Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Amtrak7

Committee Materials Jan 2013

Recommended Posts

With this 46 service, I would integrate (add) it with the Bx6... So with that said, they'd start over there on riverside drive....

 

If it helps:

Bx6: current route, unchanged...

Bx46: current Bx6 to prospect av, then turns down prospect to serve the 2/5 station, to then take on the MTA's proposed 46 route

(sans the turnaround scenario at prospect av subway)

 

If this is confusing, I don't want to know what the Q27 or Q46 is.

 

I'll have to update my maps again :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol... Good stuff...

 

under that logic, I suppose the current B17 is too confusing... or the current B41... or the current Q85.... or any other route with a branch....

To be fair, they really should just make those branches "A" branches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would make the Bx6/46 setup similar to the Bx28/38 combination. Instead of Prospect Av (2)(5), I would extend the 46 to either Yankee Stadium or Amsterdam Av. It looks too short to be successful by itself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. I think this way, you make it more useful for people living around Longwood Avenue, since you provide them with direct access to that whole area by Yankee Stadium, as well as Upper Manhattan. (Not to mention, you help whatever industrial workers who live in Melrose, Upper Manhattan, etc)

 

With this, you're depending entirely on the industrial workers (either coming from the subway or who live in the immediate area), which means that this could end up being like the Q67 (if not worse, because at least the Q67 serves a residential area on the eastern end).

 

I was originally thinking to have this take Hunts Point to Spofford, and then go down and serve the western part of Hunts Point (because this way, you still serve the residential part of Hunts Point), but I guess the other way, you provide direct access to the (2), and service along Longwood, so I guess it's a toss-up.

 

But either way, I think this'll fail as a standalone route.

That's just it..... Their whole thing w/ this 46 is to bring back access to barretto pt. park; don't think they care about serving the industrial workers around tiffany or around longwood (on the other side of the bruck')..... Personally, I think their having it encircle the hunts point meat markets is for turnaround purposes (although it does solve the issue of eliminating uni-directional service to the food centers, which I think is by accident)....

 

This would be worse than the Q67 b/c as you said, that route has actual commuters (albeit moreso during the rush)... I don't want to make this about the 67, but I think that route should be morphed into more of a commuter route anyway (meaning, bringing maspeth/middle village & possibly even ridgewood riders to hunterspoint (7) & court sq.) over serving the industry....

 

Back to this Bx46.... this reminds me more of the BL-31 (indian point/charles point... gotta ride this again sometime) more than it does the Q67 - solely dependent on industrial workers... I can't see much if any hunts point residents opting to take this route as is; they'd simply continue to make their way to the Bx6 & commence going about their business [even if the 46 does serve longwood (6) & prospect av (2)(5)] - Which is why I would integrate it w/ the Bx6 - it would be a faster alternative to those folks that are seeking the food centers/meat mkt's from manhattan & other areas along the Bx6 west of prospect av (over dealing w/ the immediate area around hunts point (6).....

 

If this is confusing, I don't want to know what the Q27 or Q46 is.

Perplexing perhaps.... lol....

 

To be fair, they really should just make those branches "A" branches.

So you think it's confusing too?

 

I would make the Bx6/46 setup similar to the Bx28/38 combination.

 

 

Instead of Prospect Av (2)(5), I would extend the 46 to either Yankee Stadium or Amsterdam Av. It looks too short to be successful by itself

I thought about the stadium as a terminal also, but to be honest, I would have that as a Bx6 short turn (YS to ryawa/halleck via current route) over having 46's end there full time....

 

Figure(d) it would be more beneficial for current Bx6 riders to have some buses short turn @ the stadium during the rush... As far as (my idea of) the 46 from areas from the west along the Bx6 short of prospect, to hunts point (and vice versa), refer to the last paragraph of my reply to Checkmate....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C'mon, another service cut on the M8? The MTA doesn't seem to get that the worse service gets, the fewer people take the bus. When it's more frequent, more people consider it a reliable option...

The (MTA) gets it, which is why they're cutting service (remember the (MTA) its not about service, its about the numbers).  They cant take an entire route like the M8 or Bx55 at once because people will complain, so instead they minimize the service to the point where the formerly significant rider base opts to take more reliable means of transportation, and whoever is left gets  ride up sh*t creek without a paddle.  I give it three years before the M8 meets the same fate as the Bx55.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The (MTA) gets it, which is why they're cutting service (remember the (MTA) its not about service, its about the numbers).  They cant take an entire route like the M8 or Bx55 at once because people will complain, so instead they minimize the service to the point where the formerly significant rider base opts to take more reliable means of transportation, and whoever is left gets  ride up sh*t creek without a paddle.  I give it three years before the M8 meets the same fate as the Bx55.  

 

You're unfortunately right, but it really is a shame to see them pulling that again, especially after they just took a gamble and improved M21 service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C'mon, another service cut on the M8? The MTA doesn't seem to get that the worse service gets, the fewer people take the bus. When it's more frequent, more people consider it a reliable option...

 

The M8 is getting a service increase in the AM rush, from 10 minutes to 9 minutes between buses, because buses are currently loaded to 112% of guideline capacity (the increase will lower that to 94%).

 

It's also getting a service decrease middays, from 15 minutes to 20 minutes between buses, because buses are currently loaded to a mere 25% of guideline capacity (the decrease will raise that to 33%).

 

In the PM rush and evenings, there is no change.

 

Overall change in revenue miles is 0.0%. This is not a cut - it's simply a reallocation of buses from middays, when they're mostly empty, to the AM rush, when they're overcrowded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's just it..... Their whole thing w/ this 46 is to bring back access to barretto pt. park; don't think they care about serving the industrial workers around tiffany or around longwood (on the other side of the bruck')..... Personally, I think their having it encircle the hunts point meat markets is for turnaround purposes (although it does solve the issue of eliminating uni-directional service to the food centers, which I think is by accident)....

 

This would be worse than the Q67 b/c as you said, that route has actual commuters (albeit moreso during the rush)... I don't want to make this about the 67, but I think that route should be morphed into more of a commuter route anyway (meaning, bringing maspeth/middle village & possibly even ridgewood riders to hunterspoint (7) & court sq.) over serving the industry....

 

Back to this Bx46.... this reminds me more of the BL-31 (indian point/charles point... gotta ride this again sometime) more than it does the Q67 - solely dependent on industrial workers... I can't see much if any hunts point residents opting to take this route as is; they'd simply continue to make their way to the Bx6 & commence going about their business [even if the 46 does serve longwood (6) & prospect av (2)(5)] - Which is why I would integrate it w/ the Bx6 - it would be a faster alternative to those folks that are seeking the food centers/meat mkt's from manhattan & other areas along the Bx6 west of prospect av (over dealing w/ the immediate area around hunts point (6).....

 

 

Perplexing perhaps.... lol....

 

 

So you think it's confusing too?

 

 

I thought about the stadium as a terminal also, but to be honest, I would have that as a Bx6 short turn (YS to ryawa/halleck via current route) over having 46's end there full time....

 

Figure(d) it would be more beneficial for current Bx6 riders to have some buses short turn @ the stadium during the rush... As far as (my idea of) the 46 from areas from the west along the Bx6 short of prospect, to hunts point (and vice versa), refer to the last paragraph of my reply to Checkmate....

Not really. I just feel it makes no sense to have one route have multiple terminals on one end (why I think Lefferts-bound A trains should be marked as K). Make the B41 that goes down Ave N the B41A (same with B38 split), it won't hurt anyone, it'll just give people an easier point of reference. If one is running to catch the bus, it is easier to notice the route number first. It's for clarity and common sense. It's already done on routes like the M14.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point of the Bx46 is to 

a) serve a section of Hunts Point where there is no bus. Residents in the section this route will serve have a long walk to the Bx6 and area subways. 

b) riders provided a want for this service

c) having alternate Bx6 buses in place will make the Hunts Point section of the Bx6 less reliable. Not to mention the Bx6 does not directly serve a station where Lex Exp and West Side IRT services are provided. (Intervale is about 2-3 blocks away from the Bx6). Its also a greatly used route as it already is. I feel this new route is the right choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really. I just feel it makes no sense to have one route have multiple terminals on one end (why I think Lefferts-bound A trains should be marked as K). Make the B41 that goes down Ave N the B41A (same with B38 split), it won't hurt anyone, it'll just give people an easier point of reference. If one is running to catch the bus, it is easier to notice the route number first. It's for clarity and common sense. It's already done on routes like the M14.

Cool.....

 

Well we have opposing opinions as far as that goes.... Some on here may know/realize this, but I'm not one to harp on route nomenclature as much as I focus on everything else that a bus route is constituted of..... Including where the routes go, themselves.

 

 

 

Far Rock Depot said:

 

The whole point of the Bx46 is to

 

a) serve a section of Hunts Point where there is no bus. Residents in the section this route will serve have a long walk to the Bx6 and area subways.

 

b) riders provided a want for this service

 

 c) having alternate Bx6 buses in place will make the Hunts Point section of the Bx6 less reliable. Not to mention the Bx6 does not directly serve a station where Lex Exp and West Side IRT services are provided. (Intervale is about 2-3 blocks away from the Bx6). Its also a greatly used route as it already is. I feel this new route is the right choice.

The point of the Bx46 is not missed (upon me anyway)....

 

Secondly, I don't even think point 'b' is the case; again, this is all about restoring barretto park "pool" service....

 

While I don't know what was stated in that PDF, I'm not suggesting that Bx46's & Bx6's alternate.... that would be a huge disservice for Bx6 riders (especially the hunts point av section) & absolute overkill for the section where the Bx46 will travel along.....

 

What I am curious to find out is how frequent they even plan on having these Bx46's....

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The M8 is getting a service increase in the AM rush, from 10 minutes to 9 minutes between buses, because buses are currently loaded to 112% of guideline capacity (the increase will lower that to 94%).

 

It's also getting a service decrease middays, from 15 minutes to 20 minutes between buses, because buses are currently loaded to a mere 25% of guideline capacity (the decrease will raise that to 33%).

 

In the PM rush and evenings, there is no change.

 

Overall change in revenue miles is 0.0%. This is not a cut - it's simply a reallocation of buses from middays, when they're mostly empty, to the AM rush, when they're overcrowded.

 

I mean, I read it, too; I can brand it however I like as well, but for day-to-day 1-2-3-4pm purposes, it's a cut. I know the point you're making, but the proposal is for midday service to have longer headways: that is a cut. (The morning improvement is absolutely warranted, too -- buses are absolutely packed at that time). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I mean, I read it, too; I can brand it however I like as well, but for day-to-day 1-2-3-4pm purposes, it's a cut. I know the point you're making, but the proposal is for midday service to have longer headways: that is a cut. (The morning improvement is absolutely warranted, too -- buses are absolutely packed at that time). 

 

Midday service is being reduced because midday loads are extremely low. The midday reduction coincidentally matches up numerically with the rush hour increase.

 

Ridership changes over time. Service has to be adjusted to match changing demand. That means increasing service where buses are overcrowded but also decreasing service where ridership no longer warrants the current level of service.

 

Increasing service when loads get heavy but never reducing service when loads get light, as you seem to be suggesting, is unsustainable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I am curious to find out is how frequent they even plan on having these Bx46's....

Every 30 minutes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every 30 minutes

 

What he said.

 

The proposed headways and span are on page 152.

 

Weekday: Eastbound 5:30-23:30; Westbound 6:00-00:00

Saturday & Sunday: Eastbound 8:30-22:30; Westbound 9:00-23:00

 

For the hell of it:

(G) extension: Pages 146-149

Bx46: Pages 150-156

Bx15/41/55: Pages 157-162

Frequency/headway changes: Pages 166-169 (Basically, 166 just says that it'll cost $2.2 million)

QM12: Pages 170-174

 

(There's also something about relocating the staff room at Kingsbridge Road on the (B)(D) that's discussed along with the Bx15/41/55)

 

The last couple of pages of the Bx46 section are comments from the public. This is basically the same discussion we're having here (I'll put the summarized responses even though I don't necessarily agree with them)

 

* The route should be extended to either Yankee Stadium or The Hub

 

Response: There's not enough money

 

* The Bx6 should merge with the Barretto Point Shuttle.

 

Response: If it's through an extension, it would decrease reliability and the extension would be overserved (apparently they never heard of short-turns)

 

If It's through a branch, "This would lead to uneven headways and confusion for customers. It would also not be possible to serve the Prospect Avenue Station."

 

* There was an old shuttle along Oak Point Avenue/Barry Street, and they should use that route.

 

Response: This alignment is better.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The last couple of pages of the Bx46 section are comments from the public. This is basically the same discussion we're having here (I'll put the summarized responses even though I don't necessarily agree with them)

 

 

* The route should be extended to either Yankee Stadium or The Hub

Response: There's not enough money

B35 says: There's seldom ever enough money to give the people what they want..... see a pattern here?

 

* The Bx6 should merge with the Barretto Point Shuttle.

Response:

- If it's through an extension, it would decrease reliability and the extension would be overserved (apparently they never heard of short-turns)

- If It's through a branch, "This would lead to uneven headways and confusion for customers. It would also not be possible to serve the Prospect Avenue Station."

B35 says: I think the wrong question was asked here; merging suggests that the Bx6 run to hunts point alternately with hunts point av service & longwood av, etc. service, but that's neither here nor there...

 

If it's through an extension? Now let's not get stupid - Pool goers during the summer time aren't going to want to inhale dead poultry on their way to possibly having some summer time fun..... That, and it'll jam up the buses for everyone else along the Bx6 past the park....

 

Lol... bullshit, branching it wouldn't be possible to serve prospect av. subway !

What's to stop buses from turning on prospect at 163rd to get to longwood from prospect?

Confusion, yeah, okay.... Uneven headways? that's a problem w/ the current Bx6 already, of course that's failed to be mentioned - Like riders are stupid.

You can still denote the longwood branched buses at Bx46's....

 

* There was an old shuttle along Oak Point Avenue/Barry Street, and they should use that route.

Response: This alignment is better.

B35 says: That's it???

Absolute gold with this 'My d*** is bigger than yours' type of a response....

 

How about you not mislead the public & tell people the real reason buses wouldn't use any other routing that doesn't put ppl. directly in front of Baretto park...

 

** facepalm **

 

replies in red y'all....

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I oversimplified a little bit (I didn't realize you could copy & paste). Here's the full comment/response.

 

Comment:

The route of the former Hunts Point Clean Air Transportation (HP CAT) Shuttle Service would serve more businesses than the proposed route. The former route traveled on Barry Street and Oak Point Avenue (written comment submitted following preliminary

presentation).

 

Staff Response: The route was selected to provide access to as many potential riders as possible while balancing the needs of residents, businesses and park users. Operating the route via Barry Street would not serve the residential areas of Hunts Point. NYCT staff observed that Barry Street. is much narrower than the selected route and narrows further when semi-trucks park on the street. Tiffany Street is a wider through street that does not become as clogged.

 

Well, I think the part about the residents is BS. The Bx6 would still be closer (for the most part) to the residential areas of Hunts Point. I guess they have a point about Tiffany being wider, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bx40/Bx42 one step closer to a rush hour LTD, so close to those combined rush hour 5 minute headways needed (they will be 6 minutes after the service increase)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bx40/Bx42 one step closer to a rush hour LTD, so close to those combined rush hour 5 minute headways needed (they will be 6 minutes after the service increase)

same is true for the q27 middays will be 5.5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bx40/Bx42 one step closer to a rush hour LTD, so close to those combined rush hour 5 minute headways needed (they will be 6 minutes after the service increase)

That's a decrease. In order to have a LTD a bus must run 5 minutes or less during rush hour

 

same is true for the q27 middays will be 5.5

I don't think the Q27 will have midday LTD service

Edited by Q43LTD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a decrease. In order to have a LTD a bus must run 5 minutes or less during rush hour

 

I don't think the Q27 will have midday LTD service

 

That's a decrease. In order to have a LTD a bus must run 5 minutes or less during rush hour

 

I don't think the Q27 will have midday LTD service

why do you feel that way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the bx15 is not getting exstended.

 

 

- Slow, eventual discontinuing of service - shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.....

Whenever any talks of the Bx15 & the 55 emerge, I say to myself, the 55 will be gone in due time anyway.... All you have to do is look how the 55 used to run & compare it to how it runs now.....

 

- As far as the QM12 change, I'm not dedicating too many keystrokes over that.....

 

- As for that Bx46 or whatever, the more I think about it, the more I say they may as well add that service (they'd put on the 46) to the Bx6 & just have w/e amount of Bx6's turn off at prospect/163rd to run down to the industry (food center dr) via prospect, longwood, etc. running past baretto point park.... I'm not suggesting a 50/50 "split", not even close..... if they want to call the diverted buses the 46, that can still be done.... But to have buses ending at prospect av 2/5? ehh......

 

I have been saying that for a while; however, I would do it differently and have the Bx46 share a western terminus with the Bx13 and use the following route: West end is Gateway Center - then via 149 Street, Morris Avenue (161/163 Streets, Prospect Avenue, and Longwood Avenue - this would also provide service to Lincoln Hospital and eliminate a transfer to the Bx32 for this for many customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about time the BX55 gets called the BX15 get rid of some of these duplicated routes. For the BX46 I thought that hunts point area was served by the Bx6 and that route being that small it got the (MTA) bus type treatment. It's probably going to run lightly for a few years until the (MTA) say oh we must cut this route. I have a feeling this route will end up cut or combined. Now if only we can do something about the reconstructing bus service in Astoria and Long Island City Queens and I really think the B74 should be cut and have the B36 take over the route either running via Mermaid or Surf I can't believe a route like that was never cut and combined in 2010.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.....however, I would do it differently and have the Bx46 share a western terminus with the Bx13 and use the following route:

 

West end is Gateway Center - then via 149 Street, Morris Avenue (161/163 Streets, Prospect Avenue, and Longwood Avenue - this would also provide service to Lincoln Hospital and eliminate a transfer to the Bx32 for this for many customers.

I don't disagree w/ the general suggestion, but I'm not so sure it would be worth it.....

 

I mean, at 30 min. headways (this Bx46 route), Hunts point patrons would be better off making their way to the Bx6 & xferring at southern for the Bx19 for that (which is what's done on a large enough scale anyway)....

 

 

....and I really think the B74 should be cut and have the B36 take over the route either running via Mermaid or Surf I can't believe a route like that was never cut and combined in 2010.

Couple years ago, I had that same train of thought - Until I realized how delay prone & unreliable the B36 actually is.... Since then, the B36 has only gotten worse..... Having that route absorb ALL of Coney island's (local) riders would make the 36 even worse than it's already gotten.....

 

B74 is as comparable to the Q64 - 2 of the more efficient routes in the entire system.....

Believe me, you're better off leaving the B74 intact.... Or you can always see for yourself how prevalent the B74 is in CI.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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