Evaluation of the June 2010 Service Reductions

[IRT Bronx Express]

Evaluating the 2010 Service Reductions - Sept 2011

 

2010 MTA Bus Company Service Reductions - 1 year evaluation

 

NYCT Evaluation of 2010 Service Reductions

[Mysterious2train]

The shortening of the B48 backfired spectacularly on the .

Ridership dropped so hard that expenses actually went up, while efficiency went down.

Discussion

Ridership of the B48 declined precipitously with the shortening of the route. Customers primarily shifted to the Franklin Avenue Shuttle (ridership on the shuttle attributable to former B48 riders grew by approximately 1,000 riders per weekday), but the decline in ridership was so severe that efficiency did not improve, and the cost per rider increased substantially. Additionally, some riders could have shifted to the B43, B49 or other routes, but given the decline in overall Brooklyn bus ridership, it is difficult to determine the extent of these shifts.

 

Follow-Up Actions

The B48 is undergoing further study. It may be necessary to adjust service on this route as part of the implementation of Select Bus Service on the nearby B44; any adjustment undertaken as part of the SBS initiative can be expected to strengthen performance of the B48.

 

 

Also, the Bx15/Bx55 corridor apparently lost a ton of ridership after the cuts last year, it would definitely explain why the cut Bx55 service the way they did this month.

[IRT Bronx Express]

The way how I see it, if the Bx15 comes first, more people will board on that bus and vice versa with the Bx55. I did seem to notice that the Bx55 is well utilized during middays than last year, which is surprising.

 

As for Country Club's Bx24, just axe the route and isolate them. They're too ungrateful anyways, and the Bx8 DID GO to Westchester Sq.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It's really amazing how they can conclude that the cuts are having a minimal impact. :mad: I certainly don't frequent places as much as I used to anymore. They seem to be forgetting that folks are being forced to alter their travel patterns. For example, I don't go to Sheepshead Bay as much anymore, which means that I don't spend as much money as I used to down there. I used to take the BM3 down there and I would stay and hang out and eat or whatever. Now I go down there and rush to get the last BM3 back because they're reduced service by 6 runs. Not only the express buses but the local buses too. Trips to places like Columbus Circle are certainly less frequent because it is more of a hassle via the bus and I don't always feel like using the subway with bags and such. I also find myself using car service a lot more. I rarely use the S54 anymore. I may have used it once in several months and that was only because it was quicker at that time than waiting for car service. I also didn't go to Coney Island at all, something I used to do with the X28, which is now gone on the weekends. :mad: So in sum, I am riding less to certain places and spending much more money to commute and I have certainly been affected by the cuts as have others. :mad:

 

People are riding less because of the cuts not just because. Sheepshead Bay is not as vibrant as it used to be now the B4 gone and the M10 and M104 routes are just ridiculous now, as they go nowhere. If anything what's happening is fewer and fewer New Yorkers out and about in certain areas and that is not at all good economically. I would like to hear from other people as to whether they are either traveling less, altering their routes, or just using a different form of transportation.

 

The way how I see it, if the Bx15 comes first, more people will board on that bus and vice versa with the Bx55. I did seem to notice that the Bx55 is well utilized during middays than last year, which is surprising.

 

As for Country Club's Bx24, just axe the route and isolate them. They're too ungrateful anyways, and the Bx8 DID GO to Westchester Sq.

 

Well I'm sure the wouldn't mind axing the Bx24... Hell there aren't too many short routes left like the Bx24... The B2 may be history soon, so who knows... :mad: :tdown: All and all an epic failure in terms of bus service. :mad:

[User]

"The discontinuation of the Q79 was difficult to analyze. This very low ridership

route did not have convenient transit alternatives. It is assumed that most riders are driving or taking car services to make their trip"

 

^ Right there, where is the MTA allowed to "assume" for the people? They're in business to serve the city and that includes all the people.

[Gorgor]

For the X90: "Some of these riders may have shifted to the M15 local and Select Bus Service (SBS) or the subway lines; however, given introduction of the M15 SBS, which attracted many new riders, and that the ridership could have shifted to several of the subway stations, it is difficult to be sure how these riders are currently making their trip."

 

Which attracted many new riders? Are they serious? Yes, the M15 SBS did attract a lot more ridership during midday and on the weekends when traffic is relatively light, but nobody in their right mind would want to be in a bus, standing, for an hour going downtown. They also failed to say how many former X90 passengers have added in a crosstown bus to get to the subway into their commute. And even with the way too frequent headways it was still much more cost efficient than the other express buses, and they could've easily just run only half the amount of buses and end up nearly making a profit.

 

Also, just in general for express buses, how does it end up costing them practically $300 to run one bus one way? What exactly is included in these direct operating costs? If you want to include deadheading then in total the gas shouldn't cost more than $100, the driver $50, and then what's the other $150 being used towards? Oh right, typical government agency wastefulness. Just the sheer fact that a private company came in, although not legal, to take over the X90 and QM22 routes, should say that they saw a huge potential to turn a profit by providing a faster alternative to the subway in an area where there's tons of demand and barely any supply.

[Amtrak7]

"The discontinuation of the Q79 was difficult to analyze. This very low ridership

route did not have convenient transit alternatives. It is assumed that most riders are driving or taking car services to make their trip"

 

^ Right there, where is the MTA allowed to "assume" for the people? They're in business to serve the city and that includes all the people.

 

The same was said of the S54.

 

That may be why the MTA decided not to do such a report for LIB, as lots of the discontinuations would use that explanation (N28, N94, N95, N14)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

For the X90: "Some of these riders may have shifted to the M15 local and Select Bus Service (SBS) or the subway lines; however, given introduction of the M15 SBS, which attracted many new riders, and that the ridership could have shifted to several of the subway stations, it is difficult to be sure how these riders are currently making their trip."

 

Which attracted many new riders? Are they serious? Yes, the M15 SBS did attract a lot more ridership during midday and on the weekends when traffic is relatively light, but nobody in their right mind would want to be in a bus, standing, for an hour going downtown. They also failed to say how many former X90 passengers have added in a crosstown bus to get to the subway into their commute. And even with the way too frequent headways it was still much more cost efficient than the other express buses, and they could've easily just run only half the amount of buses and end up nearly making a profit.

 

Also, just in general for express buses, how does it end up costing them practically $300 to run one bus one way? What exactly is included in these direct operating costs? If you want to include deadheading then in total the gas shouldn't cost more than $100, the driver $50, and then what's the other $150 being used towards? Oh right, typical government agency wastefulness. Just the sheer fact that a private company came in, although not legal, to take over the X90 and QM22 routes, should say that they saw a huge potential to turn a profit by providing a faster alternative to the subway in an area where there's tons of demand and barely any supply.

 

Good question... To be honest with you I think the just wanted to push the M15SBS service and they made any excuse to get rid of the X90. It had less to do w/cost and more to do with "cheaper" alternatives. They don't care about how those alternatives impact folks, but rather that they have "alternatives", whatever the hell that may be. The only way that the M15SBS could touch the X90 is if it duplicated its route, which it clearly doesn't. I mean what irritates me with them is they so BS with their reasons that you see right through it. I am still pissed at how they f*cked over the B4, citing low ridership in Sheepshead Bay which was an absolute lie and what's worse is they've left an entire neighborhood with basically no direct bus service to the subway. :mad: :mad::tdown:

 

The same was said of the S54.

 

That may be why the MTA decided not to do such a report for LIB, as lots of the discontinuations would use that explanation (N28, N94, N95, N14)

 

I may not use the S54 much anymore, but I see plenty of people walking up those hills along Manor Rd that would be taking the S54, and many of them are elderly people too having to schlepp with bags and such. :mad: :mad: :tdown: You can say the route had low ridership, but they did an excellent job of killing ridership by having buses go MIA and show up whenever.

[qjtransitmaster]

Good question... To be honest with you I think the just wanted to push the M15SBS service and they made any excuse to get rid of the X90. It had less to do w/cost and more to do with "cheaper" alternatives. They don't care about how those alternatives impact folks, but rather that they have "alternatives", whatever the hell that may be. The only way that the M15SBS could touch the X90 is if it duplicated its route, which it clearly doesn't. I mean what irritates me with them is they so BS with their reasons that you see right through it. I am still pissed at how they f*cked over the B4, citing low ridership in Sheepshead Bay which was an absolute lie and what's worse is they've left an entire neighborhood with basically no direct bus service to the subway. :mad: :mad::tdown:

 

 

 

I may not use the S54 much anymore, but I see plenty of people walking up those hills along Manor Rd that would be taking the S54, and many of them are elderly people too having to schlepp with bags and such. :mad: :mad: :tdown: You can say the route had low ridership, but they did an excellent job of killing ridership by having buses go MIA and show up whenever.

 

True days after the cuts I LITERALLY SAW OVER 50 PPL WAITING FOR THE B4 TO REACH SHEEPSHEAD BAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[FamousNYLover]

Everytime when I am in Fordham on Weekends, people still WAITS FOR (Bx34) and (Bx55) on Weekends.

One of lay got confuse with Bx34 schedules. I don`t have pic of Bx34 Guide-A-Ride, but use empty section from M15 SBS Schedule.

There was one lady looking at that misreading schedule, just looking at sections I circled and she thought Bx34 comes every hour. LOL!

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[B35 via Church]

uh oh.... Don't get me started.... *sigh*

this PDF is about unleash The General B35 via Church......

 

Reading the subway part of the reductions got me more miffed than reading the bus section... but I'll just deal w/ the bus portion, regarding what's on the PDF....

 

 

In addition to reducing operating costs, this restructuring provided more direct access from various points within Co-op City to traffic generators outside of Co-op City. In the past, almost every NYCT route in Co-op City served every part of Co-op City, creating long trips.

 

This restructuring has shortened the travel time for many bus customers.

yeah... I've noticed a drastic decline in Bx26 usage, and MORE ppl sardining onto Bx28's/38's - all thanks to that genius idea of randomizing bus service out in co-op....

 

within co-op is where more ppl. are taking 30's... not in an overall sense, though....

 

The Bx4A branch has been well received, but the Bx24 did not satisfy some Country Club residents who have requested that the route to be further extended to Westchester Square. NYCT is evaluating this proposal.

 

The decrease in Bx5 ridership may be the result of a combination of traffic congestion on Crosby Avenue, short-turns in service to avoid the traffic congestion, insufficient running times and reduced reliability. In summer 2011 there will be a moderate running time increase and a decrease in service to better match demand.

The Bx4a is exactly why you don't need a full revival of the Bx14; that they did a good job with.... I'm not gonna reiterate what I said in THIS THREAD about the Bx24 & the Bx5..... But what I will say is, a runtime increase & a service decrease on the Bx5? That's not a win-lose situation, but more of a lose-lose situation for the rider(s)....

 

just great, more cuts coming our way... I don't see what more they can do to the Bx5 to increase its runtime - It's already running on Crosby av.... and no way in hell do they have that route running in country club.....

 

 

The restructuring of the Bx39 and Bx41 had the desired effect of encouraging passengers to use the Bx39 as well as more efficient subway service. The combined cost per rider of the two routes increased on weekdays and decreased on weekends.

 

In July 2010, Bx39 overnight service was extended along White Plains Road to rectify an unintended consequence of the swap (NYCT had not proposed eliminating overnight bus service on White Plains Road). The restructuring of these two routes did not adversely affect crowding; weekday loads are within guidelines. NYCT staff is currently in the process of analyzing weekend loads and will adjust service if necessary.

 

Encouraging... more like forcing....

 

You see what they did there.... They say the combined cost/rider increased; they don't want to admit that they forced ppl. onto Bx39's & the cost per rider actually went UP as a result of it.... This tells you that the riders aren't clamoring for the 39 like that....

 

What I'm getting at is, the swap didn't yield the desired result on the 39 (cost/rider going DOWN) - even though there is that increase of usage on the 39.... but it actually decreased on the 41.... smh lmao.... Of course the swap itself didn't adversely affect crowding, b/c you got the 28/38, the 55, & the 30 in that specific area; there's a multitude of bus options available.... there's gonna be crowding in that area regardless....

 

I'd like to know how much of an increase there was, in the amt. of riders (north of gun hill, off 39's) xferring to the Bx12 or xferring to the 41.....

 

 

Ridership in the corridor dropped significantly following the service reductions, and it is difficult to determine precisely what happened. Some former Bx55 customers may be taking the Bx15 or Bx41, though both of these routes did not experience an increase in ridership that

would offset the drop in ridership on the Bx55. It is also possible that the changes encouraged customers to use the numerous cross-town bus routes to nearby subway lines. The cost per rider, however, for both routes has decreased.

 

Follow-Up Actions

NYCT is proposing to increase service on the Bx15 and to decrease service on the Bx55 in September 2011 during the weekday morning and afternoon peak periods to better match demand. This will bring the levels of service on these routes in line with guidelines, as shown above under “Guideline Capacity.”

 

In other words, hello bx15 & goodbye bx55.... It's no accident that artics are now being used on the 15....

 

the cost/rider decreased b/c ppl. are still cramming onto 15's - and they're gonna continue doing so as long as that route travels along 125th.... and they're still cramming onto 55's b/c there are a mass amt. of 3rd av riders that want LTD service to get to/from the hub (whether it be to get to subway, or for work/school/shopping)... riding the 15 & riding the 55 b/w the hub & fordham plz, the difference is like night & day....

 

lol @ playing stupid; it aint difficult to predict what happened... you canned weekend LTD service along 3rd av, that's wth happened.... ppl. tend to do more traveling on the weekend (as opposed to commuting during the weekday), and if you alter their weekend transportation travel patterns, that tends to have an adverse effect on how ppl. travel during the weekday too..... Don't believe that, just check the areas that have had weekend service revoked on their route.....

 

 

Ridership on the Bx7 and Bx10, which operate in the same corridor as the Bx20, increased by more than the ridership loss on the Bx20. The cost per rider for all routes improved on both weekdays and weekend.

there's a no-brainer... how's about makin the cost/rider 0 by ridding yourselves of the 20 already....

 

 

Weekend ridership on the alternate Bx16 and Bx31 increased, although not as much as ridership declined on the Bx34. Some of the displaced riders, particularly on the southern end of the route, likely shifted to the nearby 4 or D trains. The cost per rider of alternative bus

services (Bx16 and Bx31) decreased substantially. The elimination of weekend service on the Bx34 did not adversely affect crowding on the Bx31. NYCT staff is currently in the process of analyzing weekend loads on the Bx16 and will adjust service if necessary.

 

that's b/c ridership on the 16 & ridership on the 34 is not interchangable.... the ppl. taking 16's don't think twice about the 34 (it's not like say, the Bx1/2 along the concourse)....

 

Head on over to 205th , and notice the amt. of ppl. that are waiting for 16's on 206th, and those that are waiting along bainbridge for 34's.... huge difference.... They say those riders likely shifted to the subway - Gee, think much? That's what they do when the 34 is running... That's what they did when the 34 was running during the weekday....

 

The 31 has nothin to do with this... aint no one in woodlawn looking forward to take 31's to the over walking to 233rd & catching the 16 to either the or the ... especially w/ the headache that the is on weekends.... that's just stupid.... If weekend ridership increased on the 31, it had squat to do w/ the 34....

 

 

 

I'm gonna rip each of their "discussion" portions one by one.... It's disgusting how they're formulating opinions of ridership habits just on numbers, alone.... You do have to factor intangibles, and actually consider actual ridership habits - and this is part 1 of my assessments of doing just that....

 

part 2 (and most likely part 3), forthcoming.....

[Gorgor]

Buy a car.

 

That's all I got. You have a special bus service designed purely to make your trip faster. You have the 4, 5, and 6 trains. You have the SAS making huge steps. You have the crosstown bus to any of the 15, 15 SBS, 101, 102, or 103 routes. You even have the 31.

 

If you can look at that and still moan...

 

I have a car, and there's absolutely no way that I'm gonna pay for a monthly spot downtown in addition to the monthly spot in my garage at home already.

 

And I don't think you know why we wanted an express bus. Not only was it 10-20 minutes faster than the subway, it was more convenient and we got a nice comfy seat.

 

101 and 102 don't go downtown, 103 doesn't have limited which will take well over an hour, 31 to where? I can walk faster than that thing and it runs so infrequently. Crosstown buses are slow and run too infrequently, and are SRO after they leave 1st Avenue. Years back they used to have skip-stop on the crosstowns, where two buses would leave the terminal at the same time and make every other stop. I sometimes see that in the PM rush going westbound, but it's desperately needed in the morning so that it'll actually be faster than walking. I'll be partially satisfied when the SAS is completed, assuming that there's approximately 2 minute headways like on the .

 

And using your logic, any express bus that is close to a local bus, regardless of where it goes as long as it intersects with a subway line somewhere, should be eliminated even if it means increasing the commute time by up to 50%. (Yes, 40 minutes (X90) + 50% = 1 hour (walking + 4/5/6 + walking)

[Q43LTD]

"The discontinuation of the Q79 was difficult to analyze. This very low ridership

route did not have convenient transit alternatives. It is assumed that most riders are driving or taking car services to make their trip"

 

^ Right there, where is the MTA allowed to "assume" for the people? They're in business to serve the city and that includes all the people.

Well, we know what happens when you assume. Anyway, here are two statements that don't sit right with me:

 

95% of all subway and bus riders were unaffected or minimally affected

 

While more subway riders were affected than bus riders, most were

minimally impacted by small service frequency changes

 

Oh, this one really got to me:

 

Bus ridership losses were greatest in Manhattan and Brooklyn, where

bus ridership was already declining

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Buy a car.

 

That's all I got. You have a special bus service designed purely to make your trip faster. You have the 4, 5, and 6 trains. You have the SAS making huge steps. You have the crosstown bus to any of the 15, 15 SBS, 101, 102, or 103 routes. You even have the 31.

 

If you can look at that and still moan...

 

I certainly can... Just because one has "alternatives" doesn't mean anything. The crosstown buses are terribly slow. The M15 does NOT go where the X90 went, nor does the and train, so I don't see your point. Whether you want to admit or not, there was a reason why the X90 was created and the knows that the route was unique. They're just trying to cut corners and push the M15 as this "great" alternative and it is nothing more than a glorified limited stop bus. It does nothing to help former X90 riders. It's the same BS they've pulled with the X16, pointing to the fact that we have ferry service. The X16 saved at least 20 - 30 minutes off of our commutes each way and if the ran the S48 and S98 better, then I could see them saying that that is an alternative. The S98 is supposed to be about 15 minutes from my house to the ferry and there were times when it would take almost 45 minutes on the S98 because they were 20 - 25 minutes late and running all bunched up. This has nothing to do w/eliticism and everything to do w/the screwing over numerous communities because they simply want to rid themselves of certain lines and the only reason you refuse to see this or admit this is because the neighborhood in question happens to be wealthy, so you want to say screw them to get back at them.

 

Let's have your main transportation cut and then we'll tell you to get a car. All communities are entitled to decent transportation and this includes the Upper East Side and they too were hit hard by the cuts. Yes they have "alternatives", but those alternatives in many cases are already overflowing, which you fail to admit, so it isn't like they have all of these alternatives just because.

 

You want us to all get cars huh? Okay sure, and tell me how you would get around with all of these cars on the road because I do know that you use the bus...

[cotb16]

The way how I see it, if the Bx15 comes first, more people will board on that bus and vice versa with the Bx55. I did seem to notice that the Bx55 is well utilized during middays than last year, which is surprising.

 

As for Country Club's Bx24, just axe the route and isolate them. They're too ungrateful anyways, and the Bx8 DID GO to Westchester Sq.

 

I agree with the first paragraph. Traveling north from Morrisania to Fordham, I always see a crowded Bx15 arrive first, to be followed by an empty Bx55 that usually doesn't pass the Bx15 until before Tremont Av (since most passengers get on south of the Cross Bronx Expwy). I also agree with the Bx55 being well utilized during middays since many use it to reach appointments at doctors or social services, as well as visiting relatives.

 

As for its weekend service, the Bx15 gained ridership because IMO the weekend construction that knocked and service out in the Bronx resulted in riders using the Bx15 instead of the Bx55 to reach the subways in Harlem.

 

I've said this before, there needs to be a restructuring on 3rd Av that makes the Bx55 the mightier (and more reliable) route of the two. The Bx15 would travel between Fordham and 136th/Lincoln while the Bx55 would travel between Gun Hill station and Harlem MNRR station (via 3rd/Madison Av bridges).

[Q101viaSteinway]

For the X90: "Some of these riders may have shifted to the M15 local and Select Bus Service (SBS) or the subway lines; however, given introduction of the M15 SBS, which attracted many new riders, and that the ridership could have shifted to several of the subway stations, it is difficult to be sure how these riders are currently making their trip."

 

Which attracted many new riders? Are they serious? Yes, the M15 SBS did attract a lot more ridership during midday and on the weekends when traffic is relatively light, but nobody in their right mind would want to be in a bus, standing, for an hour going downtown. They also failed to say how many former X90 passengers have added in a crosstown bus to get to the subway into their commute. And even with the way too frequent headways it was still much more cost efficient than the other express buses, and they could've easily just run only half the amount of buses and end up nearly making a profit.

 

Also, just in general for express buses, how does it end up costing them practically $300 to run one bus one way? What exactly is included in these direct operating costs? If you want to include deadheading then in total the gas shouldn't cost more than $100, the driver $50, and then what's the other $150 being used towards? Oh right, typical government agency wastefulness. Just the sheer fact that a private company came in, although not legal, to take over the X90 and QM22 routes, should say that they saw a huge potential to turn a profit by providing a faster alternative to the subway in an area where there's tons of demand and barely any supply.

 

What is status of TransportAzumah restarting X90

[B35 via Church]

Well, we know what happens when you assume. Anyway, here are two statements that don't sit right with me:

 

95% of all subway and bus riders were unaffected or minimally affected

 

While more subway riders were affected than bus riders, most were

minimally impacted by small service frequency changes

 

Oh, this one really got to me:

 

Bus ridership losses were greatest in Manhattan and Brooklyn, where

bus ridership was already declining

 

That 1st pdf... yeah, I scoffed at that BS....

 

That entire document read to me as one huge summation/attempt at damage control... basically tryna justify that the cuts weren't "all that bad", and they made the right decisions that didn't grossly affect the masses (as if they care either way about that anyway)....

[checkmatechamp13]

I'll go have a look at the documents myself in a bit.

 

Trips to places like Columbus Circle are certainly less frequent because it is more of a hassle via the bus and I don't always feel like using the subway with bags and such. I also find myself using car service a lot more. I rarely use the S54 anymore. I may have used it once in several months and that was only because it was quicker at that time than waiting for car service. I also didn't go to Coney Island at all, something I used to do with the X28, which is now gone on the weekends. :mad: So in sum, I am riding less to certain places and spending much more money to commute and I have certainly been affected by the cuts as have others. :mad:

 

 

You still have the M5 and M7 (not to mention the subway) available to reach Columbus Circle. One option out of five was eliminated, but there are four left.

 

And the X28 has the subway paralleling it. You just choose not to use it.

 

Which attracted many new riders? Are they serious? Yes, the M15 SBS did attract a lot more ridership during midday and on the weekends when traffic is relatively light, but nobody in their right mind would want to be in a bus, standing, for an hour going downtown. They also failed to say how many former X90 passengers have added in a crosstown bus to get to the subway into their commute. And even with the way too frequent headways it was still much more cost efficient than the other express buses, and they could've easily just run only half the amount of buses and end up nearly making a profit.

 

Also, just in general for express buses, how does it end up costing them practically $300 to run one bus one way? What exactly is included in these direct operating costs? If you want to include deadheading then in total the gas shouldn't cost more than $100, the driver $50, and then what's the other $150 being used towards? Oh right, typical government agency wastefulness. Just the sheer fact that a private company came in, although not legal, to take over the X90 and QM22 routes, should say that they saw a huge potential to turn a profit by providing a faster alternative to the subway in an area where there's tons of demand and barely any supply.

 

You have a point in both paragraphs.

 

I don't see how somebody could make a profit on the QM22 (unless they interlined it with another route or something). As far as costs go they don't make sense either. If the runtime is 3 hours (90 minutes to Manhattan and a 90 minute deadhead, which is being very generous), the driver is being paid $30 per hour, for a total of $90.

 

Gas costs something like $0.70 per gallon for them (let's round it to $1 to again, be generous). If they get 5 miles to the gallon, and they run for 40 miles, that's $8 in gas.

 

I am still pissed at how they f*cked over the B4, citing low ridership in Sheepshead Bay which was an absolute lie and what's worse is they've left an entire neighborhood with basically no direct bus service to the subway. :mad: :mad::tdown:

 

I don't even think they cited low ridership.

 

I may not use the S54 much anymore, but I see plenty of people walking up those hills along Manor Rd that would be taking the S54, and many of them are elderly people too having to schlepp with bags and such. :mad: :mad: :tdown: You can say the route had low ridership, but they did an excellent job of killing ridership by having buses go MIA and show up whenever.

 

Most of the S54's ridership disappeared into thin air. Even if all of the S54's ridership shifted to the S53 and S57 (which is unlikely), the net loss is still over 800 riders if I recall correctly.

 

Buy a car.

 

That's all I got. You have a special bus service designed purely to make your trip faster. You have the 4, 5, and 6 trains. You have the SAS making huge steps. You have the crosstown bus to any of the 15, 15 SBS, 101, 102, or 103 routes. You even have the 31.

 

If you can look at that and still moan...

 

It would be one thing if the X90 carried air, but the thing about Manhattan is that you can have a ton of service and all of them have decent ridership. Like he said, if service was reduced so every bus had a seated load, it could come close to breaking even.

 

just great, more cuts coming our way... I don't see what more they can do to the Bx5 to increase its runtime - It's already running on Crosby av.... and no way in hell do they have that route running in country club.....

 

 

By "increase runtime", they just mean that on the schedule, they'll have it take longer between 2 points.

 

For example, every S89 used to take 50 minutes between Bayonne and Eltingville. Now, they have it down as taking anywhere from 45-49 minutes (if I remember correctly). They didn't change the actual routing, but they adjusted the running time. They're doing the same thing with the Bx5 except in reverse.

 

Encouraging... more like forcing....

 

You see what they did there.... They say the combined cost/rider increased; they don't want to admit that they forced ppl. onto Bx39's & the cost per rider actually went UP as a result of it.... This tells you that the riders aren't clamoring for the 39 like that....

 

What I'm getting at is, the swap didn't yield the desired result on the 39 (cost/rider going DOWN) - even though there is that increase of usage on the 39.... but it actually decreased on the 41.... smh lmao.... Of course the swap itself didn't adversely affect crowding, b/c you got the 28/38, the 55, & the 30 in that specific area; there's a multitude of bus options available.... there's gonna be crowding in that area regardless....

 

I'd like to know how much of an increase there was, in the amt. of riders (north of gun hill, off 39's) xferring to the Bx12 or xferring to the 41.....

 

 

Well, there are a few things that need to be factored into their calculations:

* The subway runs above the Bx39, so if ridership shifted from the buses to the subway, it's better for them.

* If riders are taking the Bx41 to the Bx39 (instead of just staying on the Bx41 like they used to), it'll look like the cost of the Bx39 has decreased, when it actually hasn't.

 

The one thing I found funny was the fact that they said "Bus ridership decreased in Brooklyn the most" after the service reductions. It's like "No sh*t. Brooklyn got the most reductions, so obviously, the decreases in ridership will be pronounced there".

[GreatOne2k]

The Bx55 on Webster Avenue should be more useful since people can use the Bx41 or Bx55 and transfer to the Bx39. Or the Bx39 and transfer to the Bx55 or Bx41.

[B35 via Church]

By "increase runtime", they just mean that on the schedule, they'll have it take longer between 2 points.

 

For example, every S89 used to take 50 minutes between Bayonne and Eltingville. Now, they have it down as taking anywhere from 45-49 minutes (if I remember correctly). They didn't change the actual routing, but they adjusted the running time. They're doing the same thing with the Bx5 except in reverse.

 

I understand that; I know what runtime is....

 

I only brought up crosby av in that sense b/c the Bx5 was moved along it, which resulted in an increase in runtime on that route (of at least 5 mins.)... compared to the old routing which just shot along Bruckner up there.....

 

and I don't put nothin past the MTA.... when you say "they'll have it take longer between 2 points", I see some'n like that being attributed to some kind of cut... it reeks of some sort of headway increase on top of altering its runtime.....

 

they wouldn't bring up something so minute if it was just about increasing runtime... it's one of those things where you, the passenger, wouldn't even notice such a change even took place, if you weren't keen enough to study/remember a particular route's schedule down to the 'T'.....

 

 

Well, there are a few things that need to be factored into their calculations:

* The subway runs above the Bx39, so if ridership shifted from the buses to the subway, it's better for them.

* If riders are taking the Bx41 to the Bx39 (instead of just staying on the Bx41 like they used to), it'll look like the cost of the Bx39 has decreased, when it actually hasn't.

 

The one thing I found funny was the fact that they said "Bus ridership decreased in Brooklyn the most" after the service reductions. It's like "No sh*t. Brooklyn got the most reductions, so obviously, the decreases in ridership will be pronounced there".

 

exactly.... which is why you shouldn't go hardbody on just numbers... analyses of analysts should not be the ultimate determinant of dictating levels of service (and what service, period) should go (and in what quantity) where..... to them, riders are seen as numbers, not actual people with actual specific travel needs.... that's one of my main problems w/ that whole thought process....

 

as for the "uhh, no sh*t sherlock" type of comments... yeh, I noticed quite a bit of em in that NYCT PDF....

 

 

The Bx55 on Webster Avenue should be more useful since people can use the Bx41 or Bx55 and transfer to the Bx39. Or the Bx39 and transfer to the Bx55 or Bx41.

problem is, the 55's not much of a draw anymore up there, now that it (along w/ the 41) stops dead at Gun Hill/WPR

[GreatOne2k]

problem is, the 55's not much of a draw anymore up there, now that it (along w/ the 41) stops dead at Gun Hill/WPR

 

 

Bx55 always ended at Gun Hill Road. The crowds at Fordham and Webster can now spread out instead of being packed on Bx41 and Bx41 LTD buses. The Bx55 LTD can now get some of those crowds (if it shows up at the right times) . That segment needs as many riders as it can get to stop the MTA from cutting anymore Bx55 service north of Fordham Road.

[B35 via Church]

Bx55 always ended at Gun Hill Road. The crowds at Fordham and Webster can now spread out instead of being packed on Bx41 and Bx41 LTD buses. The Bx55 LTD can now get some of those crowds (if it shows up at the right times) . That segment needs as many riders as it can get to stop the MTA from cutting anymore Bx55 service north of Fordham Road.

 

thanks for the correction... tryna keep up w/ all these other replies I'm commenting on...

 

btw, I'm not disagreeing with you... Instead of "encouraging" ridership on the Bx39, they should be doing the same thing (on the rest of the routes in the system, really), with the Bx55...

 

I hate to say this, but with these cheapskates (intentionally or unintentionally) forcing ppl. on 15's & 41's, it makes it easier to wash its hands with the 55....

 

the whole discontinuation of weekend service on that route did not help matters any, if the goal was to maintain some sort of crowd control.....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You still have the M5 and M7 (not to mention the subway) available to reach Columbus Circle. One option out of five was eliminated, but there are four left.

 

Oh please!! I'm not talking about the subway, I'm talking about the friggin' bus. Here's an idea... Since you recommend the subway, why don't I give you all of my heavy bags to carry up all of the stairs up and down and see what an alternative you think that is... As for the M5 and M7, both are now OVERCROWDED. That's the thing you fail to realize. When you cut one route, what do you think happens to the "alternative" bus routes?? If they're looking to cut back obviously they're not going to add an abundant amount of service on either line. Yes, they are other options, but that doesn't mean that they're viable options. Both the M5 and M7 are SLOWER and less reliable as a result of the M6 being killed. The M5 was extended and the M7 has to pick up the slack from the M6, so why would I want to use "alternatives" that are slower, more unreliable and overcrowded??

 

You clearly do the same thing that they do... Look at a map and say, "There, here are some alternatives", without weighing the problems that the alternatives will have.

 

 

 

And the X28 has the subway paralleling it. You just choose not to use it.

 

Yeah, let's see... X28, which is one transfer from the X1 or X10 and 15 minutes to get to Dyker Heights, or the to the or train and additional commuting time...

 

I don't even think they cited low ridership.

Yeah, well, I'm citing it because what other reason could they give for cutting it?? Either way it's total BS.

 

Most of the S54's ridership disappeared into thin air. Even if all of the S54's ridership shifted to the S53 and S57 (which is unlikely), the net loss is still over 800 riders if I recall correctly.

 

It didn't vanish... People are being forced to walk up hills or stay in. I see plenty of elderly folks now on the weekends walking up those hills on Manor Rd with bags and such because there is no service now. Really disgusting. Great going . :mad: :tdown: These folks are not in any condition to be walking with bags like that up hills.

[checkmatechamp13]

Oh please!! I'm not talking about the subway, I'm talking about the friggin' bus. Here's an idea... Since you recommend the subway, why don't I give you all of my heavy bags to carry up all of the stairs up and down and see what an alternative you think that is... As for the M5 and M7, both are now OVERCROWDED. That's the thing you fail to realize. When you cut one route, what do you think happens to the "alternative" bus routes?? If they're looking to cut back obviously they're not going to add an abundant amount of service on either line. Yes, they are other options, but that doesn't mean that they're viable options. Both the M5 and M7 are SLOWER and less reliable as a result of the M6 being killed. The M5 was extended and the M7 has to pick up the slack from the M6, so why would I want to use "alternatives" that are slower, more unreliable and overcrowded??

 

You clearly do the same thing that they do... Look at a map and say, "There, here are some alternatives", without weighing the problems that the alternatives will have.

 

Yeah, let's see... X28, which is one transfer from the X1 or X10 and 15 minutes to get to Dyker Heights, or the to the or train and additional commuting time...

 

Yeah, well, I'm citing it because what other reason could they give for cutting it?? Either way it's total BS.

 

It didn't vanish... People are being forced to walk up hills or stay in. I see plenty of elderly folks now on the weekends walking up those hills on Manor Rd with bags and such because there is no service now. Really disgusting. Great going . :mad: :tdown: These folks are not in any condition to be walking with bags like that up hills.

 

* You're not going to move me with the "heavy bags" comment. From my home to ShopRite is 1.25 minutes according to Google Maps. From your office to Columbus Circle is 1.05 miles, and I guarantee you I'm carrying heavier stuff than you are.

 

* I doubt the M5 and M7 are overcrowded.

 

* I have no idea why they cut the B4.

 

* If they're staying in, they're not using transit, and therefore the ridership vanished. If they're carrying bags and didn't use some bus for their trip, the ridership vanished.

 

Anyway, I got through reading both documents, and here are my analyses:

 

* The Bx7 and Bx10 ridership probably increased because people were transferring between the two routes instead of taking the Bx20, since it doesn't run off-peak. So it's not a "true" increase.

 

* For the B13, there is the chance that ridership was increasing anyway.

 

* That Bx24 is expensive. It costs $4.27 per passenger on the weekdays, and a whopping $10.47 on the weekends. It's almost as bad as the old S60!

 

* I don't see how Bx31 ridership can go down, and at the same time the cost is going down, unless they're reducing service on the line.

 

* The B64 is still hanging on, probably due to the Bay Ridge riders (it's $1.85 during the week and $2.03 on the weekends)

 

* They should've included the B44 ridership as a courtesy, to show whether B4 riders are using it to reach the . B36 ridership is down, so it's unlikely a lot of B4 riders are using it.

 

* After the reductions, the X27/X28 actually made money! The cost per passenger was $3.52 (combined. The X27 was probably cheaper)

 

* I knew M98 ridership would decrease. It's down to $4.48 per passenger, which is enough to include it in the next round of cuts.

 

On a side note, I wonder if M101/102/103 ridership shifted to the M15, as the 3 routes saw a decrease.

 

* I wonder why weekend Q27 service saw the increase in ridership, but also an increase in the cost per rider. The increase must've been really peaked, or else the cost wouldn't have increased that much (from $1.58 to $2.13)

 

* They say that they want to decrease midday service on the S66, but it already runs every 30 minutes. Maybe they mean on the shoulder periods.

 

* They should've mentioned SIR ridership (and S51 ridership) when talking about the S76. There was a net loss of 1,539 riders (when you consider the ones that shifted to the S74 and S78), and I'm sure when you count the S51 and SIR, that number goes down even further.

 

I'd say the total loss was around 600 riders.

 

* I wonder how the X1-9 managed to see an increase in ridership. I guess riders came from the X13, X16, and X18 to take those routes.

 

* It looks like the BxM4 streamlining was a good choice. Ridership pretty much remained constant, and the cost on the BxM3 and the BxM4 decreased slightly.