

 

“They're constantly coming as a pair, two or three buses,” he said.

 

Asked about the service she gets for her $2.75 fare, Marie Williams of Crown Heights said, “not enough.”

 

She uses the B46, Brooklyn's most used bus, to get to doctors appointments and for errands.

“I have to make sure we leave very, very early,” she said.

 

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/transit-advocates-officials-rally-better-bus-service-nyc-article-1.2718925

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The sickens me with their stance on buses.  We're studying this, we're looking at that.  Please.  The only thing they've been effective at is slashing service, but very little has been done to speed up bus service and improve reliability aside from SBS.  If anyone looks at the audit done by Comptroller Scott Stringer's office, it is easy to see how the responded.  All they did was adjust the schedules to allow more run time on some lines to make service appear to be more on-time, but did NOTHING about speeding up bus service on most of the lines that Stringer's report discusses.  

 

Additionally, what incentive do drivers have to actually get on schedule?  Absolutely nothing.  Once they are reprimanded for being early (written up), all they do is leave their terminals late and crawl to avoid being written up again or face other disciplinary actions.  The whole attitude towards bus service and service in general is this way, and it doesn't really matter how much passengers pay.  They should just "leave earlier".  That is not the way to run service, and it does not bode confidence in the system at all.  Quite frankly the system is broken all around, and shiny new buses with Wi-Fi and USB ports won't cut it.  The needs to go much further than talking about enforcement of bus lanes and shortening bus routes.  There needs to be a real discussion about how much service they really want to provide.  There were folks here that argued in favor of slashing bus service to numerous neighborhoods overnight which I still don't support. Then you have the limited service that runs on numerous lines.  You couple that with how late most buses are and is it really that much of a shocker that ridership continues to plummet?

 

There needs to be an attitude shift across the board, from the to the drivers.  The drivers need to make a valiant effort to stay on time (there are some that still do, but sadly they are few and far in between), and the needs to be realistic about schedules and making service attractive to the public to actually use, and finding a balance from a budget standpoint to run service that makes sense and gets people on buses again and out of their cars.  We have too many people running to their cars because they don't have faith in the to do what they should do, and that isn't just moving people.  That isn't enough.  They need to hold themselves accountable to a higher standard, and start with being on-time and reliable, two things that seem to be next to impossible on most days.

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

Couldn't agree more. Besides, buses aren't the problem. the MTA itself does not hold the buses in high regard, and as a result their performance suffers.

 

Even though subruban transit options are less populous than the MTA's, other agencies understand the importance of listening to those who actually benefit from the use of public transportation.

 

Even if a Bee-Line bus is late (like our #40), it doesn't feel half as bad waiting at a bus stop at, say, Kings Highway for a B49 while you see B7, BM3 and B82 buses whizz on by. C+ standards are unacceptable in the 21st Century...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Couldn't agree more. Besides, buses aren't the problem. the MTA itself does not hold the buses in high regard, and as a result their performance suffers.

 

Even though subruban transit options are less populous than the MTA's, other agencies understand the importance of listening to those who actually benefit from the use of public transportation.

 

Even if a Bee-Line bus is late (like our #40), it doesn't feel half as bad waiting at a bus stop at, say, Kings Highway for a B49 while you see B7, BM3 and B82 buses whizz on by. C+ standards are unacceptable in the 21st Century...

I can go back to my teen years and look at numerous bus routes that were MUCH more reliable than they are today.  The B49 is a prime example.  When I lived in Sheepshead Bay, I would often use the B49 over the B36 because it ran on-time and frequently.  Even after I moved to Midwood years later, the B49 was decent.  That route is only a shell of what it used to be.  If you look at things from the operations standpoint, it's disturbing how they work from depot to depot, which I think is another problem with regards to deteriorating bus service.  While report after report seems to imply that people are "running" from the buses to the subway, even that isn't quite accurate. The only people doing that are those who can't afford other expensive options.  The ones that can drive, take Uber, Metro-North, etc., are doing just that, and the express bus really is more about people who don't want to ride the subway as oppose to it being super fast in some cases.  What I would like the to do is look at all factors of what is decreasing bus speeds in the city, and be up front about it.  Vision Zero has definitely had an impact, but I don't think that's the entire story.  The frequencies of buses is a major factor. The long waits, and painfully slow commutes are a huge turnoff.  Schedules just seem to be there for the hell it since on-time performance is almost non-existent even by the 's own reports, and that's another big problem that the doesn't want to address or be held accountable for, and for what they're charging, they should expect to be held to such a standard.

 

As for the politicians, my question to them is why now?? Ridership on buses has been tanking for years and they've sat back and have been rather silent about it.  What Kevin Ortiz fails to state in his comment is that the is evaluating what they can cut and move elsewhere.  I don't think that's a real "evaluation" of service.  When a bus has severe bunching and ridership drops, they just cut service.  That doesn't address the real problem at all.  Then there's the question of how many of these politicians, workers and big wigs actually use buses?  I've seen my elected officials and officials on public transit, but NEVER on a bus... Always Metro-North ( Board Member Fernando Ferrer and former Councilmen Oliver Koppel are two people that live in Riverdale and have or had some political clout that ride Metro-North somewhat regularly). That should tell you something...  The B/Os driving rarely seem to rely on the system on a daily basis, though I have seen one driver I get who actually doesn't have a car and uses the system, but how often is that?  That has a huge impact on how they view the service that they're providing and how much they care.  When you just jump off your bus and into your car, you don't truly understand what the riding public goes through.

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

I can go back to my teen years and look at numerous bus routes that were MUCH more reliable than they are today. The B49 is a prime example. When I lived in Sheepshead Bay, I would often use the B49 over the B36 because it ran on time and frequently. Even after I moved to Midwood the B49 was decent. That route is only a shell of what it used to be. If you look at things from the operations standpoint, it's disturbing how they work from depot to depot, which I think is another problem being deteriorating bus service. While report after report seems to imply that people are "running" from the buses to the subway, even that isn't quite accurate. The only people doing that are those who either can't afford other expensive options. The ones that can drive, take Uber, Metro-North, etc., are doing just that, and the express bus really is more about people who don't want to ride the subway as oppose to it being super fast in some cases. What I would like the to do is look at all factors of what is decreasing bus speeds in the city, and be up front about it. Vision Zero has definitely had an impact, but I don't think that's the entire story. The frequencies of buses is a major factor. The long waits, and painfully slow commutes are a huge turnoff.

[????Applause] I certainly agree. vision zero puts an unfair strain on public transit operators. Instead, place D-class restrictions on certain roads and neighborhoods where crashes are frequent.

 

It takes a lot of effort and responsibility to attain and maintain a CDL here in New York State. Operators simply can't be punished for someone else's second rate driving skills.

 

Sent from my m8 using Tapatalk

[RailRunRob]

Couldn't agree more. Besides, buses aren't the problem. the MTA itself does not hold the buses in high regard, and as a result their performance suffers.

 

Even though subruban transit options are less populous than the MTA's, other agencies understand the importance of listening to those who actually benefit from the use of public transportation.

 

Even if a Bee-Line bus is late (like our #40), it doesn't feel half as bad waiting at a bus stop at, say, Kings Highway for a B49 while you see B7, BM3 and B82 buses whizz on by. C+ standards are unacceptable in the 21st Century...

I hardly ever use Buses. So I'm just asking  What is it you think the MTA could do better? From the perspective of someone that studied Urban planning /Civil engineering, I'm inclined to look at logistics and infrastructure as well? New York isn't the most mobile city aboveground. So is it more the MTAs management ? Or geographical, interagency (ie DOT?) issues? Don't really have an opinion just asking. How does a city like Boston stack up? It's pre-automobile city as well?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I hardly ever use Buses. So I'm just asking  What is it you think the MTA could do better? From the perspective of someone that studied Urban planning /Civil engineering, I'm inclined to look at logistics and infrastructure as well? New York isn't the most mobile city aboveground. So is it more the MTAs management ? Or geographical, interagency (ie DOT?) issues? Don't really have an opinion just asking. How does a city like Boston stack up? It's pre-automobile city as well?

There's a lot actually.  They have yet to use signal priority on ANY of their buses, yet they're ordering HUNDREDS of new buses and prioritize Wi-Fi and USB ports over moving people quicker.  Mind you signal priority was supposed to happen YEARS ago.  They've drastically decreased service over the years, literally forcing people to take Uber, the subway or other options at times because there aren't other alternatives, and while they faced financial constraints in years past, now that they're doing better financially, they haven't gone nearly far enough at trying to restore a lot of the routes that were eliminated to attract old riders or new ones.  

 

They've been given bus lanes for some SBS lines, but don't seem to be working enough with the NYPD to ensure that enforcement is consistent and on-going to keep buses moving.  They have stated on numerous occasions that they essentially can't do anything to improve bus service or speed up buses, yet on the same hand, they talk about how they are studying this and that.  In short, they aren't going to do more than the bare minimum until political pressure forces their hand to do more and that's really pathetic because the is here to encourage people to leave their cars at home, and overall, up and down the system, people have less and less faith in it, be it the buses, trains, commuter rails... A system that is far too archaic to say the least, and we as a city have to demand more from them.  Our economy and future depends on a transit system that does more than just move people, but does so efficiently.

 

Let me ask you... Why is that you hardly ever use buses?  Be honest.  When you aren't using the subway, how do you get around and why?

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

I hardly ever use Buses. So I'm just asking What is it you think the MTA could do better? From the perspective of someone that studied Urban planning /Civil engineering, I'm inclined to look at logistics and infrastructure as well? New York isn't the most mobile city aboveground. So is it more the MTAs management ? Or geographical, interagency (ie DOT?) issues? Don't really have an opinion just asking. How does a city like Boston stack up? It's pre-automobile city as well?

There's too many interests involved when there shouldn't be. Buses are a public service, and public services within the city line are never prioritized like they should be. Where bus lanes exist, people complain about their parking spaces, their curb.

 

Boroughers really have it twisted when it comes to who owns what. City curbs do not belong to any individual, cars aren't "untouchable" as some self serving person wants to think.

 

I believe we need to reverse-engineer what GM, Firestone and Standard Oil [Now Exxon-Mobil] did to the public transit industry. And a lot of car owners will be unhappy. They can suck it up or move up north.

 

My ideas are going to upset many car owners because I feel a city like this has no need or benefits from catering to car drivers over residents who can't even afford one. If I had it my way there'd be a No-Smoking Zone on 2nd Avenue.

 

I'd convert 5th Avenue and Madison Avenue into commercial vehicle only expressways at 45 MPH(so shipments can be safely and easily transported to local businesses). NO PED XINGS, ONLY OVERPASSES. One column for a portable pulley so wheelchair users can mount to and manually escalate up stairs.

 

I'd support creating a LIE-style HOV lane on FDR & Riverside Drive, ban parking on 4th Avenue in Kings and draw the B37 there instead. The B70 would be absorbed by the B63. The Triboro rail would become the train.

 

Many projects are stalled because of procrastination. The MTA, NYCDOT and NYSDOT need to stop pointing fingers and start listening to residents instead of relying on wasteful studies

 

Sent from my m8 using Tapatalk

[Via Garibaldi 8]

There's too many interests involved when there shouldn't be. Buses are a public service, and public services within the city line are never prioritized like they should be. Where bus lanes exist, people complain about their parking spaces, their curb.

 

Boroughers really have it twisted when it comes to who owns what. City curbs do not belong to any individual, cars aren't "untouchable" as some self serving person wants to think.

 

I believe we need to reverse-engineer what GM, Firestone and Standard Oil [Now Exxon-Mobil] did to the public transit industry. And a lot of car owners will be unhappy. They can suck it up or move up north.

 

My ideas are going to upset many car owners because I feel a city like this has no need or benefits from catering to car drivers over residents who can't even afford one. If I had it my way there'd be a No-Smoking Zone on 2nd Avenue.

 

I'd convert 5th Avenue and Madison Avenue into commercial vehicle only expressways at 45 MPH(so shipments can be safely and easily transported to local businesses). NO PED XINGS, ONLY OVERPASSES. One column for a portable pulley so wheelchair users can mount to and manually escalate up stairs.

 

I'd support creating a LIE-style HOV lane on FDR & Riverside Drive, ban parking on 4th Avenue in Kings and draw the B37 there instead. The B70 would be absorbed by the B63. The Triboro rail would become the train.

 

Many projects are stalled because of procrastination. The MTA, NYCDOT and NYSDOT need to stop pointing fingers and start listening to residents instead of relying on wasteful studies

 

Sent from my m8 using Tapatalk

And find a way to pass congestion pricing.  Either do that or look at other ways to curb driving.  Gas is cheap, so of course everyone is looking to jump in their cars, and you really can't blame them.  Buses are not convenient, not just in terms of slow speeds, but the overall comfort.  I rarely use local buses.  I would rather walk 20 minutes than take a local bus, and often times do just that because I can out walk the bus, and sadly even when I would like to take a bus to avoid walking more, there usually isn't one in sight on lines that should be fairly frequent.  Here and there when I have time to blow, I'll take the bus just to see what it's like.  Last Saturday it took me a good 30 minutes to go from 57th and 7th over to 42nd and 5th.  I could've taken the subway, but I didn't feel like doing that.  A trip that the M104 could've done in half the time perhaps, but isn't possible since it now ends at Times Square, which necessitates two buses.  A perfect example of a line that many people have fought vigorously (myself included) to have fully restored to the UN, and yet refuses to look consider, but this a "public" agency who is supposed to have the public's interest at heart...

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

And find a way to pass congestion pricing. Either do that or look at other ways to curb driving. Gas is cheap, so of course everyone is looking to jump in their cars, and you really can't blame them. Buses are not convenient, not just in terms of slow speeds, but the overall comfort. I rarely use local buses. I would rather walk 20 minutes than take a local bus, and often times do just that because I can out walk the bus, and sadly even when I would like to take a bus to avoid walking more, there usually isn't one in sight on lines that should be fairly frequent. Here and there when I have time to blow, I'll take the bus just to see what it's like. Last Saturday it took me a good 30 minutes to go from 57th and 7th over to 42nd and 5th. I could've taken the subway, but I didn't feel like doing that. A trip that the M104 could've done in half the time perhaps, but isn't possible since it now ends at Times Square, which necessitates two buses. A perfect example of a line that many people have fought vigorously (myself included) to have fully restored to the UN, and yet refuses to look consider, but this a "public" agency who is supposed to have the public's interest at heart...

Hypocrisy in Action. [emoji19]

 

I think it's time we talked severance. The MTA needs to be dissolved and placed under a Chapter 7 reorganization. Its debt ceiling needs to be invalidated and it's assets freezed. And EasyPay must be mandated and TVMs removed from stations one by one. [emoji389]

 

 

I don't think the MTA is socially or economically responsible to the residents of NYC, especially Queens and Brooklyn, where public transit HAS NOT kept pace with those borough's growing population. Fare increases only make public transit less attractive.

 

We need to have a serious conversation about the MTA's regional impact and image. We're all the joke of third world countries now and I feel like laughing too (while shedding tears as well). Biden was right. We shouldn't take him personally, we should take action. [emoji113]

 

Sent from my m8 using Tapatalk

[RailRunRob]

There's a lot actually.  They have yet to use signal priority on ANY of their buses, yet they're ordering HUNDREDS of new buses and prioritize Wi-Fi and USB ports over moving people quicker.  Mind you signal priority was supposed to happen YEARS ago.  They've drastically decreased service over the years, literally forcing people to take Uber, the subway or other options at times because there aren't other alternatives, and while they faced financial constraints in years past, now that they're doing better financially, they haven't gone nearly far enough at trying to restore a lot of the routes that were eliminated to attract old riders or new ones.  

 

They've been given bus lanes for some SBS lines, but don't seem to be working enough with the NYPD to ensure that enforcement is consistent and on-going to keep buses moving.  They have stated on numerous occasions that they essentially can't do anything to improve bus service or speed up buses, yet on the same hand, they talk about how they are studying this and that.  In short, they aren't going to do more than the bare minimum until political pressure forces their hand to do more and that's really pathetic because the is here to encourage people to leave their cars at home, and overall, up and down the system, people have less and less faith in it, be it the buses, trains, commuter rails... A system that is far too archaic to say the least, and we as a city have to demand more from them.  Our economy and future depends on a transit system that does more than just move people, but does so efficiently.

 

Let me ask you... Why is that you hardly ever use buses?  Be honest.  When you aren't using the subway, how do you get around and why?

I don't know all data on the service cuts besides what I saw in 2010 so ill give you that. They should definitely be held accountable for any reductions. TSP  (Traffic Signal Priority) however, I do know about more about. That I could understand would take some time to roll out, The MTA isn't in full control there from I understand the DOT also plays a big part. Tons of moving parts I can think of four right off.

 

 

A: Bus has to be connected.

AGPS with LTE/Wifi onboard  

 

B:  MTA Bus Server

 

C:  DOT Server

 

D: Then Traffic light controller.

 

 

All these systems have to be installed and tested jointly MTA/DOT.

It also has to be taken into account that the MTA's bus network is running on another agencies infrastructure  Subway yes the MTA owns that. Roads and traffic is a another variable altogether. Just from I see on the B48 my home route traffic and double parked cars up and down Frankin and Classon my street how can the MTA  be held fully accountable for that? That I don't understand. Street grids and geography play a major in bus service both in planning and service. In some cases, this can't be helped you plan for the worst and hope for the best.

Wouldn't we be pushing for better interagency cooperation more than anything? That seems to be the biggest issue.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I don't know all data on the service cuts besides what I saw in 2010 so ill give you that. They should definitely be held accountable for any reductions. TSP  (Traffic Signal Priority) however, I do know about more about. That I could understand would take some time to roll out, The MTA isn't in full control there from I understand the DOT also plays a big part. Tons of moving parts I can think of four right off.

 

 

A: Bus has to be connected.

AGPS with LTE/Wifi onboard  

 

B:  MTA Bus Server

 

C:  DOT Server

 

D: Then Traffic light controller.

 

 

All these systems have to be installed and tested jointly MTA/DOT.

It also has to be taken into account that the MTA's bus network is running on another agencies infrastructure  Subway yes the MTA owns that. Roads and traffic is a another variable altogether. Just from I see on the B48 my home route traffic and double parked cars up and down Frankin and Classon my street how can the MTA  be held fully accountable for that? That I don't understand. Street grids and geography play a major in bus service both in planning and service. In some cases, this can't be helped you plan for the worst and hope for the best.

Wouldn't we be pushing for better interagency cooperation more than anything? That seems to be the biggest issue.

You didn't answer my question as why you don't use buses, and what you rely on when you don't take the subway....

 

 

-------

Here's a more detailed report on what elected officials around the city had to say about bus service:

 

http://transitcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Turnaround-Bus-Campaign-Launch-Press-Release-7_20_16.pdf

Hypocrisy in Action. [emoji19]

 

I think it's time we talked severance. The MTA needs to be dissolved and placed under a Chapter 7 reorganization. Its debt ceiling needs to be invalidated and it's assets freezed. And EasyPay must be mandated and TVMs removed from stations one by one. [emoji389]

 

 

I don't think the MTA is socially or economically responsible to the residents of NYC, especially Queens and Brooklyn, where public transit HAS NOT kept pace with those borough's growing population. Fare increases only make public transit less attractive.

 

We need to have a serious conversation about the MTA's regional impact and image. We're all the joke of third world countries now and I feel like laughing too (while shedding tears as well). Biden was right. We shouldn't take him personally, we should take action. [emoji113]

 

Sent from my m8 using Tapatalk

I absolutely agree.  If the doesn't want to run bus service, perhaps someone else should who is serious about actually providing true service to all of New York City and not just cost cutters looking at what to cut and move elsewhere instead of looking to address why ridership is declining on numerous lines.

[Cait Sith]

There's a lot actually.  They have yet to use signal priority on ANY of their buses, yet they're ordering HUNDREDS of new buses and prioritize Wi-Fi and USB ports over moving people quicker.  Mind you signal priority was supposed to happen YEARS ago.  They've drastically decreased service over the years, literally forcing people to take Uber, the subway or other options at times because there aren't other alternatives, and while they faced financial constraints in years past, now that they're doing better financially, they haven't gone nearly far enough at trying to restore a lot of the routes that were eliminated to attract old riders or new ones. 

 

What we have isn't true signal priority.

 

Staten Island's local fleet and the older SBS fleet has had the technology for a few years now, as it extends the yellow light longer for buses to pass. Their definition of signal priority is skewed.

 

True signal priority would give buses their own signal to go on the traffic light. Cities such as Ottawa & Seattle have this type of technology in different ways.

[RailRunRob]

And find a way to pass congestion pricing.  Either do that or look at other ways to curb driving.  Gas is cheap, so of course everyone is looking to jump in their cars, and you really can't blame them.  Buses are not convenient, not just in terms of slow speeds, but the overall comfort.  I rarely use local buses.  I would rather walk 20 minutes than take a local bus, and often times do just that because I can out walk the bus, and sadly even when I would like to take a bus to avoid walking more, there usually isn't one in sight on lines that should be fairly frequent.  Here and there when I have time to blow, I'll take the bus just to see what it's like.  Last Saturday it took me a good 30 minutes to go from 57th and 7th over to 42nd and 5th.  I could've taken the subway, but I didn't feel like doing that.  A trip that the M104 could've done in half the time perhaps, but isn't possible since it now ends at Times Square, which necessitates two buses.  A perfect example of a line that many people have fought vigorously (myself included) to have fully restored to the UN, and yet refuses to look consider, but this a "public" agency who is supposed to have the public's interest at heart...

I could understand that complaint with the M104. But ill play devils advocate for second. From a purely planning and fluid dynamic aspect.

 

Factors

 

• What was the M104's ridership east of TS?
• What's the coverage of Midtown/Midtown East? Subway,Other bus routes?
• What's the Avg speed across 42nd street? 
• Does the short turn improve the reliability of the line? Avoid's snag points.  fewer buses? Energy savings?

(ie Bx41 southern end)

 

I guess the question for me is did the MTA drop the ball on any of these points? If so which?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What we have isn't true signal priority.

 

Staten Island's local fleet and the older SBS fleet has had the technology for a few years now, as it extends the yellow light longer for buses to pass. Their definition of signal priority is skewed.

 

True signal priority would give buses their own signal to go on the traffic light. Cities such as Ottawa & Seattle have this type of technology in different ways.

That's precisely what I was thinking about and if my memory serves me correctly, I thought Staten Island was to supposed to get that technology years ago (not what they have but what I put in bold above)? I heard about it and then it seemed to have faded away.  What amazes me is how far behind the is with bus service ideas.  I mean there are some things that they are implementing now that existed in places I visited in Italy such as Bologna as early as 2004... Smaller bus systems but still... You're talking about a country that is one of most disorganized around in so many areas, and yet they had certain things in place that we're just getting. 

[RailRunRob]

You didn't answer my question as why you don't use buses, and what you rely on when you don't take the subway....

 

 

-------

Here's a more detailed report on what elected officials around the city had to say about bus service:

 

http://transitcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Turnaround-Bus-Campaign-Launch-Press-Release-7_20_16.pdf

I absolutely agree.  If the doesn't want to run bus service, perhaps someone else should who is serious about actually providing true service to all of New York City and not just cost cutters looking at what to cut and move elsewhere instead of looking to address why ridership is declining on numerous lines.

I don't use buses because I mainly travel interborough and have a subway around the corner from my home. The bus system doesn't serve my travel patterns currently not that I don't want to use it. I also have mostly what I need in the area. Washington/Flatbush and Franklin Aves My question was more how much can you hold the MTA accountable for things out of their control? I just gave you two points. Then I asked what you think they could do to improve service. Minus the DOT issues?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I could understand that complaint with the M104. But ill play devils advocate for second. From a purely planning and fluid dynamic aspect.

 

Factors

 

• What was the M104's ridership east of TS?
• What's the coverage of Midtown/Midtown East? Subway,Other bus routes?
• What's the Avg speed across 42nd street? 
• Does the short turn improve the reliability of the line? Avoid's snag points.  fewer buses? Energy savings?

(ie Bx41 southern end)

 

I guess the question for me is did the MTA drop the ball on any of these points? If so which?

The cutting back of the M104 was justified by the by saying (among other things) that the M42 could provide the same service, when in reality it can't and doesn't.  What they wanted to do was truncate the route to save money and force people onto the M42 despite people preferring the M104.  The question is why did people (myself included) prefer the M104? First, it came more frequently than the M42, and it took you to and from from the Columbus Circle and the Upper West Side area to points East (i.e. Grand Central) without having to transfer, something the M42 cannot do.  Reliability on the M42 after the service cut was ok at best, and since then, the M42 has really become more an afterthought.  It seems as if service isn't as frequent as it once was once the M104 was cut back, and I have certainly modified my trips as a result, as many others have done.  Now I along with numerous other commuters wrote to elected officials in the areas that the M104 serve, particularly the part that used to serve the UN/Murray Hill area, and the response I got was that the stonewalled all efforts to restore the route.  So you have to say to yourself, here you have a public agency that is supposed to be serving the needs of the public who got signatures and the like asking for a segment of a route to be restored that served thousands of riders annually, and they simply refuse outright to do so.  Why is that?  Now yes, costs have to be looked at no question, but when you have an agency that shuts out public feedback constantly, when the public informs them of what they need, how do expect people to have any sort of confidence in bus service?  The M104 is a prime example of the  basically telling every day riders that they know better what the public needs, even though we're the ones using the service.  This is something that needs to change big time, and BrooklynBus has touched upon it in numerous threads.

 

So many years have gone by that I really don't reflect on how I've changed my travel patterns, but they have changed and not in favor of local bus service. Everything is now planned around walking as much as possible once I reach the city.  Local bus trips generally only occur if I see a  bus coming or really need the local bus or just don't feel like walking and really don't mind a much slower commute with the local bus.  Otherwise I will walk, or sometimes deal with a short subway ride.   All of those short trips that local buses used to get are being eaten away but things like Citibike, Uber, taxis and people walking.  The Citibike and people walking are good things, but more Uber cars and yellow taxis are worsening congestion, which we don't need.

[RailRunRob]

Also just a basic question? What could an official tell you about Urban or Bus route planning? Let alone what it take's to execute and manage. They bearly know the correct questions to ask. To be helpful you have learn what it takes and all parts of the process to hold folks accountable and manage expectations. Am I wrong for thinking that? 

[Around the Horn]

Simply put, transit signal priority and stop consolidation should be requirements.

 

When SEPTA is way ahead of you in this area, something is wrong.

 

 

Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

Manhattan cross towns such as the M23, M34 and M42 should be converted into light rail routes in a central median also.

 

 

Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I don't use buses because I mainly travel interborough and have a subway around the corner from my home. The bus system doesn't serve my travel patterns currently not that I don't want to use it. I also have mostly what I need in the area. Washington/Flatbush and Franklin Aves My question was more how much can you hold the MTA accountable for things out of their control? I just gave you two points. Then I asked what you think they could do to improve service. Minus the DOT issues?

You ask what the can do?  Well the report that I gave a link earlier (that PDF file) lists several things.  For starters more frequent service on certain lines. Let's be honest here.  Do you really think people are going to use a local bus that runs every 30 minutes if they have other alternatives?  Reconfigure routes to the needs of the general public and market the routes with the communities in mind.  A lot of the changes that the are making aren't really being done with the interests of the people in mind, but rather what costs will be and how costs can be cut, and that's a very narrow minded way of operating.  I think a balance needs to be struck on that end.  When they see certain lines declining in ridership, often times their response is to cut service but not really address why people aren't using the route, and when you do that it shows that you don't care about the riders and you don't think that the issues plaguing the route can be fixed, which again goes back to the whole confidence issue I mentioned earlier.  When you push people away to other alternatives, they tend to stick with those if they work.  

 

 

Also just a basic question? What could an official tell you about Urban or Bus route planning? Let alone what it take's to execute and manage. They bearly know the correct questions to ask. To be helpful you have learn what it takes and all parts of the process to hold folks accountable and manage expectations. Am I wrong for thinking that? 

No, you're absolutely right, but let's be honest, politicians don't need to be transit experts.  They're there to assist in pushing certain things through, and the can use them to assist in that process to aid in things that they can't control.  

 

 

Also just a basic question? What could an official tell you about Urban or Bus route planning? Let alone what it take's to execute and manage. They bearly know the correct questions to ask. To be helpful you have learn what it takes and all parts of the process to hold folks accountable and manage expectations. Am I wrong for thinking that? 

No, you're absolutely right, but let's be honest, politicians don't need to be transit experts.  They're there to assist in pushing certain things through, and the can use them to assist in that process to aid in things that they can't control.  

[Cait Sith]

That's precisely what I was thinking about and if my memory serves me correctly, I thought Staten Island was to supposed to get that technology years ago (not what they have but what I put in bold above)? I heard about it and then it seemed to have faded away.  What amazes me is how far behind the is with bus service ideas.  I mean there are some things that they are implementing now that existed in places I visited in Italy such as Bologna as early as 2004... Smaller bus systems but still... You're talking about a country that is one of most disorganized around in so many areas, and yet they had certain things in place that we're just getting. 

 

Nah.....they got the other version of it, where the box interacts with the signals to extend the yellow light.

 

Like I said, their definition of signal priority is skewed.

[RailRunRob]

The cutting back of the M104 was justified by the by saying (among other things) that the M42 could provide the same service, when in reality it can't and doesn't.  What they wanted to do was truncate the route to save money and force people onto the M42 despite people preferring the M104.  The question is why did people (myself included) prefer the M104? First, it came more frequently than the M42, and it took you to and from from the Columbus Circle and the Upper West Side area to points East (i.e. Grand Central) without having to transfer, something the M42 cannot do.  Reliability on the M42 after the service cut was ok at best, and since then, the M42 has really become more an afterthought.  It seems as if service isn't as frequent as it once was once the M104 was cut back, and I have certainly modified my trips as a result, as many others have done.  Now I along with numerous other commuters wrote to elected officials in the areas that the M104 serve, particularly the part that used to serve the UN/Murray Hill area, and the response I got was that the stonewalled all efforts to restore the route.  So you have to say to yourself, here you have a public agency that is supposed to be serving the needs of the public who got signatures and the like asking for a segment of a route to be restored that served thousands of riders annually, and they simply refuse outright to do so.  Why is that?  Now yes, costs have to be looked at no question, but when you have an agency that shuts out public feedback constantly, when the public informs them of what they need, how do expect people to have any sort of confidence in bus service?  The M104 is a prime example of basically telling every day riders that they know better what the public needs, even though we're the ones using the service.  This is something that needs to change big time, and BrooklynBus has touched upon it in numerous threads.

 

So many years have gone by that I really don't reflect on how I've changed my travel patterns, but they have changed and not in favor of local bus service. Everything is now planned around walking as much as possible once I reach the city.  Local bus trips generally only occur if I see a  bus coming or really need the local bus or just don't feel like walking and really don't mind a much slower commute with the local bus.  Otherwise I will walk, or sometimes deal with a short subway ride.   All of those short trips that local buses used to get are being eaten away but things like Citibike, Uber, taxis and people walking.  The Citibike and people walking are good things, but more Uber cars and yellow taxis are worsening congestion, which we don't need.

I get your point with the cars on the road

I guess where I get lost is whether you have faith that smarter people are looking at the whole picture. Like the times that I've gone to the MTA they have some pretty part smart people working for them. Especially in capital construction. Like for anyone planning a route or cutting service. They're using some type of travel matrix so they have a full picture of who rides where and how far they're going. I would assume they would have a fuller picture them both you when I. True you have to get rider feedback and pivot so it's important to get that information I have to believe that somebody at the MTA has gone through the variables and the data. There're so many moving parts you have to look at it objectively at this level everyone's gonna look at the world from their perspective in your personal experiences as they should but you have to rely on the data and you have to be able to be able to pivot.  I can look at your example and logically think there's a pretty good coverage you have the M42 The full length of the Avenue and from 3rd to 8th and The shuttle from Lexington to Seventh. That's the majority of the lost route shy of the extreme east side and that's the area I would focus on they would've had to before  a cut service. And if you felt like this was done unjustly you should focus on that and let them present the data has that been done?  I deal with engineering analytics and statistics every single day all based on first principles and logic so maybe I am biased in that way and I submit to the fact that maybe I could be missing something. Sometimes it sounds like personal rants so I'm naturally inclined to ask questions. I'm OK with learning something new. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

 

I get your point with the cars on the road

I guess where I get lost is whether you have faith that smarter people are looking at the whole picture. Like the times that I've gone to the MTA they have some pretty part smart people working for them. Especially in capital construction. Like for anyone planning a route or cutting service. They're using some type of travel matrix so they have a full picture of who rides where and how far they're going. I would assume they would have a fuller picture them both you when I. True you have to get rider feedback and pivot so it's important to get that information I have to believe that somebody at the MTA has gone through the variables and the data. There're so many moving parts you have to look at it objectively at this level everyone's gonna look at the world from their perspective in your personal experiences as they should but you have to rely on the data and you have to be able to be able to pivot.  I can look at your example and logically think there's a pretty good coverage you have the M42 The full length of the Avenue and from 3rd to 8th and The shuttle from Lexington to Seventh. That's the majority of the lost route shy of the extreme east side and that's the area I would focus on they would've had to before  a cut service. And if you felt like this was done unjustly you should focus on that and let them present the data has that been done?  I deal with engineering analytics and statistics every single day all based on first principles and logic so maybe I am biased in that way and I submit to the fact that maybe I could be missing something. Sometimes it sounds like personal rants so I'm naturally inclined to ask questions. I'm OK with learning something new. 

 

The question I have is if the claims they're doing this and that, they should be able to be transparent and show exactly what they're doing and what input the public had in it to ensure that routes are being used to the max where possible.  I don't care about some guy and his degrees...  Some guy in planning who may not even use a local bus has more insight about what the actual riders need?  Really?  I'm not sure I agree with that, and it comes off as rather arrogant to say the least.   I have seen first hand exactly how operations work in the offices.  As BrooklynBus said, everyone has their position and they are to stay within that role and not cross over into anything further or question anything.  This attitude also extends to the public when they question the about cuts or route changes.  You conveniently glossed over the point I made about making commutes more inconvenient and looked at things from a coverage standpoint of oh well there's the subway and there's this bus.  That still has nothing to do with dealing with a commuter who now has to take two buses or perhaps take a subway ride that used to take the bus, and the point of the thread was why ridership is declining and how it can be fixed.  Pointing out alternatives that riders don't find convenient don't exactly do that. lol

 

They presented the data very clearly and used every excuse in the book as to why they (a public agency who is supposed to be serving the public) couldn't accommodate the public when there was a strong request for the M104 to be restored.  Alternatives aside, it's an example of how they work to be dismissive rather than trying to find a way to say let's see if we can restore this service in a cost efficient manner because clearly people are asking for it for a reason rather than trying to force "alternatives" down their throat.

[RailRunRob]

You ask what the can do?  Well the report that I gave a link earlier (that PDF file) lists several things.  For starters more frequent service on certain lines. Let's be honest here.  Do you really think people are going to use a local bus that runs every 30 minutes if they have other alternatives?  Reconfigure routes to the needs of the general public and market the routes with the communities in mind.  A lot of the changes that the are making aren't really being done with the interests of the people in mind, but rather what costs will be and how costs can be cut, and that's a very narrow minded way of operating.  I think a balance needs to be struck on that end.  When they see certain lines declining in ridership, often times their response is to cut service but not really address why people aren't using the route, and when you do that it shows that you don't care about the riders and you don't think that the issues plaguing the route can be fixed, which again goes back to the whole confidence issue I mentioned earlier.  When you push people away to other alternatives, they tend to stick with those if they work.  

 

Some of the things on the list are in the works. No?

 

Rerouting based on current patterns is a definite good suggestion 

 

Transforming how we get off and on.

Getting there with SBS service what they learn there could be rolled out to other lines. 

 

Adopt better methods to keep buses on schedule?

Infrastructure is there. If I can track buses on a app like transit I know the MTA is working on it.

 

Design Streets to prioritize buses

 

DOT has a big hand in this as well.

 

Make using the bus easy and intuitive

 

This is already being rolled out. SBS countdown information can be rolled out to hubs next think Jamaica, Flushing or Downtown Brooklyn

onboard announcements are on the way new RF Payment system would help with this as well. London's Oyster tech could be used.

 

Besides reroutes a lot of these points are on their way,being rolled out or in practice.

 

No?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Some of the things on the list are in the works. No?

 

Rerouting based on current patterns is a definite good suggestion 

 

Transforming how we get off and on.

Getting there with SBS service what they learn there could be rolled out to other lines. 

 

Adopt better methods to keep buses on schedule?

Infrastructure is there. If I can track buses on a app like transit I know the MTA is working on it.

 

Design Streets to prioritize buses

 

DOT has a big hand in this as well.

 

Make using the bus easy and intuitive

 

This is already being rolled out. SBS countdown information can be rolled out to hubs next think Jamaica, Flushing or Downtown Brooklyn

onboard announcements are on the way new RF Payment system would help with this as well. London's Oyster tech could be used.

 

Besides reroutes a lot of these points are on their way,being rolled out or in practice.

 

No?

Yes and no.  

 

Keeping buses on schedule is the biggest one.  I would like to see more dispatchers out in the field at random (not planned) to keep B/Os on their toes.  More and more is being done from Central Command. What they do is station a dispatcher out at a particular stop (whenever they do) and all of the B/Os know that dispatch will be there, so then they all come late to ensure that they aren't early. I don't exactly call that an effective method to keep buses on time at all, and if anything, it makes things worse since they may never get back on schedule.  It's quite outdated to say the least.

 

SBS could still be further improved and the could be more transparent about how effective SBS has been, and ask the public for more input, which they really haven't done.  They've held meetings just to have them, and then proceeded as they wish.

 

Other changes that are needed will really require the to work with elected officials, and so far I don't see that happening.  Any time you have a spokesperson like Kevin Ortiz who constantly says yeah well we're doing this and we're doing that, and yet bus service isn't improving, it shows a very dismissive attitude that we know everything and you don't, and clearly they don't because ridership continues to decline, so what does that say about the 's know-how?