Jump to content

Via Garibaldi 8

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    37,005
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    143

Everything posted by Via Garibaldi 8

  1. Re-read what I wrote... At one point they did lease it.
  2. It makes perfect sense. You seem to forget that sometimes things change hands many times. Some of the private bus companies were struggling to make it. The easiest solution was to consolidate them and take over the bus lines, which is exactly what happened. It was cheaper for NYC (yes NYC) from a cost standpoint. With the exception of one bus line, all of the other buses out of Yonkers Depot serve only NYC. We're now in 2023. The consolidation happened over ten years ago when the city of Yonkers wasn't as interested as they have been lately in revitalizing the waterfront. Now that they have lured a number of new businesses in and invested to revitalize the area, that land has become quite expensive and they want it, as it would generate tax revenue, jobs, etc. for Yonkers. The will sit on it until they get exactly what they want. Yonkers at the moment does not want to provide funding to a new depot, as they know that would not be cheap. It is in the interest of the and NYC to continue the agreement in place, esp. since NYC pays no property taxes. Looking at the railroads, many of them failed due to declining ridership and we've seen a ton of consolidation over the years as a result. None of what has happened should be a surprise to you. Some of these private operators were heavily subsidized to keep afloat, but the subsidies don't last forever and when they run out, many have been unable to continue.
  3. Sometimes sweetheart deals are involved where the takes over or is given things for very cheap. One example is Yonkers Depot. The land the depot sits on is owned by NYC and leased to the . NYC pays ZERO property taxes on what is now prime waterfront real estate. lol Yonkers wants the land, but the won't give it up unless they get a brand new depot out the deal at a minimum. With this situation, it looks like Metro-North leased the Port Jervis line from Norfolk Southern Railway, with the option to buy it outright almost twenty years ago. Assuming they exercised that option, I'm sure it's worth a lot more now since they've been making upgrades to the line.
  4. ADA accessibility has nothing to do with unbanked people though. ADA just refers to the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires that announcements be made on the bus for deaf, blind and other people with disabilities, among other things. People that are unbanked deals with accessibility to public transit. To say that other transit systems didn't care is a huge assumption. It's more like the percentage of unbanked people is likely low and/or those people have not complained, plus there may be no laws in place that require cash to be accepted. If so, then you go ahead with the plan. However, at least here in NYC, elected officials have absolutely raised concerns about unbanked people not being able to pay with cash in the transit system and the City Council passed legislation requiring cash to be accepted in stores and such. Now the percentage of such riders is supposedly small. As I said, I don't know what the percentage is for NJTransit, but either way, whatever plan is rolled out must have accessibility in mind so that everyone that wants to use the system can do so. I should point out that the 's OMNY system does allow people to pay with cash at an array of stores to load or reload a card, which has quashed the concerns raised about public transit being accessible to unbanked people. NJTransit needs to have a similar program. Once they do, they should absolutely be able to eliminate cash.
  5. Yeah, by buying it, they'd have to suddenly find millions of dollars for service operations and for the capital projects and general maintenance.
  6. I don't disagree that they should move on from money transactions because it does slow down service. I do use NJ Transit (commuter trains or the express buses) to commute to our NJ offices from the City here and there when I'm not working at home, and I always pay electronically, as it is more convenient. However, I am certain that if NJTransit does not come up with something that addresses the population of riders that are unbanked, there will be an outcry and rightfully so. I have to attend NJTransit public meetings sometimes for work and one the biggest complaints I hear from riders is that NJTransit is tone deaf to the needs of its customers. That said, they absolutely need to revamp the system so that it speeds things up for the drivers, but doesn't make it more difficult for that population of people that still use cash. I have no idea what percentage of those people take NJTransit, but it wouldn't shock me if it was similar to what the sees. They must have data on it though because they do that sort of research to make sure they're covering everyone that needs to take the service. I can tell you that part of the issue with these new fare rollouts even with the has been programming. I was speaking with them today about OMNY (pretty sure NJTransit is looking to implement something similar to keep the systems connected if you will) and I was complaining about the delays and the lack of fare rollouts. It's been slow-going and that's putting it mildly.
  7. May not be an online petition. Yeah I was surprised also, but at the same time, I went to IS43. We had lots of kids that came from Sea Gate and Coney Island, so they most definitely use the buses in Sheepshead Bay, Manhattan Beach and Brighton Beach. Also lots of Russians in Sea Gate but also Coney Island and they definitely still go to Brighton Beach for shopping, etc.
  8. That makes a lot of sense... Not. You would likely be negatively impacting the people that depend most on the service, especially people that are unbanked and use cash.
  9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Jervis_Line Not that long ago, Metro-North threatened to eliminate all service unless it received more funding, which would've been a serious blow to residents that use the service. For years there has been a push to extend the rail service, but Metro-North has resisted. This is one reason that elected officials in that area are vehemently opposed to congestion pricing because they argue that they already have limited transit options as it is and some of their residents have no choice but to drive into Manhattan. Others that aren't near any West of Hudson service drive into Westchester and take either the Hudson Line or the Harlem line.
  10. I attended a CB meeting tonight and people in Sea Gate, Coney Island, Gravesend, etc. were very pissed about the B49 and B68, along with the express buses (X28 & X38). Supposedly there is a petition already circulating to keep the B49 and B68 as is. The B49 because KCC and the B68 because of lost access to Brighton Beach. Thanks to @BrooklynBus for attending as well.
  11. I would take this as people not caring about practical reasons and simply thinking about some rail fantasy route. That's my guess. As a commuter, my perspective is different. Buses are practical for a host of reasons, but I agree with you. Even if there was a subway extension, there would still be a need for a bus. People take buses for a host of reasons. Shopping, ability to walk to and from with shorter walks, not to mention that sometimes taking the subway involves a ton of backtracking. The subway is only practical for long distances or in cases where it is right there. If you have to do a decent amount of walking to reach it, then back track once you get off, it may not be all that practical.
  12. Here are the Special Schedules for tomorrow. I didn't get the link for this until yesterday... Better late than never... https://new.mta.info/schedules/bus They forgot to add the SIM4C, but I believe the other express bus lines should be there.
  13. Sounds like he is really trying to focus on people that use their transfer for round trips.... So what if they do? A free transfer is a free transfer and how it is used should be up to the customer.
  14. Realistic about what? You clearly aren't seeing the big picture. What you're proposing would likely push people out of the transit system and into their cars thereby meaning more vehicular congestion. There are some people that use public transit by choice because it is cheap (compared to driving). Tolls wouldn't be decreased. Tolls and fees don't just go to the . They are used to pay for things you use... Bridges, street maintenance, etc., and the more people that drive, the more upkeep of those things is needed.
  15. But you benefitted from a reduced fare Metrocard which is the point, yet you've forgotten that you benefitted from one because you drive now, so now you're proposing to screw over the most vulnerable riders because you drive and pay tolls. You come off as very selfish. Well I primarily use taxis in Manhattan and pay a congestion fee to do so every time to the if it's below 96th St. I guess I should be bitter about it and demand that someone else pay instead when I can comfortably afford to do so. I absolutely agree that the should get its fiscal house in order and crackdown on fare beating, but that is because those that do pay to use public transit wind up coughing up more and everyone that uses the system should pay their fair share.
  16. Oh please... Very few people ask for paper transfers these days and the ones that do are usually seniors or such that may not be able to afford the fare as it is. Anyone using OMNY gets at least one free transfer (some trips allow for two transfers because some people live in what are two-fare zones) which they can use as they see fit. Why? So that they use the system, otherwise you're discouraging usage. There are trips that are what can be called "optional" trips that people take because it is cheap or it provides a free transfer. You take those away and you are only hurting mainly low-income people that totally depend on such transfers. Local bus riders generally speaking are low-income, though there are of course exceptions to the rule. Express bus riders do not transfer between buses all that often and even if they did, they are generally upper income (as in middle to upper middle), so they generally speaking could afford such a change.
  17. The BxM1 doesn't stop anywhere on Park Av. The first stop is Lex & 96th and Northbound it runs via 3rd Av. I agree though... There are many trips where people get a free transfer currently that encourage people to use the system. I can think of subway to local bus trips on one fare that people do for example because they are on limited incomes. Either way it's a stupid idea. Neither of the lines you mentioned stop at 125th though (not even close), so that's a terrible example. You're making up random **** just because. The BxM1 stops at 96th & Lex Southbound & the BxM2 stops at 98th & Madison Northbound. What you're saying is you want to make it more expensive for people who use public transportation. Maybe they shouldn't allow people like yourself to have a reduced fare card then. You should pay the full fare. You do realize that you benefit greatly from receiving a heavily reduced fare.
  18. I got the impression that this was one of Cuomo's pet projects. He's no longer in office and the cost cannot be justified to keep it, so it's gone from all buses. Sometimes the does things based on who is in office. When he was in office, he wanted Wi-Fi on the buses and therefore he got Wi-Fi on all buses. Now, given the ridership situation perhaps if people protest enough they'll consider bringing it back, but it's gone for now. Personally even with the people that are upset about losing it, there's really no time to even protest because I only heard about it earlier in the week.
  19. Should've been cut already but today is supposedly the last day from what I was told.
  20. RE: Wi-Fi, I spoke to the today... Wi-Fi was actually supposed to be pulled earlier this week on ALL buses (local & express). I was told that it will be pulled TOMORROW (Saturday). This decision was made due to very low usage and while I argued that there should've been more notice, this is where we are. I was encouraged to have people provide formal feedback with the via the feedback link below: https://contact.mta.info/s/customer-feedback I may start a petition later on.
  21. It sounds great, but for someone that alternates between the MNRR and the express bus, I still don't use it that much just because there is no transfer included for CityTicket and there are too many restrictions aside from the limited places the MNRR goes. I'm sure it won't be $5.00 during peak periods either. If I'm doing a quick errand in the City, I can get by on $6.75 taking one express bus in and transferring to another to get back home.
  22. Why does that matter? Sure, he ran on the "law & order" campaign, but he also presented himself as a "Progressive" (these days, everyone is supposedly a "Progressive"). Regardless, much of what he wants to do requires changes to certain laws at the State level, which is why he went to Albany earlier on in his term. The cops can arrest all they want. The Manhattan DA has already said that he is NOT prosecuting what he considers low level offenses or non-violent crimes such as farebeating. That doesn't leave the cops in a position of power. I'm not sure why there's a disconnect, but a number of people seem to blame the police for things that are out of their control. As far as I'm concerned, when you don't prosecute low level offenses, you open the door to much more egregious ones. There was a stat out recently (I forget from where), but it noted that a chunk of the low level offenses are being done by serial repeat offenders who are involved in much more violent crimes and these are the types of individuals going around doing things like this guy, so as far as I'm concerned, NY State has opened the door to a lot of the issues we're seeing now. Adams may be a "law & order" Mayor, but a number of his colleagues both at the City & State level have been quite resistant to making some of the changes that are needed, including Governor Hochul. She claims she's open to more "tweaks" to the package of laws that were modified recently that included changes to bail reform, but clearly they didn't go far enough. I agree with @NewFlyer 230. The amount of theft (both of goods and services) is a huge indicator of what is wrong with our City and State. This isn't even about progressive vs. conservative. It's just common sense. If someone is repeatedly stealing goods or services, there should be consequences for it because none of this is free. The will get the money it needs, either via the State/City and/or via fare hikes, so someone will always pay for those that aren't, whether it's just or not.
  23. Since I don't have any idea of a specific date that they plan on yanking the Wi-Fi service aside from "mid January", I will follow-up with a phone call in the next few days with my contacts. E-mailed them earlier this morning. As for Wi-Fi on the new express buses, I have heard from that from other riders. Very possible.
  24. I do agree that it's much better in the subway for the reasons you mentioned, but given how limited the Wi-Fi is on the express buses to begin with, the people that use it likely do so because they are on limited plans and will use it so long as they can remain connected. I mean you are not going to do any sort of heavy internet use on the Wi-Fi used on the express buses. Just not possible, so I guess it's for light browsing or doing work that doesn't require heavy internet use.
  25. For people that have limited cell phone plans, apparently it comes in handy. I haven't used it years (only did out of curiosity anyway) since I have a data plan for all of my devices. They should've waited to get feedback first instead of providing a limited window before they yank it. For what it's worth, they appear to plan on keeping Wi-Fi in the subway system, which they should, as you cannot get a signal on some subway platforms, so it would be fair to keep it on the buses as well or scrap the whole thing entirely.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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