Jump to content

BUS - Random Thoughts Thread


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

According to them, the Bx19 has less turnover at any one point compared to the Bx15 (having spoken to some of the planners in-person).

 

5 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

bx15: It doesn't make sense to have the shorter trips run limited while the longer trips run local.

re: the bx19... there's a concrete passenger base that actually rides thru the hub to & from southern blvd & 145 street. it's one of those rare long(er) lines (in my  opinion) that's a true x-town, where people actually use it to go across town into harlem... including the elderly who want nothing to do with climbing the ridiculous steps upstairs to the (2) train/don't want to ride the train in general.

re: the bx15... i was saying this only after doing the 15 local on the extra list over the summer (which isn't a large sample size for the Bx15 corridor overall, I'll admit) but in general, over the years, I've never seen bone dry 15 limiteds heading in & out of Harlem. however, i have seen 15 locals (utilizing artic units) carry air south of Claremont or 169 at any point of the day.

in general, I'm not saying my word letalone anyone else's is the holy word of God so to speak, but both situations could've been/should be handled better than the current level of effort currently presented. the logical conclusion I've come to is that they're absolutely rushing this redesign. and it's really sad, because as someone pointed out, this is a unique opportunity to start with a blank canvas & mold a network based on current conditions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 38.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

M100 serves as a relief along 125 St because usually when someone is traveling up along Amsterdam Av, M101 buses are crushloaded and M100 is the relief because it starts at 2 Av and those buses are empty. They should also put some more artics on the M100 to handle the crowd more those who could get on a Crushloaded M101 bus.

Edited by bwwnyc123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

According to them, the Bx19 has less turnover at any one point compared to the Bx15 (having spoken to some of the planners in-person).

Less turnover: Bx19. I’m not 100% sold on that. I’m gonna need a good explanation on this one. The Bx15 and Bx19 if you ask me have high turnovers and now we are all fighting to see which depot the M125 will end up. 

In my honest opinion: The (MTA) will commit the same mistakes with this re-design plan for The Bronx like they did with Staten Island. (So much for starting off on a clean slate)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bwwnyc123 said:

By splitting up the Bx15 with the new M125 will force everyone to transfer either to another bus or by taking the Subway. Normally the current Bx15 service is a one seat ride and buses are usually crushloaded by riders from 125 St and along The Bronx.

Not only that. I don’t think that The Hub is willing to handle all these additional people hopping on the (2)(5) to get across the river to Manhattan and intra Bronx plus more people will settle with the Bx19 for 145th Street (A)(B)(C)(D)(2)(3) service along 7th and St. Nick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

Less turnover: Bx19. I’m not 100% sold on that. I’m gonna need a good explanation on this one.

I'm not going to attempt to speak for anyone, however, what the general consensus is is that the bx19 doesn't necessarily empty out at one point, then reload. for example, longer routes (like the b6 or m101) one can clearly identify 2 or more passenger pockets aka concentrated service areas where at certain timepoints buses empty out, then carry air (turnover area) until they hit another passenger pocket. some would argue that lines that fit this criteria would be better served as shorter routes that focus headways that would be case specific to these concentrated areas, as opposed to a headway that may be beneficial to certain areas and be completely useless in others. hence, the argument for splitting lines like the Bx15 & bx19. i don't agree with splitting the 19 at all, and i can't name one spot on that line where there's runs carrying air, even at night. sorry to say, but the 19 based soley on wheelchair customers & the elderly, shouldn't be touched in a splitting fashion. 

Edited by EastFlatbushLarry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Not only that. I don’t think that The Hub is willing to handle all these additional people hopping on the (2)(5) to get across the river to Manhattan and intra Bronx plus more people will settle with the Bx19 for 145th Street (A)(B)(C)(D)(2)(3) service along 7th and St. Nick. 

amen. the area was already very dense as is, especially with DOT's street redesign. there's not much room in the way of layover spacing

Edited by EastFlatbushLarry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I would definitely prefer Yankee Stadium.

But I threw The Hub out as an alternative terminal just in case. 

An extension to Yankee Stadium would take (a small amount) of pressure off the Bx6 and would allow them to reduce service on that line slightly while still providing service to where the passengers need to go.

And just like on Staten Island with the Hylan Blvd express routes, they're shooting themselves in the foot by being this stubborn.

I’m glad we’re on the same page with the Bx46. Definitely would be a nice to extend to The Stadium and (B)(D)(4) for Manhattan and Intra-Bronx West Side service. 

Since the Bx6 is getting a small extension to Soundview there needs to be some balance on the line and the Bx46 would provide that. The hub to me is too congested and plus you have the Bx2, Bx4, Bx4A, Bx15, Bx19, Bx21 all within reach of The Hub. 

For the last part: The (MTA) is really at fault for not listening enough to the concerns of riders. How do you expect transparency if you (MTA) not being real with the riding public and these mistakes will continue until you listen to the riding public.

(Staten Island Express saga part 2)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, NBTA said:

Ran into a Manhattan Fantasy Map the other day, wonder how you guys will feel about it.

https://sites.google.com/site/midnightrts/home/mta-fantasy-maps

I'll take a swing at this... in one word: laughable. and i'm not saying that to be an a**hole or to seem cooler than the room, but come on! 2 one-directional loop routes thru lower Manhattan that travel across the willy-b to bk? that m41/43/44 mess is some of the most erroneous things I've ever seen. what are these "routes" attempting to accomplish? I'm not saying this as if you can answer my questions, seeing as you didn't take ownership of these, but damn, man. no. just no. 

Edited by EastFlatbushLarry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bwwnyc123 said:

By splitting up the Bx15 with the new M125 will force everyone to transfer either to another bus or by taking the Subway. Normally the current Bx15 service is a one seat ride and buses are usually crushloaded by riders from 125 St and along The Bronx.

4 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Not only that. I don’t think that The Hub is willing to handle all these additional people hopping on the (2)(5) to get across the river to Manhattan and intra Bronx plus more people will settle with the Bx19 for 145th Street (A)(B)(C)(D)(2)(3) service along 7th and St. Nick. 

They're trying to force more people onto the subway, simple as that.... They're not expecting people to choose the bus-to-bus commute over the bus-to-subway commute.

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

Less turnover: Bx19. I’m not 100% sold on that. I’m gonna need a good explanation on this one. The Bx15 and Bx19 if you ask me have high turnovers and now we are all fighting to see which depot the M125 will end up.

He's not saying (they're saying) turnover is low on the Bx19, he's saying it's less than that of the Bx15.... Both routes have high turnover.

While the Bx19 garners more usage than the Bx15 & while more people ride longer distances on the Bx19, there aren't more people xferring off other buses to ride the Bx19, than are disembarking off the Bx19, over that of the Bx15..... That's just transfers.... Then you have to take a look at the amt. of people disembarking buses to the amt. of people boarding them along the route on any given trip, not counting xfers....

Whatever that ratio is, is it undeniably lower than that of the Bx15.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

They're trying to force more people onto the subway, simple as that.... They're not expecting people to choose the bus-to-bus commute over the bus-to-subway commute.

 

... and this is why the (MTA) missed the mark on intra-Bronx service in The South Bronx. It’s not for the fact that The South Bronx is close to Manhattan, but also it’s areas are gentrifying. Putting pressure for additional service The Hub is not the wisest thing.  

After re-reading what I said yesterday with regards with the Bx19. It should be left alone in being split but additional increase of service is needed for reliability of the line. (SBS on the horizons)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I'm not going to attempt to speak for anyone, however, what the general consensus is is that the bx19 doesn't necessarily empty out at one point, then reload. for example, longer routes (like the b6 or m101) one can clearly identify 2 or more passenger pockets aka concentrated service areas where at certain timepoints buses empty out, then carry air (turnover area) until they hit another passenger pocket. some would argue that lines that fit this criteria would be better served as shorter routes that focus headways that would be case specific to these concentrated areas, as opposed to a headway that may be beneficial to certain areas and be completely useless in others. hence, the argument for splitting lines like the Bx15 & bx19. i don't agree with splitting the 19 at all, and i can't name one spot on that line where there's runs carrying air, even at night. sorry to say, but the 19 based soley on wheelchair customers & the elderly, shouldn't be touched in a splitting fashion. 

After re-reading your post and @B35 via Church explanation on splitting the 19. It’s gotta be left alone. You know better than me since your on the road and see it first hand. 

Definitely routes like the B6, M101 and I will throw in the B46 for purposes of this conversation you know when you will get a full load and you know when it’s gonna empty out and pick up again.  There are times late night the 6 is definitely SRO with pickups on the Junction and Utica than empties out in Canarsie with another SRO in Canarsie (L) and empties out on between East 105th and Penn Ave heading to ENY.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

....The (MTA) is really at fault for not listening enough to the concerns of riders. How do you expect transparency if you (MTA) not being real with the riding public and these mistakes will continue until you listen to the riding public.

(Staten Island Express saga part 2)  

Oh, Rest assured, these are not mistakes, fam - this is all intentional....

They're just being underhanded with their motives.

37 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I'll take a swing at this... in one word: laughable. and i'm not saying that to be an a**hole or to seem cooler than the room, but come on! 2 one-directional loop routes thru lower Manhattan that travel across the willy-b to bk? that m41/43/44 mess is some of the most erroneous things I've ever seen. what are these "routes" attempting to accomplish? I'm not saying this as if you can answer my questions, seeing as you didn't take ownership of these, but damn, man. no. just no. 

Save your strength.

33 minutes ago, NBTA said:

Ran into a Manhattan Fantasy Map the other day, wonder how you guys will feel about it.

https://sites.google.com/site/midnightrts/home/mta-fantasy-maps

Dude still pokes his head around on this forum (albeit only in the shoutbox, VERY rarely, and to basically comment about some social or socio-political issue).... His handle on here is @RTS CNG Command

I'm not going to bother surgically ripping apart a 9 year old map that features concepts that would've loomed impractical back then, let alone today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Whatever that ratio is, is it undeniably lower than that of the Bx15

Should read:

"Whatever that ratio is, it is undeniably lower than that of the Bx15"

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

After re-reading your post and @B35 via Church explanation on splitting the 19. It’s gotta be left alone. You know better than me since your on the road and see it first hand. 

Definitely routes like the B6, M101 and I will throw in the B46 for purposes of this conversation you know when you will get a full load and you know when it’s gonna empty out and pick up again.  There are times late night the 6 is definitely SRO with pickups on the Junction and Utica than empties out in Canarsie with another SRO in Canarsie (L) and empties out on between East 105th and Penn Ave heading to ENY.  

Even though there are topographical issues, a 145th st crosstown would fall flat on its face; 145th itself is not the draw that 125th is (for example).... It should come as a shock to no one that there is a shit ton of people riding through the Hub on that route... It also takes riders away from the Bx4/a between [Westchester/Southern] & The Hub.... The Bx4/a terminal at The Hub is somewhat akin to the Q58 terminal in Flushing; it's a hassle to get to where most people are trying to get to within The Hub from that stop.... The Bx19 OTOH puts you off right in the middle of the action (so to speak) - and then some..... Nefarious motives aside, the thing is a long coverage route you can't really do anything with....

I have been on Bx19's from Riverbank that filled up at Amsterdam..... During summer months, buses can get filled up at the park itself.

Yeah, the Bx19 has too many overlapping riderbases & are not as distinguishable like that of those 3 heavily utilized routes you mention.... Routes that run along a subway line, doesn't have to rely on the subway itself as a major ridership gen' (although additional patronage definitely helps :D)..... This is why I get irritated whenever you have people suggesting discontinuing bus routes that parallel subway lines (or, the portion of a route that does).....

Edited by B35 via Church
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Should read:

"Whatever that ratio is, it is undeniably lower than that of the Bx15"

Even though there are topographical issues, a 145th st crosstown would fall flat on its face; 145th itself is not the draw that 125th is (for example).... It should come as a shock to no one that there is a shit ton of people riding through the Hub on that route... It also takes riders away from the Bx4/a between [Westchester/Southern] & The Hub.... The Bx4/a terminal at The Hub is somewhat akin to the Q58 terminal in Flushing; it's a hassle to get to where most people are trying to get to within The Hub from that stop.... The Bx19 OTOH puts you off right in the middle of the action (so to speak) - and then some..... Nefarious motives aside, the thing is a long coverage route you can't really do anything with....

I have been on Bx19's from Riverbank that filled up at Amsterdam..... During summer months, buses can get filled up at the park itself.

Yeah, the Bx19 has too many overlapping riderbases & are not as distinguishable like that of those 3 heavily utilized routes you mention.... Routes that run along a subway line, doesn't have to rely on the subway itself as a major ridership gen' (although additional patronage definitely helps :D)..... This is why I get irritated whenever you have people suggesting discontinuing bus routes that parallel subway lines (or, the portion of a route that does).....

What's your opinion on splitting the M101?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Nefarious motives aside, the thing is a long coverage route you can't really do anything with....

what people need to realize, is that the Bx19 is actually management's prototype for the type of lines they want across the board in every boro, which is a negative perspective to have because this scenario can't be copied & pasted thru the entire network. but, they've been gradually pushing this s**t for awhile now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

what people need to realize, is that the Bx19 is actually management's prototype for the type of lines they want across the board in every boro, which is a negative perspective to have because this scenario can't be copied & pasted thru the entire network. but, they've been gradually pushing this s**t for awhile now. 

Of course it is; It's all about pocketing misusing a dollar (elsewhere) & the buses are always the primary source of siphonage....

I have a bit of a saying/premonition; some on here may know of it - "The future of bus service in this city will be comprised of super-routes & dinky shuttles"

48 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

What's your opinion on splitting the M101?

I would do more than split it.....

I don't want to turn this into a proposal thread, so I'll keep it short & sweet... The M101 should be a branch of the M100 & nothing more.
(the current M100, not the impending neutered M100)

Edited by B35 via Church
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Should read:

"Whatever that ratio is, it is undeniably lower than that of the Bx15"

Even though there are topographical issues, a 145th st crosstown would fall flat on its face; 145th itself is not the draw that 125th is (for example).... It should come as a shock to no one that there is a shit ton of people riding through the Hub on that route... It also takes riders away from the Bx4/a between [Westchester/Southern] & The Hub.... The Bx4/a terminal at The Hub is somewhat akin to the Q58 terminal in Flushing; it's a hassle to get to where most people are trying to get to within The Hub from that stop.... The Bx19 OTOH puts you off right in the middle of the action (so to speak) - and then some..... Nefarious motives aside, the thing is a long coverage route you can't really do anything with....

I have been on Bx19's from Riverbank that filled up at Amsterdam..... During summer months, buses can get filled up at the park itself.

Yeah, the Bx19 has too many overlapping riderbases & are not as distinguishable like that of those 3 heavily utilized routes you mention.... Routes that run along a subway line, doesn't have to rely on the subway itself as a major ridership gen' (although additional patronage definitely helps :D)..... This is why I get irritated whenever you have people suggesting discontinuing bus routes that parallel subway lines (or, the portion of a route that does).....

This reminds me of when the (MTA) wanted to discontinue the Q56 during their financial crisis back in 2009. It would have been such a disaster if it was discontinued. Plus the route becomes more useful when the (J) is either delayed or suspended along Jamaica Ave due to construction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

This reminds me of when the (MTA) wanted to discontinue the Q56 during their financial crisis back in 2009. It would have been such a disaster if it was discontinued. Plus the route becomes more useful when the (J) is either delayed or suspended along Jamaica Ave due to construction. 

That and the B25 was slated in the 2009 cuts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/20/2019 at 10:08 AM, B35 via Church said:

Don't sit up there & tell me that the Bx19 is to be left alone because it's straight, direct, makes lots of important connections, and transports a lot of people (as if we don't know this already) - but yet, sever direct coverage to/from Manhattan, as if the Bx15 doesn't make the same "important" connections to other routes in the Bronx, doesn't carry a lot of people, and doesn't have the same "direct" route structure.... 

I need to be one of these people at the planning table making decisions, not one of these people on my knees begging for mercy for the f*** s*** that's already set in stone (pardon the french)..... I'm on vacation right now, but to me, it's a matter of principle - Three minutes (or however little time they give you) to speak, under the guise that my opinion will make a difference, is a waste of my time, quite honestly.

The thing with the Bx15 is that it makes all those turns running to/from the Third Avenue Bridge (which admittedly could be fixed by working with NYCDOT to put a reverse-direction bus lane along the Willis Avenue Bridge).

I think the main difference between the Bx19 & Bx15 in that regard (aside from the few extra turns on the Bx15) is the fact that on the Bx19, there's no real way to encourage the usage of the subway moreso than the current extent. None of the Bronx subway lines the Bx19 connects with offers service to 145th Street in Manhattan so it's not like the Bx15 where you have riders who will take the subway instead of the M125.

As for these meetings, they give you 2 hours to speak to whichever planners you want (of course you don't have to stay for the full 2 hours)

On 11/20/2019 at 11:44 AM, B35 via Church said:

I agree with your assessment & all 3 of your bullet points..... To #1, my concern is that the M100 will be severely bastardized along Amsterdam av... I know you know this, but for anyone that doesn't know that's reading - Once upon a time, the M101 used to be king along Amsterdam av & the M100 used to be an afterthought along their mutual portions.... I can't pinpoint when it exactly happened (because the phenomenon was gradual), but it got to a point where the M100 was used more interchangeably with the M101 - to the point where you started seeing artics at random junctures on the M100... I remember the posts on RD & subchat; the M100 doesn't deserve artics, are you sure that wasn't an M101, something must have happened with the M101, stop the lies, yada yada yada..... I would even argue a paradigm shift took place; as in, the M100 being the more sought after route along Amsterdam (due to the woes plaguing the M101 further down the route; i.e. 3rd/Lex).... You'd have been lambasted (lol) on the online transit forums if you told someone you saw a bone empty (or close enough to it) SB M101 at some point along 125th say, 20 or so years ago... Now somebody tells me that, and it's like, meh, I'm not surprised - especially if it's a 96th st shorty..... So yeah, this service/network change will have the M101 being the more prominent route of choice again along Amsterdam....

As I've mentioned in the past (and as a CCNY grad who witnessed it myself) the M100 is one of the few Manhattan routes that has seen ridership increases and it isn't because of its own merits, it is because of all the issues on the M101.

13 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

In general, I'm not saying my word letalone anyone else's is the holy word of God so to speak, but both situations could've been/should be handled better than the current level of effort currently presented. the logical conclusion I've come to is that they're absolutely rushing this redesign. and it's really sad, because as someone pointed out, this is a unique opportunity to start with a blank canvas & mold a network based on current conditions. 

I agree. And the little typos and errors in the report indicate that this really was a rush job (not quite as bad as the SIMs but definitely rushed). And if (generally speaking) The Bronx didn't have too many changes, how will they do Queens which is much bigger and is expected to have many more changes?

11 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

In my honest opinion: The (MTA) will commit the same mistakes with this re-design plan for The Bronx like they did with Staten Island. (So much for starting off on a clean slate)

The one thing I like is that the existing conditions report released a lot more data than the Staten Island express one did (which was basically nothing). That, and they released draft schedules in advance so there is time for comments and catching errors. So it won't be as bad (not to say it won't be bad, but it won't be on the same level of disaster as the original SIM system)

9 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

Not only that. I don’t think that The Hub is willing to handle all these additional people hopping on the (2)(5) to get across the river to Manhattan and intra Bronx plus more people will settle with the Bx19 for 145th Street (A)(B)(C)(D)(2)(3) service along 7th and St. Nick. 

I don't think ridership patterns on the Bx19 will change too much as a result of the Bx15 split.

9 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I'm not going to attempt to speak for anyone, however, what the general consensus is is that the bx19 doesn't necessarily empty out at one point, then reload. for example, longer routes (like the b6 or m101) one can clearly identify 2 or more passenger pockets aka concentrated service areas where at certain timepoints buses empty out, then carry air (turnover area) until they hit another passenger pocket. some would argue that lines that fit this criteria would be better served as shorter routes that focus headways that would be case specific to these concentrated areas, as opposed to a headway that may be beneficial to certain areas and be completely useless in others. hence, the argument for splitting lines like the Bx15 & bx19. i don't agree with splitting the 19 at all, and i can't name one spot on that line where there's runs carrying air, even at night. sorry to say, but the 19 based soley on wheelchair customers & the elderly, shouldn't be touched in a splitting fashion. 

On lines like the S74 (which admittedly isn't anywhere as busy as the B6, Bx19, etc) you can often have a crowd of people get off at Richmond Avenue/ETC and an entirely new crowd getting on to replace them. 

9 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

amen. the area was already very dense as is, especially with DOT's street redesign. there's not much room in the way of layover spacing

Would've been nice if they coordinated that with the NYCDOT reps they brought to those meetings (one of which coincidentally is my old college classmate). I guess I'll give it a shot myself lol

9 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

I’m glad we’re on the same page with the Bx46. Definitely would be a nice to extend to The Stadium and (B)(D)(4) for Manhattan and Intra-Bronx West Side service. 

Since the Bx6 is getting a small extension to Soundview there needs to be some balance on the line and the Bx46 would provide that. The hub to me is too congested and plus you have the Bx2, Bx4, Bx4A, Bx15, Bx19, Bx21 all within reach of The Hub. 

For the last part: The (MTA) is really at fault for not listening enough to the concerns of riders. How do you expect transparency if you (MTA) not being real with the riding public and these mistakes will continue until you listen to the riding public.

(Staten Island Express saga part 2)  

I agree, and I didn't even think of it but yeah if some of the 161st/163rd Street buses will have their trips lengthend it makes sense to have some that will have their trips shortened.

As for SI, see my comments above. The mistakes made out here were on a whole new level that I don't think they will ever be quite that stupid to repeat (or at least I hope not lol)

4 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

That and the B25 was slated in the 2009 cuts. 

The "subway-duplicates" they were planning to cut were the Bx4, Q56, B25, B75, and M10. The B75 was split up into the B57 & B61, the M10 was cut from Penn Station to Columbus Circle, the Bx4 had a Bx4A branch created to replace the Bx14, and the B25/Q56 were unchanged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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