Jump to content

Loss of local bus service to Union Square


Via Garibaldi 8

Recommended Posts

yeh, sure...

 

anyway, yeh, some M5's do make all local stops... which is exactly why I would truncate all weekend M5's to Houston.... and have M6's runnin in the process....

 

There are also M5's that end at 135th comin from S. Ferry... as well as those that run b/w 135th & GWB... not that many of (either of) them, though...

 

 

 

Riverside drive, there's no where to turn around really over there... either you make that right onto riverside dr, or you dive straight onto the west side hwy... since that's also an exit on the west side hwy, that eliminates illegally u-turning on 72nd past riverside... lol....

 

The thought process I had, was to have that stop on [W 72nd, off broadway] serve as a first pickup/last dropoff stop w/ no layover whatsoever... on the return SB trip, a relief point can be made over there where the M20 ends at...

 

Ending buses at West end does make a little more sense though, you're right.

 

I could've sworn there was a turnaround at 72nd around Riverside Drive! I've been too much around the M79 as of late lol. If the street design was better at 72nd & Broadway, I'd go straight for it, but there are way too many buses turning off and on that intersection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I could've sworn there was a turnaround at 72nd around Riverside Drive! I've been too much around the M79 as of late lol. If the street design was better at 72nd & Broadway, I'd go straight for it, but there are way too many buses turning off and on that intersection.

 

I figured you were thinkin about the traffic circle over there on 79th :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M5 runs local on weekends.

 

I have not been on the new and improved(not!:eek:) weekday (M5) since it merged w/ the M6 last summer. Been on it 2x on weekends since then.

 

Still a bad job by the (MTA). It should be a 7-day limited between 14th and 72nd until at least 9pm(8pm Sundays).:mad::tdown:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the MTA is worried about being cost-neutral, would splitting the route at Columbus Circle (and calling the southern half the M6) be a good idea, rather than (basically) a restoration of the old pattern?

 

Problem is quiet a few riders ride the (M5)from my experience at least 15 riders or more per trip Sometimes less but often more)on average ride 'most of the route' from West Midtown i.e 23rd and Up and between the GW Bridge and 135th/Bway. That also not counting those boarding along Riverside Drive. The (M5) is the only route to serve most of Riverside Drive.

 

Majority of those riders are of course Seniors/Disabled riders and also Woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem is quiet a few riders ride the (M5)from my experience at least 15 riders or more per trip Sometimes less but often more)on average ride 'most of the route' from West Midtown i.e 23rd and Up and between the GW Bridge and 135th/Bway. That also not counting those boarding along Riverside Drive. The (M5) is the only route to serve most of Riverside Drive.

 

Majority of those riders are of course Seniors/Disabled riders and also Woman.

 

Those riders still have the option of taking the M6 to the M5. Plus, depending on their destination, they may be able to use the M7 or M104 as a direct alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the MTA is worried about being cost-neutral, would splitting the route at Columbus Circle (and calling the southern half the M6) be a good idea, rather than (basically) a restoration of the old pattern?

 

That whole cost neutrality BS is nothin more than a way for the MTA to hide behind/refrain from making changes that would benefit the actual people that USE their services (which they continue & continue to neglect)... I don't buy they're broke at all, especially to they point where they really have to worry about breaking even on things....

 

To answer the other half of your question.... Splitting the M5 into two halves would make things worse, IMO... For one, you defeat the purpose of it running LTD.... It would be very similar to opting to split the B103 @ the junction (except the B103 sees way more riders @ the junction, than the M5 sees at Columbus Circle)...

 

two, Columbus Circle isn't a median point of where the ridership is on the M5.... Coming from the north, M5's are still pretty packed after it passes that point (but not enough to survive on it's own, if CC were to be designated as a terminal)... there isn't a crowd of riders that really embark at CC like that (although you will tend to see a good # of folks getting off)... CC is where you start to see people disembarking more over people embarking on M5's....

 

Coming from the south, however, M5's b/w SF & 14th st, are where the riders pile on... @ 23rd is usually where you start to see ppl. get off, in proportion to the number of people that get on... that pattern of equal proportion (of ppl gettin on, to gettin off) continues on up to 72nd/Broadway...

 

You split the M5, and guaranteed, the lower portion overall will see much more ridership than the upper portion overall.... It may even give them a reason to cut the upper portion & say "for alternative service, use the (1) or the M104"....

 

The M5 as we know it, is an upper west side broadway bypass.... And it should stay that way... You can freely catch the M104 anywhere b/w CC & W 72nd if you need that segment of Broadway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As promised in This Post:

My bit at restoring *some* service AT Union Square....

 

The revival & extension of the old M6 route....

It would run from South Ferry to W. 72nd st (1)(2)(3)

 

[GMAPS]<iframe width="100" height="100" frameborder="0" scrolling="yes" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" src="http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=204011070939843183781.0004a50e167dabda09e77&ll=40.73261,-73.983596&spn=0.043081,0.050661&output=embed"></iframe>[/GMAPS]

 

- Lines In Red: [Northbound M6 service via 6th av], [southbound M6 service via 5th av & via Broadway]

- Lines In Green: Retained portions (shown in unique snippets) of the current M5 route

 

 

Thanks to the pedestrian plaza's, the M6 can't be restored the way it was....

 

Way I'd have it though, the northbound M6 routing would be exactly the same as the current M5 from South Ferry to 72nd.... Whereas the southbound portion of the M6, I would have it divert at 23rd st; for the purpose of restoring local service along that part of Broadway where service was lost, as well as supplying direct service BACK to Union square...

 

1) The M6 would only run during off-peak hours (weekdays), and pretty much all day during the weekend....

2) During the times M6's are running on weekdays, most M5's would end at Houston st... and would run at a slightly lesser rate....

3) During weekends, ALL M5 service ends at Houston st...

4) The M6 wouldn't have it's own separate schedule, per se; it'll be fused into the M5's schedule... as it's meant to supplement the current M5 service, south of 72nd, somewhat increasing reliability along 5th/6th av's....

 

Thoughts ?

I like it. I would have the (M6) run 7 days a week like it used to. The (M5) would go back to Houston. The (M20) can go back to BPC. I would have the (M5) split with MJQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it. I would have the (M6) run 7 days a week like it used to. The (M5) would go back to Houston. The (M20) can go back to BPC. I would have the (M5) split with MJQ

 

I'd agree, but with the current state of the M5, that route can barely meet with the demand in the downtown area, and it barely gets any help from that terrible M20. When the M1/M6 routing was there, you had two types of crowds, the Greenwich Village folk and the Chinatown/St. Marks folk. That's what made those two routes unique to some extent.

 

Splitting the M5 would do no good unless you have the downtown short turn at Greenwich Village or City Hall.

 

I had a similar proposal for that M6 routing, but instead of it going straight up Broadway, I'd use West End Ave after 66th Street, though I gotta work out the kinks when I get home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That whole cost neutrality BS is nothin more than a way for the MTA to hide behind/refrain from making changes that would benefit the actual people that USE their services (which they continue & continue to neglect)... I don't buy they're broke at all, especially to they point where they really have to worry about breaking even on things....

 

To answer the other half of your question.... Splitting the M5 into two halves would make things worse, IMO... For one, you defeat the purpose of it running LTD.... It would be very similar to opting to split the B103 @ the junction (except the B103 sees way more riders @ the junction, than the M5 sees at Columbus Circle)...

 

two, Columbus Circle isn't a median point of where the ridership is on the M5.... Coming from the north, M5's are still pretty packed after it passes that point (but not enough to survive on it's own, if CC were to be designated as a terminal)... there isn't a crowd of riders that really embark at CC like that (although you will tend to see a good # of folks getting off)... CC is where you start to see people disembarking more over people embarking on M5's....

 

Coming from the south, however, M5's b/w SF & 14th st, are where the riders pile on... @ 23rd is usually where you start to see ppl. get off, in proportion to the number of people that get on... that pattern of equal proportion (of ppl gettin on, to gettin off) continues on up to 72nd/Broadway...

 

You split the M5, and guaranteed, the lower portion overall will see much more ridership than the upper portion overall.... It may even give them a reason to cut the upper portion & say "for alternative service, use the (1) or the M104"....

 

The M5 as we know it, is an upper west side broadway bypass.... And it should stay that way... You can freely catch the M104 anywhere b/w CC & W 72nd if you need that segment of Broadway.

 

How about cutting the M5 back to Houston Street and extending the M1 to South Ferry via a modified route?

 

Southbound, it would take the same path as it used to, and northbound, it could take the former M6 route until 8th Street, and then take 8th Street and resume its current route (I also agree that it should go on Park Avenue, rather than 5th/Madison Avenue)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about cutting the M5 back to Houston Street and extending the M1 to South Ferry via a modified route?

 

Southbound, it would take the same path as it used to, and northbound, it could take the former M6 route until 8th Street, and then take 8th Street and resume its current route (I also agree that it should go on Park Avenue, rather than 5th/Madison Avenue)

 

If I were to restore the M1 to South Ferry, it would be via it's old routing, south and northbound.... Not that I would have a reason to doubt Cait, but he's right; the M1 from the ferry attracted more riders, due to the fact that it did pass through chinatown, and you also had those folks that headed to city hall....

 

Having M1's (coming from S. Ferry) pan up 6th av, to then turn off on 8th st.... all that would accomplish is (more) ppl. gettin off @ West 4th street to take the subway, or gettin off @ 6th/Houston to xfer to the M5.... b/c I don't get the sense that 6th av riders want Madison av access....

 

The minute they killed M1 service south of Astor place (area), was the minute you noticed more ppl. takin the (6), uptown b/w Bklyn Bridge & Union Sq... I know that b/c I used to take the (Q) to canal for the (6) to Bleecker & walked to work.... There is definitely more people using bleecker st; it ain't just about the 6th av line over there on B'way/Lafayette anymore....

 

The M103 does nothin for those riders; it's too far out, over on Bowery...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd agree, but with the current state of the M5, that route can barely meet with the demand in the downtown area, and it barely gets any help from that terrible M20. When the M1/M6 routing was there, you had two types of crowds, the Greenwich Village folk and the Chinatown/St. Marks folk. That's what made those two routes unique to some extent.

 

Splitting the M5 would do no good unless you have the downtown short turn at Greenwich Village or City Hall.

 

I had a similar proposal for that M6 routing, but instead of it going straight up Broadway, I'd use West End Ave after 66th Street, though I gotta work out the kinks when I get home.

Hence why the (M20) goes back to BPC. The (M1) and (M6) return to South Ferry. Some (M1)'s come from MJQ. The (M5) going to South Ferry was the worst decision the (MTA) ever made

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The M20 going to S. Ferry, I didn't have a problem with... that terminal on 1 pl. (lol) was pointless...

 

Whereas Killing off the M6, truncating M1's to go no further south than Astor pl., in conjunction w/ extending the M5 to South Ferry as a compromise.... that's the proverbial "killin of 2 birds w/ one stone" I did not like.... The only real (decent) local bus usage you see at S. Ferry, is that of the infamous M15 & its SBS....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hence why the (M20) goes back to BPC. The (M1) and (M6) return to South Ferry. Some (M1)'s come from MJQ. The (M5) going to South Ferry was the worst decision the (MTA) ever made

 

Remember guys the (M1) was extended to South Ferry weekdays until about 6-7pm if i remember. The current merged (M6)(M5)runs to South Ferry all times(except for a few short trips at Houston)so Caith and Q43 does the (M1) also run to South Ferry 7 days a week?

Personally w/ a (M5) and (M6) combo the (M1) should only be extended downtown to South Ferry rush hours only. All other times (except overnights) the (M1) runs between 148th/Lenox and 8th Street.

 

Another huge mistake of basically ending 2 bus lines for South Ferry bus service along Bway/6th Ave & Church St between Houston and Lower Manhattan.

 

Expanding on (B35) idea and make it less confusing I still think it best to restore the (M6) and make the (M5) (M6) a combo along Bway and Church/6th Ave similar to the (M101) (M102) (M103) and (Q44) (Q20). When the M6 is running most (M5's)starting/ending at Houston.

Late evenings and overnights (I make M5 a 24/7 route)all M5's run local between GW Bridge and South Ferry. What the Lower Bway and Church St/6th Coordiors need is a full time 7 day a limited further downtown to/from Chambers-City Hall area.

A Bus only lane needs to be created down there in Lower Manhattan.

 

Bro(B35) makes some good points in his (M5) (M6) ideas but the issue is that riders will be confused especially out of town tourists and casual riders. With that said, Maybe B35 could revise his proposal with that in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't like it when they re-routed the (M9) from South Ferry either

I admit that the route was redundant to the M15 in lwr manhattan, and it had very few riders past South Ferry, on in to BPC.... Meanwhile, it was also redundant to the M14 - but buses were leaving Union Sq. packed as all hell, so I kinda understood the move on the MTA's part.... but on the same side of the coin, I also feel as if that was a mistake to move it from Union Sq.

 

To have had M9's absorb the old M21 portion along Av. C, to make the M21 a "true" crosstown, was a questionable move... because of it, the M21 is a weekday only route....

 

I would have actually combined (or interlined) the M21 w/ the M8 (At Av D), have it run 7 days a week, every 15 min headways weekdays and 30 min headways on the weekend... but I digress on that part...

 

 

Anyway, How is the ridership on this new M9? I see a decent crowd waiting for them @ Park row, but I don't know how it is on the north end of the route...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty large post so if you guys got the patience to read all of this, go ahead....

 

I admit that the route was redundant to the M15 in lwr manhattan, and it had very few riders past South Ferry, on in to BPC.... Meanwhile, it was also redundant to the M14 - but buses were leaving Union Sq. packed as all hell, so I kinda understood the move on the MTA's part.... but on the same side of the coin, I also feel as if that was a mistake to move it from Union Sq.

 

To have had M9's absorb the old M21 portion along Av. C, to make the M21 a "true" crosstown, was a questionable move... because of it, the M21 is a weekday only route....

 

I would have actually combined (or interlined) the M21 w/ the M8 (At Av D), have it run 7 days a week, every 15 min headways weekdays and 30 min headways on the weekend... but I digress on that part...

 

 

Anyway, How is the ridership on this new M9? I see a decent crowd waiting for them @ Park row, but I don't know how it is on the north end of the route...

 

Redundant, yes. A useful alternative, even better. You're absolutely right about the fact that there were not much folks on the bus after South Ferry, but it made one hell of an alternative when the M15 isnt leaving the terminal yet. Buses were always packed till 14th & 1st Ave going Uptown which says a lot.

 

Moving it away from Union Square was the worst idea because M14As have become more unreliable. If you stand out at Union Square or anywhere along the 14A/D routes, I guarantee you'd see more M14Ds over M14As in 10 minutes. This is another gripe I have with the removal of the M9.

 

The current M9 pattern? While it did absorb the M21, it killed off one of the main purposes of the former M21 routing which was to go to Bellevue Hospital. Not saying that V.A Hospital as a terminal isnt useful or smart, but using that area as a terminal is a joke because they still can't figure out how to turn around M9s going Downtown.....

 

Buses going uptown usually empty out at 14th, it usually carries air after that. Downtown buses, you'd see a pretty nice amount of folks on it. Overall, ridership seems to be alright, but not as good as it went to Battery Park City/Union Square. There has been quite a decrease since the cuts. The one thing that kinda pissed me off is the fact that them Battery Park folk seemingly gave up on the restoration of the M9 to Battery Park City, but it is what it is....

 

The M21 has interlined runs with the M9 and M22 respectively, I'm not too sure if there are interlined runs with the M8. The current terminal of the M21 at Lower East Side-FDR actually works believe it or not. Last time I fanned there, I saw a lot of people getting off the bus at the last stop.

 

Cutting off the Bellevue routing was a bad move but to send the M21 to that side was a pretty smart move in itself, riders no longer have to hop on the M14A to make a transfer at Houston.

 

Remember guys the (M1) was extended to South Ferry weekdays until about 6-7pm if i remember. The current merged (M6)(M5)runs to South Ferry all times(except for a few short trips at Houston)so Caith and Q43 does the (M1) also run to South Ferry 7 days a week?

Personally w/ a (M5) and (M6) combo the (M1) should only be extended downtown to South Ferry rush hours only. All other times (except overnights) the (M1) runs between 148th/Lenox and 8th Street.

 

Another huge mistake of basically ending 2 bus lines for South Ferry bus service along Bway/6th Ave & Church St between Houston and Lower Manhattan.

 

Expanding on (B35) idea and make it less confusing I still think it best to restore the (M6) and make the (M5) (M6) a combo along Bway and Church/6th Ave similar to the (M101) (M102) (M103) and (Q44) (Q20). When the M6 is running most (M5's)starting/ending at Houston.

Late evenings and overnights (I make M5 a 24/7 route)all M5's run local between GW Bridge and South Ferry. What the Lower Bway and Church St/6th Coordiors need is a full time 7 day a limited further downtown to/from Chambers-City Hall area.

A Bus only lane needs to be created down there in Lower Manhattan.

 

Bro(B35) makes some good points in his (M5) (M6) ideas but the issue is that riders will be confused especially out of town tourists and casual riders. With that said, Maybe B35 could revise his proposal with that in mind.

 

I don't think I understand this clearly, your words and lack of commas and such is making this a tricky thing to understand.

 

I previously explained this before, the M1 was extended to South Ferry to supplement and help the M6 on the weekdays, but to also serve a different area compared to the M6, as the M1 went through Chinatown/Little Italy and St. Marks/Astor Place while the M6 didnt when going Uptown. However, those M1 trips were select trips as other M1s terminated at 8th Street. I agree that the M1 should be sent via Park Avenue, but at the rate service is now, it should stay at 8th Street. The extension played a major role when the M6 was sent via 7th Avenue as M1 ridership saw a small increase.

 

The M5/M6 plan would work if corresponding M5s run to South Ferry but have short turns at Houston or City Hall for weekday runs, and for weekends, have the service pattern restored pre-2010 cuts.

 

But in my opinion, the one thing that really killed the M1 to South Ferry, honestly, the (W). It was a much faster alternative from 59th Street all the way to Whitehall/South Ferry.

 

Hence why the (M20) goes back to BPC. The (M1) and (M6) return to South Ferry. Some (M1)'s come from MJQ. The (M5) going to South Ferry was the worst decision the (MTA) ever made

 

Bad idea sending it back to BPC, main reason, those folks would not have a subway connection. Thats why they went apeshit when the M9 was axed from the area, because the M9 made a lot of subway & bus connections that the M15 doesnt make. You also can't send back M9s to BPC (unfortunately) because then all the pressure goes on the M103 and M22. The M9 gets the crowds from the former City Hall M15. The M103 also saw a ridership increase because of the loss of that branch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expanding on (B35) idea and make it less confusing I still think it best to restore the (M6) and make the (M5) (M6) a combo along Bway and Church/6th Ave similar to the (M101) (M102) (M103) and (Q44) (Q20). When the M6 is running most (M5's)starting/ending at Houston.

 

Late evenings and overnights (I make M5 a 24/7 route)all M5's run local between GW Bridge and South Ferry. What the Lower Bway and Church St/6th Coordiors need is a full time 7 day a limited further downtown to/from Chambers-City Hall area.

A Bus only lane needs to be created down there in Lower Manhattan.

 

Bro(B35) makes some good points in his (M5) (M6) ideas but the issue is that riders will be confused especially out of town tourists and casual riders. With that said, Maybe B35 could revise his proposal with that in mind.

 

Thanks for the further comments.

 

With that said, I still feel as if running the M6 all day from 72nd to S. Ferry weekdays, along w/ the service the current M5 gets, is excessive.... Something is gonna have to give.... because I don't want to create the same scenario that had the M6 getting the axe in the first place....

 

compare the setups (this is for weekdays):

 

1) The old setup was that the (core):

- M5 service went from GWB to Houston st...

- M6 service went from 59th st to South Ferry....

 

M5 ran at 10 min headways, M6 ran at 15 min headways IINM....

 

2) The setup you're bringing up (while ideal, I suppose), is actually worse... pretty much, you want to:

- run the M5 from GWB to Houston st (S. ferry on a lesser basis than what currently is), all day

- run the M6, using my idea from havin it go from W. 72nd to S. Ferry, all day

 

3) The setup I'm bringing up, is a sort of combination of how things used to be when the M6 was around, and what you make a mention of.... I'm saying:

- run the M5 from GWB to Houston st (S. ferry on a lesser basis than what currently is), all day

- run the M6 during off peak hours W. 72nd to S. Ferry. @ 15 min headways

 

 

* #2 would have M5's & M6's going up & down 5th/6th all day (including during the rush)

* #3 would have M5's & M6's going up & down 5th/6th only during off peak hours... Peak hours, you'd only see M5's (like it currently is, which would run how M5's currently run)

 

Buses usually run as lower headways during the rush; which means more buses.... again, w/ the plethora of the bronx, SI, and the Brooklyn express buses that use 5th av during the rush, I don't want to add to that traffic; may as well keep the M5 running during that time...

 

 

As for Regarding the idea, and (possible) confusion:

Any tourist or casual rider south of Houston during off peak hrs, can take any bus they see, if their destination is b/w Houston & South Ferry....

 

Any tourist or casual rider north of Houston during off peak hrs, will simply have to ask if M5's are going to [insert destination here] (if they board anywhere north of houston) to be certain...

{yes, I know they're not gonna look up at the destination sign}

 

if it's an M6 that arrives first, there's no confusion at all - it's going to South Ferry regardless....

 

 

 

hope I nipped it in the bud....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't quite understand that part of Shortline's last post either, to be honest....

 

 

 

Moving it away from Union Square was the worst idea because M14As have become more unreliable. If you stand out at Union Square or anywhere along the 14A/D routes, I guarantee you'd see more M14Ds over M14As in 10 minutes. This is another gripe I have with the removal of the M9.

 

The current M9 pattern? While it did absorb the M21, it killed off one of the main purposes of the former M21 routing which was to go to Bellevue Hospital. Not saying that V.A Hospital as a terminal isnt useful or smart, but using that area as a terminal is a joke because they still can't figure out how to turn around M9s going Downtown.....

 

Buses going uptown usually empty out at 14th, it usually carries air after that. Downtown buses, you'd see a pretty nice amount of folks on it. Overall, ridership seems to be alright, but not as good as it went to Battery Park City/Union Square. There has been quite a decrease since the cuts. The one thing that kinda pissed me off is the fact that them Battery Park folk seemingly gave up on the restoration of the M9 to Battery Park City, but it is what it is....

 

The M21 has interlined runs with the M9 and M22 respectively, I'm not too sure if there are interlined runs with the M8. The current terminal of the M21 at Lower East Side-FDR actually works believe it or not. Last time I fanned there, I saw a lot of people getting off the bus at the last stop.

 

Cutting off the Bellevue routing was a bad move but to send the M21 to that side was a pretty smart move in itself, riders no longer have to hop on the M14A to make a transfer at Houston.

 

Oh, I also notice that about the M14a/d.... My lunch hour, coming back from that pizza hut/taco bell around 5th/14th, (if it was right there) I would take M14A's to the last stop, and walk to Christopher st from there.... The M14d does me no good b/c it continues on 14th, past 9th av...... I'd see a slew of 14d's before I saw one 14a... That's when I'm like the hell w/ it, and walk back to work from union sq.; about a good 20 min walk.....

 

My *guess* as to why they run more 14d's, is to serve that housing complex over there on 9th, around W 16th/17th.... that, and it allows for more layover space over there along west st & 18th st (where I see as many as four parked artics back to back.... Whereas idle artics (M14A's) be all over the place along 9th av b/w 14th st & abindgon sq....

 

I figured this new M9 wouldn't yield many riders past 14th st... that is M23 territory to the fullest, and they don't play when it comes to that bus... lol... Regardless, Thanks for that bit of information...

 

Far as BPC, as long as they had direct service to the subway (which came w/ the M20 extension), they didn't care.... The M9 always saw more riders than the M20 within BPC b/c of it... seldom anyone took the M20 northward for chambers st b/c of it's indirect routing... residents would call up cabs, over taking the M20 & making that walk to S. ferry afterwards (especially, given it's poor headways)... That walk from 1 pl. to the subway station (south ferry) wadn't as short as it looked....

 

The M21, to me, seems like it's actually gaining ridership... west of 6th av though, it's still dead as a doorknob.... So it's actually worked out for the better down there in the LES... Interesting.

I would like to see a (true) 3-year, or even a 5-year trend of ridership figures on the M21, as a gauge....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the further comments.

 

With that said, I still feel as if running the M6 all day from 72nd to S. Ferry weekdays, along w/ the service the current M5 gets, is excessive.... Something is gonna have to give.... because I don't want to create the same scenario that had the M6 getting the axe in the first place....

 

compare the setups (this is for weekdays):

 

1) The old setup was that the (core):

- M5 service went from GWB to Houston st...

- M6 service went from 59th st to South Ferry....

 

M5 ran at 10 min headways, M6 ran at 15 min headways IINM....

 

2) The setup you're bringing up (while ideal, I suppose), is actually worse... pretty much, you want to:

- run the M5 from GWB to Houston st (S. ferry on a lesser basis than what currently is), all day

- run the M6, using my idea from havin it go from W. 72nd to S. Ferry, all day

 

3) The setup I'm bringing up, is a sort of combination of how things used to be when the M6 was around, and what you make a mention of.... I'm saying:

- run the M5 from GWB to Houston st (S. ferry on a lesser basis than what currently is), all day

- run the M6 during off peak hours W. 72nd to S. Ferry. @ 15 min headways

 

 

* #2 would have M5's & M6's going up & down 5th/6th all day (including during the rush)

* #3 would have M5's & M6's going up & down 5th/6th only during off peak hours... Peak hours, you'd only see M5's (like it currently is, which would run how M5's currently run)

 

Buses usually run as lower headways during the rush; which means more buses.... again, w/ the plethora of the bronx, SI, and the Brooklyn express buses that use 5th av during the rush, I don't want to add to that traffic; may as well keep the M5 running during that time...

 

 

As for Regarding the idea, and (possible) confusion:

Any tourist or casual rider south of Houston during off peak hrs, can take any bus they see, if their destination is b/w Houston & South Ferry....

 

Any tourist or casual rider north of Houston during off peak hrs, will simply have to ask if M5's are going to [insert destination here] (if they board anywhere north of houston) to be certain...

{yes, I know they're not gonna look up at the destination sign}

 

if it's an M6 that arrives first, there's no confusion at all - it's going to South Ferry regardless....

 

 

 

hope I nipped it in the bud....

 

I didn't quite understand that part of Shortline's last post either, to be honest....

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, I also notice that about the M14a/d.... My lunch hour, coming back from that pizza hut/taco bell around 5th/14th, (if it was right there) I would take M14A's to the last stop, and walk to Christopher st from there.... The M14d does me no good b/c it continues on 14th, past 9th av...... I'd see a slew of 14d's before I saw one 14a... That's when I'm like the hell w/ it, and walk back to work from union sq.; about a good 20 min walk.....

 

My *guess* as to why they run more 14d's, is to serve that housing complex over there on 9th, around W 16th/17th.... that, and it allows for more layover space over there along west st & 18th st (where I see as many as four parked artics back to back.... Whereas idle artics (M14A's) be all over the place along 9th av b/w 14th st & abindgon sq....

 

I figured this new M9 wouldn't yield many riders past 14th st... that is M23 territory to the fullest, and they don't play when it comes to that bus... lol... Regardless, Thanks for that bit of information...

 

Far as BPC, as long as they had direct service to the subway (which came w/ the M20 extension), they didn't care.... The M9 always saw more riders than the M20 within BPC b/c of it... seldom anyone took the M20 northward for chambers st b/c of it's indirect routing... residents would call up cabs, over taking the M20 & making that walk to S. ferry afterwards (especially, given it's poor headways)... That walk from 1 pl. to the subway station (south ferry) wadn't as short as it looked....

 

The M21, to me, seems like it's actually gaining ridership... west of 6th av though, it's still dead as a doorknob.... So it's actually worked out for the better down there in the LES... Interesting.

I would like to see a (true) 3-year, or even a 5-year trend of ridership figures on the M21, as a gauge....

 

So M21 and service improved?? for subway linking???:cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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