How Will the MTA Spend its New Found Money?

[Cait Sith]

I just have one question: if the X25 was based out of Brooklyn, I'm absolutely sure those buses didn't just deadhead into Manhattan, do it's one trip and then deadhead back. Did they turn into X27s or X28s?

 

They were interlined with the x29, which should come back IMO.

[46Dover]

So what percentage of routes would anyone say of the routes that were cut in 2010 came back?

[Quill Depot]

So what percentage of routes would anyone say of the routes that were cut in 2010 came back?

 

60% probably. I don't know why they should restore the whole thing though.

[Q43LTD]

 

60% probably. I don't know why they should restore the whole thing though.

What would that 60% percent be if you don't mind me asking

[BrooklynBus]

60% probably. I don't know why they should restore the whole thing though.

Because they never adequately justified why any of the cutbacks were justified. I'm sure a few were, but it is their obligation to show that with numbers that tell the truth, not ones that lie and distort.

 

If you present an alternate route to the one that is eliminated, it has to be a realistic alternative, not one that no one would use. Also, when you state a walking distance to something, you can't give that distance as the crow flies, because people cannot walk through buildings or highways.

[Quill Depot]

Because they never adequately justified why any of the cutbacks were justified. I'm sure a few were, but it is their obligation to show that with numbers that tell the truth, not ones that lie and distort.

 

If you present an alternate route to the one that is eliminated, it has to be a realistic alternative, not one that no one would use. Also, when you state a walking distance to something, you can't give that distance as the crow flies, because people cannot walk through buildings or highways.

 

I meant more of, how much service was restored, not the routings or anything.

[qjtransitmaster]

Is that right?? Tell me what trains serve the World Financial Center??? 

you do realize the walk is less than 10 mins right? WHAT POINT OF NOBODY USED IT DO YOU NOT GET!!!!! $80 per passenger seriously it was the lowest ridership line in the entire system. culver is right it's useless heck it's below even foam status. Be reasonable here some routes are simply not needed and have alternatives around them all over.

[Interested Rider]

Brooklyn bus' response to my post concerning MTA managers revealed some very interesting information as to how the agency responds to the public.

 

One of the things that many in the bureaucracy have pedaled to the public is that managers have the ability to make policies and that the managerial class should be excluded from civil service rules. This is what is referred as "at will" and is totally different from regular civil service status which grants protection to the employee prior to termination and demotion especially if the person has permanent status. If one looks at the New York State Civil Service Rules Appendix (it is not in the McKinneys' Civil Service and Laws)  there is a list of exempt positions in New York State Government. If an agency wants to have a position placed in the exempt class, the announcement has to be placed in the new York State Register to allow for public input prior to a decision by the New York State Civil Service Commission. In many cases it is not a "fait accompli" as the public employee unions are quite vigilant in protecting their members from being moved out of civil service protection.

 

I was in a different position from you as with the exception of three or four agencies in the state, there was just one person in the title and many of these positions were abolished during the periodic budget crises.  If I wanted to be promoted, I had to change titles and there was career promotion ladder in two titles in the agency if I wanted it. It was the reason that I decided to stay in the title that I was hired and I retired from the same title.

 

Just like the MTA ended civil service protection for its higher level managers, the agency that I worked for ended  it and the last of the civil service managers was phased out in the 1980's. This is what bothers me here is not  only the MTA but almost all governmental agencies as before civil service was ended, personnel had to have some experience in the area that the person would be promoted before being offered the position. Today. it is the political person that gets the job even though the person has no idea of what the job  entails and there is nothing that the tenured civil servant could do with a political appointee. As a civil servant an employee can complain and has some protection from the union contract and New York State Civil Service Law.  Managers  that are "at will" do not have any protection which is available to the tenured civil servant. The climate of fear as to losing a position in this economy precludes any new ideas coming from a person in the managerial class.

 

Taking the managerial class out of the civil service system has done the opposite as it helped to stifle creativity in government as the loyalty is not to the people but to the political establishment. Unfortunately it will not happen and therefore, I do not see any changes coming either now or the near future even with the additional funds being provided to the MTA.

[qjtransitmaster]

Brooklyn bus' response to my post concerning MTA managers revealed some very interesting information as to how the agency responds to the public.

 

One of the things that many in the bureaucracy have pedaled to the public is that managers have the ability to make policies and that the managerial class should be excluded from civil service rules. This is what is referred as "at will" and is totally different from regular civil service status which grants protection to the employee prior to termination and demotion especially if the person has permanent status. If one looks at the New York State Civil Service Rules Appendix (it is not in the McKinneys' Civil Service and Laws)  there is a list of exempt positions in New York State Government. If an agency wants to have a position placed in the exempt class, the announcement has to be placed in the new York State Register to allow for public input prior to a decision by the New York State Civil Service Commission. In many cases it is not a "fait accompli" as the public employee unions are quite vigilant in protecting their members from being moved out of civil service protection.

 

I was in a different position from you as with the exception of three or four agencies in the state, there was just one person in the title and many of these positions were abolished during the periodic budget crises.  If I wanted to be promoted, I had to change titles and there was career promotion ladder in two titles in the agency if I wanted it. It was the reason that I decided to stay in the title that I was hired and I retired from the same title.

 

Just like the MTA ended civil service protection for its higher level managers, the agency that I worked for ended  it and the last of the civil service managers was phased out in the 1980's. This is what bothers me here is not  only the MTA but almost all governmental agencies as before civil service was ended, personnel had to have some experience in the area that the person would be promoted before being offered the position. Today. it is the political person that gets the job even though the person has no idea of what the job  entails and there is nothing that the tenured civil servant could do with a political appointee. As a civil servant an employee can complain and has some protection from the union contract and New York State Civil Service Law.  Managers  that are "at will" do not have any protection which is available to the tenured civil servant. The climate of fear as to losing a position in this economy precludes any new ideas coming from a person in the managerial class.

 

Taking the managerial class out of the civil service system has done the opposite as it helped to stifle creativity in government as the loyalty is not to the people but to the political establishment. Unfortunately it will not happen and therefore, I do not see any changes coming either now or the near future even with the additional funds being provided to the MTA.

ok so we should give up and just live out our lives huh?

[bobtehpanda]

you do realize the walk is less than 10 mins right? WHAT POINT OF NOBODY USED IT DO YOU NOT GET!!!!! $80 per passenger seriously it was the lowest ridership line in the entire system. culver is right it's useless heck it's below even foam status. Be reasonable here some routes are simply not needed and have alternatives around them all over.

 

You obviously don't frequent the area, because you're out of your mind with your rhetoric. It's 10-15 minutes assuming you hit all greens and no one else is on the street, which as a pedestrian is next to impossible. Add the fact that the WFC is cut off from access to the closest subway stations due to WTC construction, and it easily comes to a 20 minute walk.

[qjtransitmaster]

You obviously don't frequent the area, because you're out of your mind with your rhetoric. It's 10-15 minutes assuming you hit all greens and no one else is on the street, which as a pedestrian is next to impossible. Add the fact that the WFC is cut off from access to the closest subway stations due to WTC construction, and it easily comes to a 20 minute walk.

Well there are 2 connecting services M22 and M9. If WFC was such a draw X25 would have riders lets drop it already nobody was interested in it.

[Quill Depot]

Yeah Bob, I've done it myself and it takes a while. By the way, subway and local is completely different than express bus. First of all, express buses do not "feed" the subway as many local routes do, and subway routes are out of the way for some riders.

[qjtransitmaster]

Yeah Bob, I've done it myself and it takes a while. By the way, subway and local is completely different than express bus. First of all, express buses do not "feed" the subway as many local routes do, and subway routes are out of the way for some riders.

Not in the case of the X25 which nobody even took.

[B35 via Church]

So what percentage of routes would anyone say of the routes that were cut in 2010 came back?

If we consider the routes that were completely discontinued, as well as the ones that saw partial service cuts....

I'd say it's a very low percentage....

-----------

 

 

Well, since were on the subject, guess I'll do it this way... The spoiler tag is used to shorten this post....

 

Inside the respective borough "spoilers":

- Anything you see in red with no asterisk or green text under it, is a change that has came back...

- Any route you see with a red asterisk (*) next to it, is a change that's partially came back....

- Anything you see in green is additional commentary by yours truly...

- Any route/change you see in regular black text is a cut that did not come back.....

 

Manhattan Bus Route Changes

 

- M6, M18, M27, M30, X25, X90: all service will be discontinued.

- M8, M21 and M50: weekend service will be discontinued.

- M1, M8, M16, M22, M50* and M66: overnight service will be discontinued.

- M11, M20, M21, M22, M98, M100 and M116: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.

 

- M1 service will be discontinued on weekends south of 106 St.

- M6 service will be discontinued with alternate service provided partially by the rerouted M5.

- M9* service will be rerouted from Avenue B to Avenue C to replace M21 and will terminate at the VA Hospital at East 23 St (Peter Cooper - Village and Stuyvesant Town).M9 service will be discontinued along Water St and in Battery Park City and will be extended along Park Row to City Hall replacing the M15.

 

^^ NOTE: M9 got extended to Bellevue hospital from Peter Cooper Village.... M9 got extended back to Battery Park City from City Hall, albeit via City Hall instead of via Water st....

 

- M10 service south of Columbus Circle will be discontinued.

- M15 service to City Hall via Park Row will be discontinued replaced by the M9.

- M21* service will be discontinued north of Houston St (along Avenue C) and extended along Houston St and the FDR Drive to Grand St (M21 service will not run on the weekends).

 

^^ NOTE: M21 Weekend service was restored.... Service to Bellevue now is provided by the M9 along Avenue C

 

- M42 service will no longer operate to the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.

- M98 service south of 65 St will be discontinued; service will no longer stop inside the George Washington Bridge bus station.

- M104 service on 42 St will be discontinued.

 

* = partially restored

 

 

Brooklyn Bus Route Changes

 

- B23, B37, B39, B51, B71, B75, B77, X29: all service will be discontinued.

- B2, B24, and B69: weekend service will be discontinued.

- B7, B31, B45, B57, B64, B65 and B67: overnight service will be discontinued.

- B2, B9, B11, B13, B16, B24 and B69: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.

- B3 service south of Avenue U and 71 St will be discontinued.

 

- B4 service east of Coney Island Av will be modified to operate during rush hours only, via a new routing: Avenue Z to Shore Pkwy to Emmons Av. During off-peak hours B4 service will terminate at Coney Island Av.

^^ NOTE: B4 service via ocean parkway & via neptune av has been FULLY restored... that Av Z routing no longer applies

 

- B8 service west of the VA Hospital will be discontinued (except late nights). Alternate service is available on the B70.

- B12 service east of Alabama Av will be discontinued.

- B13 service west of Wyckoff Hospital/Dekalb Av will be discontinued.

- B37 service will be discontinued with alternate service south of Bay Ridge Av provided by a rerouted B70.

- B48 service south of Fulton St will be discontinued.

 

- B57 service will be extended south to Smith-9 Sts via Court St southbound and Smith St northbound to replace the northern portion of the B75 route. (B57 service will not run overnight.)

^^ NOTE: In addition to this 2010 change, the B57 has been extended to Red Hook - IKEA from Smith-9th st subway....

 

- B64 service south of 25 Av will be discontinued.

 

- B69* service will be rerouted from 8 Av and Prospect Park West to operate via the B67 route (Flatbush and 7th Avs) south of Grand Army Plaza. Service will be extended to McDonald Av and Cortelyou Rd. (B69 service will not run on weekends.)

^^ NOTE: B69 service has been restored on weekends.... rest of the changes listed still apply

 

- B70 service will be rerouted from 7 Av to 3 Av south of Bay Ridge Av replacing the southern portion of the B37. The B70 will return to its current route-path at 92 St and Fort Hamilton Pkwy and will continue to serve the VA Hospital.

- B75, B77 service will be discontinued with alternate service provided partially by other routes.

- X27 and X28: weekend service will be discontinued.

 

- X27/37, X28/38: service combined into two routes, X27 and X28.

^^ NOTE: X37 & X38 service has been restored... Combination no longer applies

 

 

Queens Bus Route Changes

 

- Q14, Q74, Q75, Q79*, Q89, X32, X51, QM22 and QM23: all service will be discontinued.

^^ NOTE: Albeit not via the Q79, service along Little Neck Parkway has been restored via an extended Q36

 

- Q14 will be discontinued. Every other Q15 trip will be labeled Q15A and will follow the Q14 routing north of the Cross Island Parkway on 150 St and 7 Av. The Q15A will then follow Clintonville St to 10 Av to 154 St and then follow the current Q15 routing to Beechhurst.

- Q31 and Q76: weekend service will be discontinued.

- Q24 service west of Broadway Junction will be discontinued.

- Q26, Q42: Off-Peak service will be discontinued.

- Q30: overnight service will be discontinued.

- Q48: sunday service will end earlier.

 

 

Bronx Bus Route Changes

 

- Bx14*, Bx25: service will be discontinued with alternate service provided partially by other routes.

- BxM4A: all service will be discontinued, alternate service available on the BxM4B (which will be relabeled BxM4).

 

- BxM7B: all service will be discontinued, select BxM7A peak period trips will be extended to City Island to provide alternate service.

^^ NOTE: The BxM7a is now called the "BxM8"... the actual changes still apply though.

 

- Bx5 service will be rerouted off of Bruckner Blvd to Crosby Av, providing a replacement to the rerouted Bx8.

- Bx8 service will be rerouted off of Crosby Av to follow Stadium Av, Research Av, Ampere Av, Kennelworth Place and Jarvis Av, providing an alternative to the eliminated Bx14. Bx8 service will then follow the Bruckner Blvd Service Rd to the Pelham Bay Park 6 station. The Bx8 will then follow Westchester Av to Williamsbridge Rd.

- All Bx14* service will be discontinued....

 

^^ NOTE: As far as this mess with these 3 routes go... Okay, The Bx5 (via Bruckner Blvd, no Crosby av) & The Bx8 (via Crosby av, no Country Club) are now back to their pre-2010 routings.... As for the Bx14, service has been partially restored (albeit under a new route number - the Bx24, which runs between country club & westchester square only).... Service from off the old Bx14 between westchester sq. & parkchester is now served with a branch of the Bx4 called the "Bx4A"....

 

- Bx25 and Bx26 service will be combined into the Bx26 and rerouted.

- Bx28 service will be split into the Bx28 and Bx38

- Bx17, Bx32 and Bx33: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.

- Bx20: off-peak and Saturday service will be discontinued.

 

- Bx34: weekend and overnight service will be discontinued.

^ NOTE: Bx34 weekend service has been restored... Overnight change still applies....

 

- Bx41 service will be discontinued north of Gun Hill Rd and replaced by an extended Bx39 to E 241 St.

- Bx55: night and weekend service will be discontinued. Extra service will be added to the Bx15.

 

- Barretto Park Pool Shuttle*: all service will be discontinued.

^^ NOTE: From Longwood av , service to Barretto Point Park is now provided with the new Bx46 route

 

 

Staten Island Bus Route Changes

 

- S67, X6, X13, X16, X18, X20: all service will be discontinued.

- S54 and S76: weekend service will be discontinued.

- S54, S57 and S66: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.

- S60 service will be discontinued and S66 service will be rerouted along Clove Rd, Howard Av, Arlo Rd and Highland Av to provide an alternate to S60 riders on Grymes Hill. No alternative will be provided on weekends.

 

- S40/90 service will no longer serve Howland Hook, buses will terminate on Goethals Road North.

- S42 service will be retained during peak-hours and evenings. The S52 will be re-routed via the S42 routing north of Crescent Av (St. Marks Place and Hamilton Av) at all times to provide an alternative.

 

- X1: during peak periods X1 service will only serve stops south of 23 St with some trips originating or terminating at Worth St:

^ NOTE: X1 is now a 24/7 route... these changes still apply....

 

- X13 service will be discontinued and replaced by X14 which will be rerouted to serve Water St.

 

[qjtransitmaster]

If we consider the routes that were completely discontinued, as well as the ones that saw partial service cuts....I'd say it's a very low percentage....-----------  Well, since were on the subject, guess I'll do it this way... The spoiler tag is used to shorten this post.... Inside the respective borough "spoilers":- Anything you see in red with no asterisk or green text under it, is a change that has came back...- Any route you see with a red asterisk (*) next to it, is a change that's partially came back....- Anything you see in green is additional commentary by yours truly...- Any route/change you see in regular black text is a cut that did not come back..... Manhattan Bus Route Changes

- M6, M18, M27, M30, X25, X90: all service will be discontinued.- M8, M21 and M50: weekend service will be discontinued.- M1, M8, M16, M22, M50* and M66: overnight service will be discontinued.- M11, M20, M21, M22, M98, M100 and M116: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.- M1 service will be discontinued on weekends south of 106 St.- M6 service will be discontinued with alternate service provided partially by the rerouted M5.- M9* service will be rerouted from Avenue B to Avenue C to replace M21 and will terminate at the VA Hospital at East 23 St (Peter Cooper - Village and Stuyvesant Town).M9 service will be discontinued along Water St and in Battery Park City and will be extended along Park Row to City Hall replacing the M15. ^^ NOTE: M9 got extended to Bellevue hospital from Peter Cooper Village.... M9 got extended back to Battery Park City from City Hall, albeit via City Hall instead of via Water st....- M10 service south of Columbus Circle will be discontinued.- M15 service to City Hall via Park Row will be discontinued replaced by the M9.- M21* service will be discontinued north of Houston St (along Avenue C) and extended along Houston St and the FDR Drive to Grand St (M21 service will not run on the weekends). ^^ NOTE: M21 Weekend service was restored.... Service to Bellevue now is provided by the M9 along Avenue C- M42 service will no longer operate to the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.- M98 service south of 65 St will be discontinued; service will no longer stop inside the George Washington Bridge bus station.- M104 service on 42 St will be discontinued. * = partially restored

 Brooklyn Bus Route Changes

- B23, B37, B39, B51, B71, B75, B77, X29: all service will be discontinued.- B2, B24, and B69: weekend service will be discontinued.- B7, B31, B45, B57, B64, B65 and B67: overnight service will be discontinued.- B2, B9, B11, B13, B16, B24 and B69: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.- B3 service south of Avenue U and 71 St will be discontinued. - B4 service east of Coney Island Av will be modified to operate during rush hours only, via a new routing: Avenue Z to Shore Pkwy to Emmons Av. During off-peak hours B4 service will terminate at Coney Island Av.^^ NOTE: B4 service via ocean parkway & via neptune av has been FULLY restored... that Av Z routing no longer applies - B8 service west of the VA Hospital will be discontinued (except late nights). Alternate service is available on the B70.- B12 service east of Alabama Av will be discontinued.- B13 service west of Wyckoff Hospital/Dekalb Av will be discontinued.- B37 service will be discontinued with alternate service south of Bay Ridge Av provided by a rerouted B70.- B48 service south of Fulton St will be discontinued. - B57 service will be extended south to Smith-9 Sts via Court St southbound and Smith St northbound to replace the northern portion of the B75 route. (B57 service will not run overnight.)^^ NOTE: In addition to this 2010 change, the B57 has been extended to Red Hook - IKEA from Smith-9th st subway....- B64 service south of 25 Av will be discontinued. - B69* service will be rerouted from 8 Av and Prospect Park West to operate via the B67 route (Flatbush and 7th Avs) south of Grand Army Plaza. Service will be extended to McDonald Av and Cortelyou Rd. (B69 service will not run on weekends.)^^ NOTE: B69 service has been restored on weekends.... rest of the changes listed still apply - B70 service will be rerouted from 7 Av to 3 Av south of Bay Ridge Av replacing the southern portion of the B37. The B70 will return to its current route-path at 92 St and Fort Hamilton Pkwy and will continue to serve the VA Hospital.- B75, B77 service will be discontinued with alternate service provided partially by other routes.- X27 and X28: weekend service will be discontinued.- X27/37, X28/38: service combined into two routes, X27 and X28.^^ NOTE: X37 & X38 service has been restored... Combination no longer applies

 Queens Bus Route Changes

- Q14, Q74, Q75, Q79*, Q89, X32, X51, QM22 and QM23: all service will be discontinued.^^ NOTE: Albeit not via the Q79, service along Little Neck Parkway has been restored via an extended Q36 - Q14 will be discontinued. Every other Q15 trip will be labeled Q15A and will follow the Q14 routing north of the Cross Island Parkway on 150 St and 7 Av. The Q15A will then follow Clintonville St to 10 Av to 154 St and then follow the current Q15 routing to Beechhurst.- Q31 and Q76: weekend service will be discontinued.- Q24 service west of Broadway Junction will be discontinued.- Q26, Q42: Off-Peak service will be discontinued.- Q30: overnight service will be discontinued.- Q48: sunday service will end earlier.

 Bronx Bus Route Changes

- Bx14*, Bx25: service will be discontinued with alternate service provided partially by other routes.- BxM4A: all service will be discontinued, alternate service available on the BxM4B (which will be relabeled BxM4). - BxM7B: all service will be discontinued, select BxM7A peak period trips will be extended to City Island to provide alternate service.^^ NOTE: The BxM7a is now called the "BxM8"... the actual changes still apply though. - Bx5 service will be rerouted off of Bruckner Blvd to Crosby Av, providing a replacement to the rerouted Bx8.- Bx8 service will be rerouted off of Crosby Av to follow Stadium Av, Research Av, Ampere Av, Kennelworth Place and Jarvis Av, providing an alternative to the eliminated Bx14. Bx8 service will then follow the Bruckner Blvd Service Rd to the Pelham Bay Park 6 station. The Bx8 will then follow Westchester Av to Williamsbridge Rd.- All Bx14* service will be discontinued.... ^^ NOTE: As far as this mess with these 3 routes go... Okay, The Bx5 (via Bruckner Blvd, no Crosby av) & The Bx8 (via Crosby av, no Country Club) are now back to their pre-2010 routings.... As for the Bx14, service has been partially restored (albeit under a new route number - the Bx24, which runs between country club & westchester square only).... Service from off the old Bx14 between westchester sq. & parkchester is now served with a branch of the Bx4 called the "Bx4A".... - Bx25 and Bx26 service will be combined into the Bx26 and rerouted.- Bx28 service will be split into the Bx28 and Bx38- Bx17, Bx32 and Bx33: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.- Bx20: off-peak and Saturday service will be discontinued. - Bx34: weekend and overnight service will be discontinued.^ NOTE: Bx34 weekend service has been restored... Overnight change still applies....- Bx41 service will be discontinued north of Gun Hill Rd and replaced by an extended Bx39 to E 241 St.- Bx55: night and weekend service will be discontinued. Extra service will be added to the Bx15. - Barretto Park Pool Shuttle*: all service will be discontinued.^^ NOTE: From Longwood av , service to Barretto Point Park is now provided with the new Bx46 route

 Staten Island Bus Route Changes

- S67, X6, X13, X16, X18, X20: all service will be discontinued.- S54 and S76: weekend service will be discontinued.- S54, S57 and S66: late night service will end earlier and/or early morning service will begin later.- S60 service will be discontinued and S66 service will be rerouted along Clove Rd, Howard Av, Arlo Rd and Highland Av to provide an alternate to S60 riders on Grymes Hill. No alternative will be provided on weekends. - S40/90 service will no longer serve Howland Hook, buses will terminate on Goethals Road North.- S42 service will be retained during peak-hours and evenings. The S52 will be re-routed via the S42 routing north of Crescent Av (St. Marks Place and Hamilton Av) at all times to provide an alternative.- X1: during peak periods X1 service will only serve stops south of 23 St with some trips originating or terminating at Worth St:^ NOTE: X1 is now a 24/7 route... these changes still apply....- X13 service will be discontinued and replaced by X14 which will be rerouted to serve Water St.

 

hmm with that said only a small handful would need restoration the span well that happens when you don't use em. So about 10 to 15% need to return.

[B35 via Church]

hmm with that said only a small handful would need restoration the span well that happens when you don't use em.

So about 10 to 15% need to return.

Totally different discussion (to what 46Dover was asking)....

 

As to what you're saying here.... While I don't think every single cut needs to be restored, 10-15% restoration (on top of what's already been restored) still sounds kinda low to me....

[qjtransitmaster]

Totally different discussion (to what 46Dover was asking)....

 

As to what you're saying here.... While I don't think every single cut needs to be restored, 10-15% restoration (on top of what's already been restored) still sounds kinda low to me....

Most of the cuts were weak or redundant services. Many don't need to return.

[B35 via Church]

Most of the cuts were weak or redundant services. Many don't need to return.

Most the cuts were not "weak" (shouldn't conclude based on the MTA's actions) & and redundancy isn't as much an issue as much as you like to make it as being - If that were the case, there'd have been a hell of a lot more services cut than what we had happen almost 3 years ago....

-------

 

 

If you're gonna make decisions on what should be cut & then come out with huge PDF files displaying/summarizing/listing everything, it shouldn't be too difficult a task to be consistent with the reasonings for them - meaning, with every single decision/cut - Especially when you're gonna number crunch as many bus & subway riders into prolonged commutes..... This is why I seldom harp on stats; numbers can be used to prove or disprove anything....

 

^^ And in saying that, I still say there was no common sense on display when they made the decisions that they made, but the one thing I will agree with BrooklynBus on is that.... They do what they want.

[BrooklynBus]

Most the cuts were not "weak" (shouldn't conclude based on the MTA's actions) & and redundancy isn't as much an issue as much as you like to make it as being - If that were the case, there'd have been a hell of a lot more services cut than what we had happen almost 3 years ago....

-------

 

 

If you're gonna make decisions on what should be cut & then come out with huge PDF files displaying/summarizing/listing everything, it shouldn't be too difficult a task to be consistent with the reasonings for them - meaning, with every single decision/cut - Especially when you're gonna number crunch as many bus & subway riders into prolonged commutes..... This is why I seldom harp on stats; numbers can be used to prove or disprove anything....

 

^^ And in saying that, I still say there was no common sense on display when they made the decisions that they made, but the one thing I will agree with BrooklynBus on is that.... They do what they want.

You are 100% correct. I know you agree with the B37 being cut. I tend to think that perhaps the MTA was correct on that one, but I still wouldn't support its cut because they didn't provide the justification to prove the cut was necessary. In some cases only one extra column would have been necessary. When I personally spoke to the Director of OP at the hearing, he told me they had all the numbers but it would have required "too much paper" to display them all. What a bogus reason! I wasn't asking him to print anything out. You don't present conclusions and a bunch of tables with little justification between the two which is what they did. You need some sort of weighting scale so you can rank every route systemwide from most efficient to least efficient. Then you still keep routes where no suitable alternative exists.

 

Look at the data presented for the B71 which they eliminated. Ridership rose the highest on the B71 of all Brooklyn routes in the previous five years, 29%. No alternatives existed. They ignored the fact regarding the ridership increase and claimed everyone could walk a half mie to Bergen Street for the B65 and a half mile back to Union Street when previously there was no walk at all. They ignored the fact that their own guidelines call for a maximum walk of a quarter mile. And if your total trip consists of a mile along Union Street, who will walk the same distance to and from another bus route plus pay a fare and wait for a bus when it s easier to just walk the entire mile trip? Yet the MTA was able to get away with that logic because few even read and studied their report.

[qjtransitmaster]

Most the cuts were not "weak" (shouldn't conclude based on the MTA's actions) & and redundancy isn't as much an issue as much as you like to make it as being - If that were the case, there'd have been a hell of a lot more services cut than what we had happen almost 3 years ago....

-------

 

 

If you're gonna make decisions on what should be cut & then come out with huge PDF files displaying/summarizing/listing everything, it shouldn't be too difficult a task to be consistent with the reasonings for them - meaning, with every single decision/cut - Especially when you're gonna number crunch as many bus & subway riders into prolonged commutes..... This is why I seldom harp on stats; numbers can be used to prove or disprove anything....

 

^^ And in saying that, I still say there was no common sense on display when they made the decisions that they made, but the one thing I will agree with BrooklynBus on is that.... They do what they want.

I do agree that the B71 should return what kind of drugs does one need to be on to cut a route whose ridership rose 29%?

[B35 via Church]

I do agree that the B71 should return what kind of drugs does one need to be on to cut a route whose ridership rose 29%?

You are 100% correct. I know you agree with the B37 being cut. I tend to think that perhaps the MTA was correct on that one, but I still wouldn't support its cut because they didn't provide the justification to prove the cut was necessary. In some cases only one extra column would have been necessary. When I personally spoke to the Director of OP at the hearing, he told me they had all the numbers but it would have required "too much paper" to display them all. What a bogus reason! I wasn't asking him to print anything out. You don't present conclusions and a bunch of tables with little justification between the two which is what they did. You need some sort of weighting scale so you can rank every route systemwide from most efficient to least efficient. Then you still keep routes where no suitable alternative exists.

 

Look at the data presented for the B71 which they eliminated. Ridership rose the highest on the B71 of all Brooklyn routes in the previous five years, 29%. No alternatives existed. They ignored the fact regarding the ridership increase and claimed everyone could walk a half mie to Bergen Street for the B65 and a half mile back to Union Street when previously there was no walk at all. They ignored the fact that their own guidelines call for a maximum walk of a quarter mile. And if your total trip consists of a mile along Union Street, who will walk the same distance to and from another bus route plus pay a fare and wait for a bus when it s easier to just walk the entire mile trip? Yet the MTA was able to get away with that logic because few even read and studied their report.

@ BrooklynBus: I didn't agree with that particular cut [b37] due to any ill justifications or conclusions of theirs; I certainly don't need the MTA to form opinions for me.... As was, I felt the way that I did about that route well before 2010.... As was, the route did not benefit near as many riders as it possibly could have by leaving it along 3rd.... It was no accident either that they decided to retain *some* sort of bus service along the part of the B37 where it was mostly/consistently utilized - the Bay Ridge portion....

 

A couple weeks ago, a couple of us on this forum were discussing ways that increased ridership could be garnered, but it does not involve keeping buses along the length of 3rd av.... Which of course the MTA would have rejected wholesale, had the actual idea of sorts been presented to them.....

 

As for that bit about too much paper, it's clear he was looking for an out..... I don't know how well/how close you are with the guy, but if I'm having a discussion with someone & that someone is open enough to state that he has something to show that would shed light on (whatever), then it should come as no surprise that I'd want to see what it is you're making a talking point of presenting... Paper & printouts, smh... I mean, Don't bring up how good the food is at your new restaurant, but then tell me the damn bathroom's out of order!

 

 

@ the both of you: The B71 cut, yeah, more inconsistency on their end.... Your (BrooklynBus) point about walking distances is duly noted, but I'm going to give another perspective as to why (quite frankly) that particular cut was BS....... I don't doubt that they simply (and here's where QJT's favorite fallback argument of redundancy kicks in) used the eastern half of the B71 routing to come to grips with killing off the whole route....

 

Thing about it is, they didn't have to DO anything with the B71 & (increased) ridership would have came from the western end with the route - even with the shit headways it had... Worse, their 29% number or whatever supports that too! Why, because there's a bit of an influx of people moving out there to carroll gardens & cobble hill.... These people that are moving out there are not driving en masse either because they're the same ones that are (partly) the reason for B61's being jammed-packed throughout the day.... The old B61 (red hook-queens plaza) was not that packed/utilized south of downtown brooklyn (compared to today's B61 in the same area).... That population increase in that part of the borough was taking place around the mid-to-late 2000's too, so there's really no excuse as far as that goes.... As far as people riding to/from the eastern half is concerned, I think that particular usage would have remained what it was.... So if you combine the two portions (I shouldn't say halves) or whatever, that would've easily been enough to justify keeping the route around as was..... All talk about B71 to South Ferry or anywheres else, aside....

 

Mighty funny how they jumped the gun in discontinuing the B71, but were quick to come out with this B32.... Both areas are growing, but the (major) difference is Cobble Hill/Carroll Gardens was already quote-unquote established.... That part of Williamsburg where the B32 will travel along isn't even close to being fully developed, yet they're getting a route... The part of Williamsburg that's already established, the B62 (and the B44) already serves..... There isn't a soul on here that can get me to believe that the upcoming B32 will garner more riders than the B71 would have if it were still around today.....

 

But 'aye, Guess it all comes with the... territory.

[BrooklynBus]

@ BrooklynBus:. As for that bit about too much paper, it's clear he was looking for an out..... I don't know how well/how close you are with the guy, but if I'm having a discussion with someone & that someone is open enough to state that he has something to show that Worse, their 29% number or whatever supports that too!

I only spoke to him that one time and we've had some e-mail correspondence, after he was told to respond by someone above him. But since then he has ignored all my e-mails and immediately deletes all the links I send him to my articles. Even worse, anther top official in that department who I know better and even once interviewed me for a job once, wrote to me asking that he be taken off my email list. They clearly are not interested in anyone's opinions. But that may change I hope. I hear that te newly appointed Chairman wants to change the culture at the MTA. Let's hope he does. He reads everything I send him.

 

One point about the B71. The major reason for the 29% increase was that eastward extension, which proves that when you make a change people need, they will use it, although the MTA always assumes no new revenue, only more operating expenses. Also, they never wanted to run the B71 through the BBT. Bloomberg forced them to propose changes so he could get congestion pricing. They looked around and found that was the cheapest route to extend because it operated the least frequently, not that they couldn't have proposed a new route. They didn't even propose running it more often.

[B35 via Church]

I only spoke to him that one time and we've had some e-mail correspondence, after he was told to respond by someone above him. But since then he has ignored all my e-mails and immediately deletes all the links I send him to my articles. Even worse, anther top official in that department who I know better and even once interviewed me for a job once, wrote to me asking that he be taken off my email list. They clearly are not interested in anyone's opinions. But that may change I hope. I hear that te newly appointed Chairman wants to change the culture at the MTA. Let's hope he does. He reads everything I send him.

 

One point about the B71. The major reason for the 29% increase was that eastward extension, which proves that when you make a change people need, they will use it, although the MTA always assumes no new revenue, only more operating expenses. Also, they never wanted to run the B71 through the BBT. Bloomberg forced them to propose changes so he could get congestion pricing. They looked around and found that was the cheapest route to extend because it operated the least frequently, not that they couldn't have proposed a new route. They didn't even propose running it more often.

Trying to cut all ties with someone who knows what they're talking about..... Not surprising....

 

Anyway, What eastward extension on the B71 are you referring to?

[Interested Rider]

What I learned in government is that the person above you never wants anyone that is smarter that they are and since many of them are "poliitcal appointees" with no idea of what they are supposed to do, they frown upon anyone who is below them that has even the slight bit of knowledge. Thus many of these managers resort to the "my way or the hghway" supervision approach to keep the employees in line. It is these type of individuals (I worked with many of them) that have no compuction of using every trick in the book to keep the employee in line.

 

In a bureaucracy such as the MTA, it is this type of political (my way or the highway)  manager that makes the decision as to what and where things will be done or ever get done. It is the reason that many of the meaningful suggestions that are posted here and on other forums that never see the light of day. It is a crying shame that the more bureaucratic an agency becomes, the less responsive it is to the needs of the public. This is what is happening on all levels of government and until it is reversed, it will only get worse. Not everyone wants to work in that sort of environment and it is the main reason that many employees do not seek promotions regardless of the financial gain.

 

Anyone who has worked in government can relate the horror stories of working with the political appointees and the "my way or the highway" style of management. This is why I stayed in same title for 29 of 31 years that I worked in government. At least I had some protection even though I was targeted many tines during my tenure..

 

The money should should go to a new contract for the workers  (not to the bureaucrats) as they are the ones keeping the system running and in good order.  

 

 

 

 

[B35 via Church]

What I learned in government is that the person above you never wants anyone that is smarter that they are and since many of them are "poliitcal appointees" with no idea of what they are supposed to do, they frown upon anyone who is below them that has even the slight bit of knowledge. Thus many of these managers resort to the "my way or the hghway" supervision approach to keep the employees in line. It is these type of individuals (I worked with many of them) that have no compuction of using every trick in the book to keep the employee in line

Sounds a lot like these beneficiaries of nepotism.... They don't belong in positions of upper mgmt. in the first place & they absolutely fear any worker boy/girl that holds any iota of knowledge over them - As it would go on to further expose how they obtain said positions.... Reminds me of the company I used to work p/t for - Dumb young SOB couldn't even calculate 10% of 100 without using a calculator & he inherited a CFO position (his father was the owner of the company)....