Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
EE Broadway Local

BUS - Random Thoughts Thread

Recommended Posts

On 8/7/2020 at 3:29 PM, B35 via Church said:

As a Brooklynite, nobody's going to sway me into taking the (A) to get to the Rockaways over a bus.... Smart man IMO... If I ever need to get to the Rockaways for any reason (if I'm not driving, of course), it's the Q35 or the Q53 for most occasions.... Hell with the (A) & for damn sure, to hell w/ the LIRR... I don't even care that it's situated by the quote-unquote notorious Redfern houses, it's more that it's in the middle of nothing in-particular....

A bit off-topic... Funny you mention the Redfern Houses. I used to work with the youth there when the Police Athletic League had the cornerstone program there. That was some years ago. During the summers we'd take the (A) to get to our trip destinations. A lot of those kids aspired to get out of there someday. I haven't forgotten their faces, even though it's been 4+ years since I last worked over there.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

It was meant to be an either or (so only one of those routes would go there during the overnight). If an M102 extension is less expensive than an M101 extension (i.e, if they can milk the M102 operators just the right amount without needing an extra bus), then that would most likely be considered over the M101 (where an extra bus would likely be needed). The runtime is 35-40 minutes at night on the M102, and 9 minutes is given on the M103 from Cooper Square to City Hall, so it's very likely the M102 would just be chosen solely based on cost. Also, I'm not too sure about this, but based on the arrival and departures time at its northern terminal, it looks like overnight M101 operators take their scheduled break there. If that's the case, you'll need an extra bus, which kinda negates eliminating the M103 overnights.

Yes, an either/or - so the M102 is inclusive, which is why I asked... In other words, I was asking why would the M102 be chosen over the M101 for that purpose....

Funny you mention that in the penultimate statement, because I've actually experienced the opposite on the overnight M101 almost every time I've rode up to Ft. George.... They layover on the Astor end of the route & take virtually no break on the Ft. George end.... Couple of times as I was walking along St. Nich' (as in, before it turns onto 190th to get back to Amsterdam), the b/o would honk his horn at me (I'm guessing, as if to say stay up [stay safe] or whatever).....

One time in particular I remember, albeit a couple of years ago, I was the only person on the bus after we hit 181st/Amsterdam.... She asked where I was getting off.... I (gambled and) said 193rd... She dropped me off at the hill... I got off, and within about a minute or so, she changed the signage & drove off.... Maybe she took a proper/longer layover at 190th/Amsterdam, IDRK.....

-------------------------

Side note: They changed the terminal/layover scenario of the M3 & M101 in Ft. George yet again.... Now they got M3's ending at the park (where the 101 used to) & the M101's ending across the street from the back end of that high school, but laying over at the hill (the SB M3 stop, just short of 193rd).... It's going to come to a point where they're going to discontinue buses running along Amsterdam, north of 190th...

6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The M102 overnight in my opinion is redundant....... All it does is supplement the M103.

The M103 isn't used as much, but is still used somewhat since it is the literal surface version of the (6) in Manhattan.

4 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The M102 isn't really an M103 supplement, and that underestimates the M102 off of 3rd/Lexington Avenues....

IDK, I'll just put it like this... I wouldn't go as far to say that all it does is supplement the M103, but the M102 along Lenox & along 116th doesn't garner too much more usage than the M103 b/w City Hall & Astor overnights either (especially on weekdays)....

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

There was plans to turn the abandoned SIR North Shore branch into a BRT route but IDK what happened with that. I'd rather that corridor become a light rail route than a bus BRT though, since NYC doesn't have a LR route the North Shore line is the best shot of getting one.

TriBoro RX could be one. The thing with the North Shore Line is that the catchment area is limited because it runs so close to the waterfront so a busway would allow bus routes to use it that penetrate the neighborhoods better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Still goofy as f***, but wasn't what I was expecting.... At least the driver wasn't injured & the bus wasn't damaged.

I'm gonna go ahead & say that they need to go on ahead & (formally) open up these clubs.... You have people throwing secret raves over there by the new Kosciuszko bridge, by the Manhattan bridge (co-incidentally, both on the Brooklyn sides of the bridges), now this nonsense.... As an introvert, I can't relate - so I could only imagine how a socialite's social life (and those that are either unemployed or are WFH) is holding up right now.... Repression (which IMO is worse than suppression) would have someone meticulously planning a temporary commandeering of a damn bus to paaaar-taaaaay :(<_<

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Still goofy as f***, but wasn't what I was expecting.... At least the driver wasn't injured & the bus wasn't damaged.

I'm gonna go ahead & say that they need to go on ahead & (formally) open up these clubs.... You have people throwing secret raves over there by the new Kosciuszko bridge, by the Manhattan bridge (co-incidentally, both on the Brooklyn sides of the bridges), now this nonsense.... As an introvert, I can't relate - so I could only imagine how a socialite's social life (and those that are either unemployed or are WFH) is holding up right now.... Repression (which IMO is worse than suppression) would have someone meticulously planning a temporary commandeering of a damn bus to paaaar-taaaaay :(<_<

Imo they just need to throw the book at these a**holes, harder and more often. Opening up the clubs we'd just have cases up the wazoo, and when those a**holes got sick they'd spread it to the rest of us. Cause it's never just the reckless guy who gets sick, it's also his delivery guy, and the B/O who takes up down the block, and the guy at his Chinese place, etc. If it were just consequences for the people who are stupid enough, it'd be a different thing. I believe in speak softly and carry a big stick on this. City doesn't need to make a big scene, we just need to have very hard consequences if you break this, cause it affects all of us. People who refuse to comply with contract tracing even after knowingly spreading covid? $2000-3000 fine. Stuff like this is just gonna make this pain in the ass longer for everybody.

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Imo they just need to throw the book at these a**holes, harder and more often. Opening up the clubs we'd just have cases up the wazoo, and when those a**holes got sick they'd spread it to the rest of us. Cause it's never just the reckless guy who gets sick, it's also his delivery guy, and the B/O who takes up down the block, and the guy at his Chinese place, etc. If it were just consequences for the people who are stupid enough, it'd be a different thing. I believe in speak softly and carry a big stick on this. City doesn't need to make a big scene, we just need to have very hard consequences if you break this, cause it affects all of us. People who refuse to comply with contract tracing even after knowingly spreading covid? $2000-3000 fine. Stuff like this is just gonna make this pain in the ass longer for everybody.

People are holding these underground parties anyway... Engaging in large enough gatherings.... Same goes for eating in/at these makeshift curbside restaurant seating arrangements, being that people can't dine-in.... So my attitude is one of the inevitable as far as that goes.... Everybody is not out here wearing masks, gloves, properly sanitizing, etc... It is what it is with that...

Regardless of anything covid related, these winners should be imprisoned & heavily fined just for pulling that nonsense.... Soon as the reporter said something about blocking off the bus with 2 parked cars or some shit, I thought something serious happened to the driver & someone stole the bus & drove off somewhere - to party on the bus.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I've been on the all three routes overnight, and the only one that actually still has somewhat of a ridership is the M101, but most people that get on just go to the next stop where the subway is available (on 3rd/125th/Lex) or just get off anywhere between 193rd St and 125th St.

 

The M102 overnight in my opinion is redundant, as IIRC it was created as an alternative to when the (3) wasn't running to 148th St. All it does is supplement the M103.

The M103 isn't used as much, but is still used somewhat since it is the literal surface version of the (6) in Manhattan.

I always felt like the Manhattan bus system was a big mess, more so with the N/S routes than the crosstown routes. I feel like there is a lot of redundancy as well as routes covering too much ground. When these routes were being planned I wonder who thought it was a good idea to have long drawn out routes that cover over half the distance of Manhattan itself.  And the fact that very little has been changed with the bus system within the last 30 years shows how much concern the MTA has. I think the MTA has the mentality of “as long as the route works it’s fine” even though the entire bus system needs a “good” redesign to better serve today’s ridership patterns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I always felt like the Manhattan bus system was a big mess, more so with the N/S routes than the crosstown routes. I feel like there is a lot of redundancy as well as routes covering too much ground. When these routes were being planned I wonder who thought it was a good idea to have long drawn out routes that cover over half the distance of Manhattan itself.  And the fact that very little has been changed with the bus system within the last 30 years shows how much concern the MTA has. I think the MTA has the mentality of “as long as the route works it’s fine” even though the entire bus system needs a “good” redesign to better serve today’s ridership patterns. 

To that very first statement, Central Park has a lot to do with it.... Generally speaking, the crosstown routes complement the subway system, whereas the north-south routes do not.... This is one reason why you have routes running from either Harlem and/or Washington Heights, to (at least) Midtown Manhattan due south.... Stubbing/splitting all (or most) of the north-south routes somewhere between Central Park south & Central Park north, simply won't fly for the northern splits of the routes (patronage-wise).... As far as the network goes, what we have now is more or less what you're gonna get with a grid network that has a 2½ mile long by a ½-mile wide land mass situated smack in the middle of the borough - with 2 CBD's on one end of the borough & the other end of the borough being highly residential, on top of it....

As far as the redundancy, that also ties into the fact that the north-south routes doesn't complement the subway... Matter of fact, they tend to mimic subway lines (don't confuse that with supplementation) & the 5th/Madison routes is a good example of it.... Look at how the routes M1-M4 branch out, north of 110th - M1 continues along 5th/Madison, M2 connects Powell to the 5th/Madison trunk, etc... You get the idea.

I wouldn't say it's perfect as is, but I actually don't have that much of a problem with Manhattan's bus network (hell, especially compared to the other boroughs)... The 2 hour long runtimes gotta go - but at the same time, you start truncating too many of those routes & you're pretty much begging for grossly inadequate service levels on each of them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@B35 via Church I'm a bit confused as to how the M1-M4 are good examples of mimicking the subway. I would've thought something more along the lines of how the M7 mimics the (3) train or the M10 mimics the CPW lines.

Edited by checkmatechamp13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church I'm a bit confused as to how the M1-M4 are good examples of mimicking the subway. I would've thought something more along the lines of how the M7 mimics the (3) train or the M10 mimics the CPW lines.

If it helps, replace "mimic" with "act as de facto" in that statement.... In any case, I wasn't trying to convey that the M1-M4 parallels a current subway line on 5th/Madison.

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Manhattan bus network is as old as time. You have to remember it was designed really by the FABCO and other individual operators in the 30s-50s, back when all the avenues were two-way and the 5th Ave buses went right up and down. Generally, if ain't broke, don't fix it – the MTA's efforts to mess with the original network have only made things worse over the years (i.e, ruining the M5, ruining the M1/M6, screwing up the M103, implementing the useless M55, messing up everything near Penn Station, etc.).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

The Manhattan bus network is as old as time. You have to remember it was designed really by the FABCO and other individual operators in the 30s-50s, back when all the avenues were two-way and the 5th Ave buses went right up and down. Generally, if ain't broke, don't fix it – the MTA's efforts to mess with the original network have only made things worse over the years (i.e, ruining the M5, ruining the M1/M6, screwing up the M103, implementing the useless M55, messing up everything near Penn Station, etc.).

In my opinion, the crosstown routes are fine. Its some of the north to south routes that generally make zero sense (like the M55 and M101). 

IIRC, wasn't the M100 running artics last month? If so, whats the point of creating a brand new route instead of just having the M100 operate from 220th St to 149th St/The Hub?

Edited by Lawrence St

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

In my opinion, the crosstown routes are fine. Its some of the north to south routes that generally make zero sense (like the M55 and M101). 

Both good examples fixing what wasn't broke – the M5 went Riverside-Greenwich Village from the 1940s or 1950s through 2010, then came the idiotic South Ferry extension that was doomed to fail, then instead of admitting their mistake they made it a complete waste of a route with the midtown cut-off, and the useless M55 gets to run parallel to the useless M12 uptown! And the M101 was originally a City Hall route, which made pretty decent sense before the 103 was created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

In my opinion, the crosstown routes are fine. Its some of the north to south routes that generally make zero sense (like the M55 and M101). 

IIRC, wasn't the M100 running artics last month? If so, whats the point of creating a brand new route instead of just having the M100 operate from 220th St to 149th St/The Hub?

The M100 was using artic units because KB had many spare units freely available when bus service was severely cut down during the height of the pandemic in the city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:

The M100 was using artic units because KB had many spare units freely available when bus service was severely cut down during the height of the pandemic in the city.

Isnt the Bx15's fleet suppose to be split between the Bx15 and the M125 now? 

The M100 can use those artics as well as additional 40 footers during rush hours.

2 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

Both good examples fixing what wasn't broke – the M5 went Riverside-Greenwich Village from the 1940s or 1950s through 2010, then came the idiotic South Ferry extension that was doomed to fail, then instead of admitting their mistake they made it a complete waste of a route with the midtown cut-off, and the useless M55 gets to run parallel to the useless M12 uptown! And the M101 was originally a City Hall route, which made pretty decent sense before the 103 was created.

The current M101 is a complete joke. Buses run an average of 10-20 minutes late because of how long the route is, along with horrible traffic along 125th St.

And just to show you how these some of these redesigns make no sense, the discontinuation of the Q53-SBS and yet the Q52-SBS gets to stay. How does this help commuters??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

The Manhattan bus network is as old as time. You have to remember it was designed really by the FABCO and other individual operators in the 30s-50s, back when all the avenues were two-way and the 5th Ave buses went right up and down. Generally, if ain't broke, don't fix it – the MTA's efforts to mess with the original network have only made things worse over the years (i.e, ruining the M5, ruining the M1/M6, screwing up the M103, implementing the useless M55, messing up everything near Penn Station, etc.).

Yeah man, the M1 is a straight up afterthought now, south of the East Village.... Too many changes too frequency to the routing past that point... Creates doubt & instability in the minds of riders....

What were/are your thoughts on the M10 & the M104 truncations?

12 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Both good examples fixing what wasn't broke – the M5 went Riverside-Greenwich Village from the 1940s or 1950s through 2010, then came the idiotic South Ferry extension that was doomed to fail, then instead of admitting their mistake they made it a complete waste of a route with the midtown cut-off, and the useless M55 gets to run parallel to the useless M12 uptown! And the M101 was originally a City Hall route, which made pretty decent sense before the 103 was created.

Both [the M5 between South Ferry & GWB] & [the M101 between City Hall & Ft. George] were idiotic... They had to break down that old M101... Now how they went about doing it, is a different story.... The M103 was said to be created to increase reliability along 3rd/Lex, but to me, all it ended up doing was taking away from the M102.... Both the M101 & the M102 didn't have to be cut back to Astor.

Putting this another way, the same way they throw a ton of service on the M101, they could've done the same thing to the M102 & kept that route running to City Hall... Routing-wise, I don't have a problem with the thing (M103), but service-wise/reliability wise, it's a god damn joke... Don't know how many times I've waited for an M103 in Kips Bay/Murray Hill to get to the Bayard stop, to see a sea of M101's & M102's before I get fed up & walk over to 2nd for the M15 to get to Chatham Sq.... Basically, the M103 looks good on paper, but in actuality, runs like garbage.

The way the M6 was phased out was bullshit in & of itself, and its half-ass replacement (M55) is more of the same... The decision to run M5's to South Ferry (upon the M6's demise) the way I see it, was just plain lazy.... Compared to the M6, the M55 is a service cut (frequency-wise) & on top of it, its reach/catchment area was lessened.... They'll never admit that they shit the bed with the M5/M6/M55 ordeal.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

IIRC, wasn't the M100 running artics last month? If so, whats the point of creating a brand new route instead of just having the M100 operate from 220th St to 149th St/The Hub?

They've been sporadically throwing artics on the M100 back since (at least) the early 2010's....

As for that follow up question, realize that this M125 plan also has M100's cut back to Amsterdam/125th.... It's not a matter of fleet as to why they don't/won't have M100's running to The Bronx.... They *say* the creation of it, in part, is to "improve reliability".... Let's take that for face value.... Having Bx15's & M100's terminating at The Hub would defeat the purpose; a bus reaching E. Harlem from Inwood-220th via 125th is incomparable to a bus running between W. Harlem & The Hub...

Also, the current combination (frequency-wise) of M100's & Bx15's along 125th during the rush, is something like a bus every 4 mins..... The M125 proposal has buses running at a clip of about half that frequency <_<.... You'd also leave 125th west of Amsterdam with nothing but a (basically useless) M104 for Harlem/E. Harlem patrons.....

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

The current M101 is a complete joke. Buses run an average of 10-20 minutes late because of how long the route is, along with horrible traffic along 125th St.

Right.... Now imagine if it still went to City Hall.

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@B35 via Church Actually they have the M100 terminating at 125th & Broadway. They (lazily) just posted the final plan as the final plan, but they posted a video on the Bronx redesign page that said that the express bus changes would be postponed, and the M100 would be extended to 125th & Broadway (they were trying to decide between Broadway & St. Nicholas). I went to a CB meeting and everyone (myself included) thought it was stupid to end right at Amsterdam.

The one slight upside is that there would be a connection between the (1) and CCNY. The vast majority of students would of course continue to walk up the hill from 137th but having the option of a bus would be nice.

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Too many changes too frequency to the routing past that point... Creates doubt & instability in the minds of riders....

....should read: "Too many changes too frequently...."

45 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church Actually they have the M100 terminating at 125th & Broadway. They (lazily) just posted the final plan as the final plan, but they posted a video on the Bronx redesign page that said that the express bus changes would be postponed, and the M100 would be extended to 125th & Broadway (they were trying to decide between Broadway & St. Nicholas). I went to a CB meeting and everyone (myself included) thought it was stupid to end right at Amsterdam.

The one slight upside is that there would be a connection between the (1) and CCNY. The vast majority of students would of course continue to walk up the hill from 137th but having the option of a bus would be nice.

So the level of stupidity they decided on, boiled down to a lesser of two evils (ending smack at Amsterdam/125th vs Broadway/125th)...

Sure the (direct) subway connection is better than nothing, but who's supposed to be taking buses from points along Amsterdam, for a purpose of getting to 125th (1)? Nevermind how cumbersome getting to/from platform level at that station, compared to the other stations along the (1).... Given the topographical difference between St. Nich' & Amsterdam, they probably may have been better off neutering the thing where the short turn M3 ends... People along/around Amsterdam would be more likely to walk to Broadway for the subway, over St. Nich.... Matter of fact, the demand for 125th (A)(B)(C)(D) is greater than that for 125th (1)....

For all I care, they can keep this M125 bit... People will still be using M60's & M101's for traveling along & within 125th anyway... Dubbing the route M125 won't deter people from that (which is what I believe they think {or hope} will happen, upon the creation & implementation of this thing)....

 

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@B35 via Church My main complaint was that they refused to consider any changes to the M101 in conjunction with the M100. I said I'm open to the idea (not necessarily in agreement with it, but open to it) of truncating the M100, but you cannot have the M101 be this long, drawn-out, unreliable route from the East Village to Washington Heights and then say "Oh well it is still an alternative for those traveling between 125th Street & Amsterdam Avenue" and "We'll get to it in the Manhattan redesign" (the second one was literally their answer, and when I said that's ridiculous they just nodded blankly...you know that psychotherapist type nod where they pretend they're paying attention but don't give a crap and you can see right through it)

So if they said that they would truncate the M101 to 125th & Lex, and make the M98 the full-time 3rd/Lex limited (or at least do something with the M103 or something until they can do the complete Manhattan redesign) I'd be OK with that. But instead they basically said riders are on their own until the Manhattan redesign.

And another thing about that CB meeting...it was the CB for West Harlem (I think CB6, not sure exactly offhand) and when I tried to bring up ideas for the Bx10 & Bx18 (you know...Bronx routes for this Bronx redesign) the planner cut me off and said that since it's out of the boundaries of that CB we wouldn't be discussing it (even though the CB board members had no problem with it...they just cut me off, said their good-byes and I literally had to chase them into the street where they continued to use the excuse of it being out of the CB boundaries as if I have nothing better to do with my time than chase them around CB meetings). And to top it off, when I brought up that I used to use the M100 as part of my commute to CCNY, she said "Well do you use it now?" as if 5 years of commuting makes my opinion meaningless just because I graduated one year prior...SMH...

I was so angry after that CB meeting that I emailed the planning team (Byford and all those higher-ups). I'm not normally the type of person to make a big complaint that can result in someone getting disciplined, but that was blatantly disrespectful. (I never got a response so I'm not sure what came of it. Most likely she got out of it by saying "It was a misunderstanding" or some nonsense)

Edited by checkmatechamp13
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That moment when a Bx2 becomes a Bx1 midroute after the original Bx1 that pulled up was a 40 footer and the original Bx2 (an artic) was going to short turn.

Holy confusion, Batman.

Edited by paulrivera
  • LMAO! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

They've been sporadically throwing artics on the M100 back since (at least) the early 2010's....

As for that follow up question, realize that this M125 plan also has M100's cut back to Amsterdam/125th.... It's not a matter of fleet as to why they don't/won't have M100's running to The Bronx.... They *say* the creation of it, in part, is to "improve reliability".... Let's take that for face value.... Having Bx15's & M100's terminating at The Hub would defeat the purpose; a bus reaching E. Harlem from Inwood-220th via 125th is incomparable to a bus running between W. Harlem & The Hub...

Also, the current combination (frequency-wise) of M100's & Bx15's along 125th during the rush, is something like a bus every 4 mins..... The M125 proposal has buses running at a clip of about half that frequency <_<.... You'd also leave 125th west of Amsterdam with nothing but a (basically useless) M104 for Harlem/E. Harlem patrons.....

 

What a way to f**k over everyone.

Honestly, branching off of the success that 14th Street had, they should've just made 125th a busway, between Broadway and Lexington (cut it short for Highway users), and have some sort of bus terminal in the area (M15, M103, M100, M35, some sort of M101 split). Would make life way easier for bus ops and passengers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

Just saw a B12 with a New York Avenue destination. How often is that short turn used?

Very rarely.... It's usually a response to some logistical severity (usually elsewhere along the B12 route)...

I used to get a kick out of being on a crushloaded bus that turned into a short turn mid-route (speaking of which) & seeing it fizzle out to about 5 or 6 ppl. left on it.... I get off at Albany/Clarkson, so it made no difference to me if the thing stops short at the western end of KCH.....

3 minutes ago, NBTA said:

What a way to f**k over everyone.

Honestly, branching off of the success that 14th Street had, they should've just made 125th a busway, between Broadway and Lexington (cut it short for Highway users), and have some sort of bus terminal in the area (M15, M103, M100, M35, some sort of M101 split). Would make life way easier for bus ops and passengers.

Ideally, I don't disagree - but at the same time, that would only reinforce the MTA's position for this (supposed) warranting of an M125.... It's no different than the MTA claiming success with the SBS routes, being that they did away with a couple stops (compared to the LTD's it replaced) & painted dedicated bus lanes for their use/benefit....

16 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church My main complaint was that they refused to consider any changes to the M101 in conjunction with the M100. I said I'm open to the idea (not necessarily in agreement with it, but open to it) of truncating the M100, but you cannot have the M101 be this long, drawn-out, unreliable route from the East Village to Washington Heights and then say "Oh well it is still an alternative for those traveling between 125th Street & Amsterdam Avenue" and "We'll get to it in the Manhattan redesign" (the second one was literally their answer, and when I said that's ridiculous they just nodded blankly...you know that psychotherapist type nod where they pretend they're paying attention but don't give a crap and you can see right through it)

So if they said that they would truncate the M101 to 125th & Lex, and make the M98 the full-time 3rd/Lex limited (or at least do something with the M103 or something until they can do the complete Manhattan redesign) I'd be OK with that. But instead they basically said riders are on their own until the Manhattan redesign.

I wouldn't have even been open to it... People have to rely on these routes... I'm not even a daily M100 rider & I have to say it's a HARD pass for having that route stubbed to terminating at either 125th/Broadway or 125th/St. Nich'.... Neither of the two destinations are where the masses are trying to get along/around 125th.... It simply can not be argued that the M100 from terminal to terminal is more detrimental (reliability-wise) than the M101.... The way I see this apparent immunity/stubbornness when it comes to the current rendition of the M101 with the MTA, it's as if:

  1. The M100 portion of the route north of 125th is expendable/less of an importance to a routing that has buses running clear up Amsterdam from 125th to the end, and...
  2. As NewFlyer conveyed, as long as the route has the high amount of ridership that it does, leave it alone...

To the latter, more often than not, sure - but there's a little something called nuance that has to be considered also.... The thing (M101) simply does too much - and cutting it back from City Hall to Astor pl. is like someone with chickenpox draining a blackhead & concluding that to be a remedy for the damn chickenpox... Remedy & remedial are not the same thing :lol:

There's a couple of different ways 3rd/Lex service can be rectified (or, better allocated).... But this service pattern of having the M102/103 as locals & the M101 be this monstrous LTD (in terms of route length/runtime), with the M98 as a bastardized LTD to boot, is for the birds... Depending on how you set it up, you can easily justify having either (or even both, if you want to do away with the M98 & the M101) the M102 or M103 having LTD trips.....

Lol at riders are on their own until the Manhattan redesign - as if that's something that riders should be looking forward to.... As if the masses will be undeniably satisfied with what'll be proposed....

17 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

....And to top it off, when I brought up that I used to use the M100 as part of my commute to CCNY, she said "Well do you use it now?" as if 5 years of commuting makes my opinion meaningless just because I graduated one year prior.

Disgusting.

Curious though, what was your direct response to that, after she said that shit? I would have gave a flippant response to that..... So my defense of CURRENT M100 riders (I happen to know the stat off-top is in the 10k riders/weekday range, so throw that in there too) is irrelevant because I SINGULARLY no longer use the route? This is supposed to be PUBLIC transportation, right..... Something along those lines.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
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.