Jump to content

Evaluation of the June 2010 Service Reductions


IRT Bronx Express

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Oh come on now... You know you've been saying that the L.E.S lost the most service in terms service versus the Upper East Side, but ridership is higher on the Upper East Side AND more cost effective and that was my point, thus they shouldn't be losing that much service because they use their service overall more than the Lower East Side does and it is cheaper to run, and here are the stats to prove it. With that I rest my case. :) :cool:

 

http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=485632&postcount=74

 

Thanks for evading my points and reiterating everything I said.....

 

And I dont trust these "stats" because when the last set of service cuts came before the 2010 cuts, they've been exposed for blindly cutting services without actual and proper reasoning behind their cuts. Ridership IS much higher in the Upper East Side now because there were barely any major cuts (and I mean devastating cuts) in the area.

 

The one major thing they lost was the x90 and I agree that it was a hard hitting cut for them. Had they reduced the headways for the line, that line itself would've been fine. The M30 was barely utilized to its fullest so that was meeting its own death. Within the entire 2010 cuts, the Lower East Side & South Brooklyn got hit the worst. The Bronx & Queens got some pretty screwed up revisions and cuts.

 

The Upper East Side barely got grazed with the exception of the loss of Express Bus service. Just be happy that lines like the M31 and the others surrounding that area isnt running with 15-20 minute headways...

 

If Staten Island lost substantial & important services(and I mean services that would really hit communities hard), you'd be throwing a shit fit too....

 

And excuse me, but I think we were talking about RIDERSHIP, not COST TO OPERATE.

 

L.E.S = 103,350 Passengers in total

U.E.S = 79,760 Passengers in total

 

So...which one did you say was higher? :( Do the math next time!

 

And do you know why L.E.S and Lower Manhattan routes cost more to operate?

 

#1. The demand for service

#2. Interlined runs with other L.E.S / Lower Manhattan routes.

 

U.E.S routes barely interlined with one another, so that made them cheaper to operate. L.E.S / Lower Manhattan routes interlined often because of the demand for service in certain areas. So that makes them more costly to operate WITH good reasoning. I rest my case!

 

1) But the thing is how much more time is the new commute? If it's just a few more minutes, it's not worth it for the MTA to run a whole new service for you.

 

But since it was a more comfortable alternative and did see decent ridership, like I said, the X90 should've kept some of its service.

 

2) Well, the subway is always a faster alternative than the local bus if you're traveling over any significant distance, and the local bus is always faster if you're not traveling that far.

 

Of course, the problem is that sometimes there are gaps in service on the subway. There were times when I've waited close to 20 minutes for an (R) train to stop at 8th Street. But the same can be said for buses.

 

3) I could've sworn I saw you ask for stats. :confused: Anyway, I have my handy dandy service reductions booklet right here, and the ridership and cost is as follows (weekday/weekend)

 

M9: 5,960/5,940 $1.75/$1.91

M14: 38,660/41,820 $1.03/$1.14

M21: 2,000/1,410 $2.84/$5.32

M22: 4,310/3,250 $2.27/$3.39

M30: 1,220 $3.32 (No weekend service)

M31: 12,260/10,920 $1.39/$1.57

M57: 8,630/8,170 $1.32/$1.70

M79: 19,740/18,820 $0.86/$0.96

 

So you're right that the UES routes are more efficient than the LES routes, and the stats prove it. :(

 

Efficient by cost, right? If I look at this correctly, the first set of numbers is ridership while the second set of numbers is cost to operate or w/e

 

Having to total up both L.E.S and U.E.S routes

 

L.E.S = 103,350 Passengers

U.E.S = 79,760 Passengers

 

If I read this stats thing correctly, that would mean that the L.E.S is still high on ridership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for evading my points and reiterating everything I said.....

 

And I dont trust these "stats" because when the last set of service cuts came before the 2010 cuts, they've been exposed for blindly cutting services without actual and proper reasoning behind their cuts. Ridership IS much higher in the Upper East Side now because there were barely any major cuts (and I mean devastating cuts) in the area.

 

The one major thing they lost was the x90 and I agree that it was a hard hitting cut for them. Had they reduced the headways for the line, that line itself would've been fine. The M30 was barely utilized to its fullest so that was meeting its own death. Within the entire 2010 cuts, the Lower East Side & South Brooklyn got hit the worst. The Bronx & Queens got some pretty screwed up revisions and cuts.

 

The Upper East Side barely got grazed with the exception of the loss of Express Bus service. Just be happy that lines like the M31 and the others surrounding that area isnt running with 15-20 minute headways...

 

If Staten Island lost substantial & important services(and I mean services that would really hit communities hard), you'd be throwing a shit fit too....

 

interesting what hit bronx so hard???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Upper East Side barely got grazed with the exception of the loss of Express Bus service. Just be happy that lines like the M31 and the others surrounding that area isnt running with 15-20 minute headways...

 

If it did then nobody would use it. Most people traveling along York take a cab as it is now with such infrequent M31 bus service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it did then nobody would use it. Most people traveling along York take a cab as it is now with such infrequent M31 bus service.

 

Thats exactly the point I was trying to make. With the cuts that happened in the Lower East Side, ridership had dropped. If the Upper East Side was like that, ridership would've dropped tremendously. L.E.S ridership on certain routes dropped because of the major headways change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats exactly the point I was trying to make. With the cuts that happened in the Lower East Side, ridership had dropped. If the Upper East Side was like that, ridership would've dropped tremendously. L.E.S ridership on certain routes dropped because of the major headways change.

 

Also you can't really increase the headways because it, along with the M57, have a lot of ridership on 57th Street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also you can't really increase the headways because it, along with the M57, have a lot of ridership on 57th Street.

 

Yup, and the M57 itself can't take on the load. Thats why they have artics run on that M31. But you never know, this is the MTA we are talking about...they've blindly cut/reduced routes before...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Thanks for evading my points and reiterating everything I said.....

 

And I dont trust these "stats" because when the last set of service cuts came before the 2010 cuts, they've been exposed for blindly cutting services without actual and proper reasoning behind their cuts. Ridership IS much higher in the Upper East Side now because there were barely any major cuts (and I mean devastating cuts) in the area.

 

If Staten Island lost substantial & important services(and I mean services that would really hit communities hard), you'd be throwing a shit fit too....

 

2) Efficient by cost, right? If I look at this correctly, the first set of numbers is ridership while the second set of numbers is cost to operate or w/e

 

Having to total up both L.E.S and U.E.S routes

 

L.E.S = 103,350 Passengers

U.E.S = 79,760 Passengers

 

If I read this stats thing correctly, that would mean that the L.E.S is still high on ridership.

 

1) Those stats were from 2009, so it was before any (major) reductions happened.

 

2) True, but the LES services were generally more expensive (per rider) to operate than the UES routes. I mean, they weren't unreasonably expensive, but the UES routes were still cheaper.

 

But to be honest (and feel free to disagree), I don't think either of those areas got hit particularly hard, since the frequency of the remaining routes is reasonable, and there aren't any huge gaps in the network (e.g: Nobody's walking extremely long distances to reach a bus).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't service increase on M31??? that line is a sardine can yeah it does not duplicate the subway

 

It could increase, but then you'd be choking service along the line by increasing chances of bunching due to traffic and so-on, the line already has a terrible issue with bunching. It still kills me as to how they throw those NGs with the luggage racks on the line....thats the biggest and the most legit complaint I've heard as of late...

 

1) Those stats were from 2009, so it was before any (major) reductions happened.

 

2) True, but the LES services were generally more expensive (per rider) to operate than the UES routes. I mean, they weren't unreasonably expensive, but the UES routes were still cheaper.

 

I wouldn't doubt it, a lot of interlined runs occur in the L.E.S and Lower Manhattan itself. There is not much interlining in the Upper East Side which would be a factor into why L.E.S service is more costly to operate. There was more of a demand for service down there on certain routes especially the M9 to/from Battery Park City (buses would still be packed till the last run of the day), the M21, M22 and what was then the M6.

 

The M9 had interlined runs with the M22 and M21, other interlined runs with the M6. The L.E.S and the Lower Manhattan portions always had a higher demand for service. There was always a lot of interlining in the Lower Manhattan areas so I do believe that the cost to operate was more higher. With these new cuts, they cut down on interlined runs, making them cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most people traveling along York take a cab as it is now with such infrequent M31 bus service.

They can thank the M57 for that.....

 

 

I don't think either of those areas got hit particularly hard, since the frequency of the remaining routes is reasonable, and there aren't any huge gaps in the network (e.g: Nobody's walking extremely long distances to reach a bus).

Yeah, b/c, you know.... gettin hit hard of course is a subjective term :)

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

 

 

anyway, as far as that back & forth discussion goes....

 

When it comes to overall bus service, I have to say LES got hit worse than UES did.... it's a large reason why those (F) trains are crowded on weekends; that's the one line I avoid, esp. on a saturday..... weekend usage (at least during the afternoon anyway) almost mimics weekday ridership on that line w/i manhattan....

 

To bring up which of the 2 areas have the most riders on its routes, is a separate argument... that's more an argument of population density, as it relates to public transportation..... As if to say, you're more prone to seeing LES patrons taking the bus.... you're more prone to seeing UES patrons taking cabs (this is NOT implying that UES riders don't take buses in large numbers.... it's a large dense area for crying out loud).....

 

In other words, out of every 100 people (for example), there's more ppl. out of the 100 that are taking buses w/i the LES..... more (bus) service was interrupted/tinkered with.... that's more or less cait's point....

 

via's point is, UES has higher ridershipped routes running in the area, so therefore, any service cut to any of its routes would impact UES harder..... it would be like telling me (using that example), nzzzzz, why are you talkin in hundreds when I'm talking in tens of thousands..... lol....

 

That's why I haven't said much about this particular discussion up until this point.....

It's like arguing which makes your tv picture clearer; adjusting the tint or adjusting the contrast......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I'm seeing, you really need a time out. Sit down somewhere and don't act like a know-it-all because you don't know anything.

 

Oh, and answering back a moderator will give them even more reason to ban you. Just saying.

 

I do not know everything cause if I did I would have submitted plans to MTA already

Link to comment
Share on other sites

anyway, as far as that back & forth discussion goes....

 

When it comes to overall bus service, I have to say LES got hit worse than UES did.... it's a large reason why those (F) trains are crowded on weekends; that's the one line I avoid, esp. on a saturday..... weekend usage (at least during the afternoon anyway) almost mimics weekday ridership on that line w/i manhattan....

]loud[/i]).....

 

It's also the reason why M14A service has suffered dramatically because of the increase in demand. Riders that used to take the M9 to Union Square now go on the M14A. Riders that used to take the M21 to Bellevue Hospital would either take the M21 to the M15 or the M9 to the M15. And then to see more M14Ds over As along 14th Street doesnt make matters any better....It's been getting so bad to the point where some A riders take the D over to Avenue C to get the M9....As frequent as the M14A is, its not enough, even though bunching situations make the service no better than it really is...

 

However, I will say that the M21 turning into the Houston Street Crosstown was a pretty brilliant move, but to shorten the M9 down to 23rd Street - V.A Hospital was a bad idea all in itself....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also the reason why M14A service has suffered dramatically because of the increase in demand. Riders that used to take the M9 to Union Square now go on the M14A. Riders that used to take the M21 to Bellevue Hospital would either take the M21 to the M15 or the M9 to the M15. And then to see more M14Ds over As along 14th Street doesnt make matters any better....It's been getting so bad to the point where some A riders take the D over to Avenue C to get the M9....As frequent as the M14A is, its not enough, even though bunching situations make the service no better than it really is...

 

However, I will say that the M21 turning into the Houston Street Crosstown was a pretty brilliant move, but to shorten the M9 down to 23rd Street - V.A Hospital was a bad idea all in itself....

 

true the M14 is literally a slaveship. well can't refute facts how would you improve M9???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, when looking at bus ridership you HAVE to look at the overall ridership, not base it off percentages. Percentage wise I'd definitely say there's more people on the Lower East Side using buses than on the Upper East Side, but number wise there's no comparison; there's much more riders using the bus up here than down there.

 

And regarding the M31s with luggage racks, that's just plain stupid. Nobody uses them, and when the bus gets packed people will just sit on them, and I've done so a couple times. Not once have I ever seen anyone actually put luggage on there.

 

The M31 also definitely needs more arctics on the route in addition to increased service. Despite higher operating costs, running a bus every 5 minutes all day would increase ridership substantially because most people traveling on York will look down the street, and if there's no bus coming they'll stick their arm in the air and get a cab within a minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But to be honest (and feel free to disagree), I don't think either of those areas got hit particularly hard, since the frequency of the remaining routes is reasonable, and there aren't any huge gaps in the network (e.g: Nobody's walking extremely long distances to reach a bus).

 

Well I certainly disagree... You should try riding some of these routes before you make that claim. The M1 - M3 routes have run like sh*t of late and buses are just either backed up in traffic, late or MIA. With the way service is now, it doesn't take much for overcrowding to occur.

 

 

There are alot of days I prefer to take the M5 Limited home than be packed onto the (1). And don't say it's because I'm a busfanner because I get on @ 42nd/6th and alot of the same people who board there don't get off until the Heights.

 

Well, I've done that myself, albeit the M2 up to 168th street when I had to do a private tutoring session up there years ago... Quite frankly it's also a comfort issue and a safety issue and in those cases then yes you may take the slower form of transportation. I was thinking more in line with the express bus, which accommodates all three of those issues... Speed, safety and comfort, so in that case it is a no brainer.

 

 

Thanks for evading my points and reiterating everything I said.....

 

And I dont trust these "stats" because when the last set of service cuts came before the 2010 cuts, they've been exposed for blindly cutting services without actual and proper reasoning behind their cuts. Ridership IS much higher in the Upper East Side now because there were barely any major cuts (and I mean devastating cuts) in the area.

 

The one major thing they lost was the x90 and I agree that it was a hard hitting cut for them. Had they reduced the headways for the line, that line itself would've been fine. The M30 was barely utilized to its fullest so that was meeting its own death. Within the entire 2010 cuts, the Lower East Side & South Brooklyn got hit the worst. The Bronx & Queens got some pretty screwed up revisions and cuts.

 

The Upper East Side barely got grazed with the exception of the loss of Express Bus service. Just be happy that lines like the M31 and the others surrounding that area isnt running with 15-20 minute headways...

 

If Staten Island lost substantial & important services(and I mean services that would really hit communities hard), you'd be throwing a shit fit too....

 

And excuse me, but I think we were talking about RIDERSHIP, not COST TO OPERATE.

 

L.E.S = 103,350 Passengers in total

U.E.S = 79,760 Passengers in total

 

So...which one did you say was higher? :) Do the math next time!

 

And do you know why L.E.S and Lower Manhattan routes cost more to operate?

 

#1. The demand for service

#2. Interlined runs with other L.E.S / Lower Manhattan routes.

 

U.E.S routes barely interlined with one another, so that made them cheaper to operate. L.E.S / Lower Manhattan routes interlined often because of the demand for service in certain areas. So that makes them more costly to operate WITH good reasoning. I rest my case!

 

Nice way to twist things... B) I still stand by what I said though... In any event, as far as Staten Island goes, hell I don't think there is too much more to cut. I mean there are so many buses on the weekends that aren't running... :(

 

1) But the thing is how much more time is the new commute? If it's just a few more minutes, it's not worth it for the MTA to run a whole new service for you.

 

What in the world are you talking about??? :confused::confused::confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Well I certainly disagree... You should try riding some of these routes before you make that claim. The M1 - M3 routes have run like sh*t of late and buses are just either backed up in traffic, late or MIA. With the way service is now, it doesn't take much for overcrowding to occur.

 

2) What in the world are you talking about??? :confused::confused::confused:

 

1) The last time I checked, the M1/2/3 don't serve the LES. In any case, even if they're backed up, what's the longest you're going to wait for a bus? 15 minutes? That's still not that long. Now if you were regularly waiting 30 minutes and the buses showed up packed, then yeah, that would be a problem.

 

2) Well, for example if you have a subway service that takes 50 minutes and an express bus that takes 45 minutes, and the express bus doesn't see too high ridership, then it should be cut.

 

But like I said, that wasn't the case with the X90.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) The last time I checked, the M1/2/3 don't serve the LES. In any case, even if they're backed up, what's the longest you're going to wait for a bus? 15 minutes? That's still not that long. Now if you were regularly waiting 30 minutes and the buses showed up packed, then yeah, that would be a problem.

 

Nope, thats the East Village!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) The last time I checked, the M1/2/3 don't serve the LES. In any case, even if they're backed up, what's the longest you're going to wait for a bus? 15 minutes? That's still not that long. Now if you were regularly waiting 30 minutes and the buses showed up packed, then yeah, that would be a problem.

 

Yeah, but who said I was talking about the LES specifically? I was making a general statement. I said you should ride some of the routes before you go making assumptions. I don't care where the routes are or where they are. Ride them and stop basing your conclusions solely on numbers and maps. It is very easy to suggest cutting a route by just looking at a map and ridership numbers. I've said that a million times, but you're hell bent on concluding on those two things, very much the way that the (MTA) does. :tdown::tdown:

 

2) Well, for example if you have a subway service that takes 50 minutes and an express bus that takes 45 minutes, and the express bus doesn't see too high ridership, then it should be cut.

 

Uh, no, it should not just be cut. The (MTA) should explore why the route is underperforming then explore ways to increase ridership. You know they could learn a lot by conferring with the communities sometimes too. They just run to the damn numbers and look to make cuts without understanding why the routes are functioning they way that they are. :mad: You love pushing people to the subway and the subway is undergoing so much construction and constant delays. The subway in its current state is not all that glorious as you make it to be. I mean I don't see anything glorious about taking a friggin' shuttle every weekend because of track work or having to transfer to a gazillion trains because of track work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Yeah, but who said I was talking about the LES specifically? I was making a general statement. I said you should ride some of the routes before you go making assumptions. I don't care where the routes are or where they are. Ride them and stop basing your conclusions solely on numbers and maps. It is very easy to suggest cutting a route by just looking at a map and ridership numbers. I've said that a million times, but you're hell bent on concluding on those two things, very much the way that the (MTA) does. :tdown::tdown:

 

2) Uh, no, it should not just be cut. The (MTA) should explore why the route is underperforming then explore ways to increase ridership. You know they could learn a lot by conferring with the communities sometimes too. They just run to the damn numbers and look to make cuts without understanding why the routes are functioning they way that they are. :mad: You love pushing people to the subway and the subway is undergoing so much construction and constant delays. The subway in its current state is not all that glorious as you make it to be. I mean I don't see anything glorious about taking a friggin' shuttle every weekend because of track work or having to transfer to a gazillion trains because of track work.

 

1) Because the discussion was about the LES. Why bring up other routes/neighborhoods? Not to mention that I said "feel free to disagree", which was a disclaimer saying that I didn't ride those routes. (And why would I say that if I were making a general statement)

 

Like I said, if the area doesn't have a huge gap in service and buses aren't being constantly overcrowded and late, it wasn't hit that hard.

 

2) And if they do that and it doesn't increase ridership, then it should be cut.

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.