Bronx Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[dkupf]

...The WDOT folks actually supported the idea because it would have let them discontinue the #54 route. Even the mayor of Mount Vernon liked it because it would have given Bronx bus riders the option of shopping on Gramatan Avenue and connecting to Metro-North away from Fordham.

 

The opposition came from two fronts:

 

The Comptroller of Mount Vernon, who demanded that NYCT reimburse Mount Vernon for damage to its streets. NYCT agreed to the same level of reimbursement that WDOT provided (i.e. none).

 

Residents of Woodlawn, who didn't want "those people" riding through their neighborhood and filling up their empty buses. (What they actually said at the public meeting was that bus riders should stay on their respective sides of the border — people in the Bronx shouldn't travel to Westchester and people in Westchester shouldn't travel to the Bronx.)

 

I would have extended the Bx34 anyway just to be spiteful, i.e., to show them that if you think that way you belong in the gutter!!!

Edited November 29, 2013 by dkupf

[GreatOne2k]

Bx31 to Castle Hill Park would be a good way to fill in a gap on Zerega Avenue (and Commerce Avenue). It would also relieve crowding on the Bx22.

[dkupf]

That's a good idea.  But I would have the Bx31 operate via Westchester Avenue, instead of Commerce Avenue, in order to get to Zerega Avenue.

 

To start, every other bus would operate south of Westchester Square as a test case.  I would make the span south of Westchester Square, to start, only when the frequency north of Westchester Square is every 15 minutes or less (every 30 minutes or less south of Westchester Square). 

 

As that the Bx31 currently operates every 20 minutes on Sunday, it would not operate on that day of the week, to start.  As ridership builds up, the Bx31 would eventually operate every 15 minutes, and Sunday service south of Westchester Square (every 30 minutes) would be added.

Edited November 30, 2013 by dkupf

[Gotham Bus Co.]

I hate their schedulers.

 

My critique about their service planners is that they are extremely delusional to demand that new routes must have 100% cost recovery ratios and to claim that there is insufficient operational and/or financial resources to add new routes.

 

 

And why not?  Filling in service gaps, where feasible, will boost ridership and revenue.  And that's a good thing.

 

 

In public transportation, "boosting fare revenue" is not a realistic goal statement because the cost of generating revenue is usually much higher than the revenue generated (i.e. the agency loses money on every passenger).

 

With the state legislature leaning over like a vulture, ready and eager to take money from the MTA to use for upstate "pork barrel" projects, a better goal is to maximize the overall efficiency of mobility. 

[dkupf]

Good point.

[qjtransitmaster]

I hate their schedulers.

 

My critique about their service planners is that they are extremely delusional to demand that new routes must have 100% cost recovery ratios and to claim that there is insufficient operational and/or financial resources to add new routes.

 

 

And why not?  Filling in service gaps, where feasible, will boost ridership and revenue.  And that's a good thing.

 

Adding new routes aren't the only way to fill service gaps especially in Philadelphia you should know that since you claim to know SEPTA well. Unlike MTA septa can upgrade service by restructuring without new lines via merging segments of lines together even in some cases streamline lines. With MTA such a strategy would adversely affect reliability in Philly not so much. With MTA the sheer volume makes that thinking difficult. Examples 92,99&90&123 I will detail in another forum as this is NYCT forums. Even In NYC new routes can only be introduced when all other methods to fill the gap fail.

Edited December 1, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[dkupf]

But the service planners here don't want to try anything.  They refuse to look at the system holistically.  For example, the northern terminus of the Bx46 is 1/2 mile from The Hub.  They claim that there wasn't enough money, which is far from the truth.

 

The service planners only do comprehensive studies when they are told to do so by the Brass, which is rare.  And when comprehensive studies are done, the service planners present their results on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, resulting in no changes being made.

 

In fact, the changes that occurred in the eastern Bronx in June 2010 was the result of a comprehensive study, and we all know what happened when it was implemented.

 

This is why the service planners prefer to do incremental changes that affect one or two routes, while ignoring major service gaps, especially in the Bronx.

Edited December 3, 2013 by dkupf

[qjtransitmaster]

But the service planners here don't want to try anything.  They refuse to look at the system holistically.  For example, the northern terminus of the Bx46 is 1/2 mile from The Hub.  They claim that there wasn't enough money, which is far from the truth.

 

The service planners only do comprehensive studies when they are told to do so by the Brass, which is rare.  And when comprehensive studies are done, the service planners present their results on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, resulting in no changes being made.

 

In fact, the changes that occurred in the eastern Bronx in June 2010 was the result of a comprehensive study, and we all know what happened when it was implemented.

 

This is why the service planners prefer to do incremental changes that affect one or two routes, while ignoring major service gaps, especially in the Bronx.

SEPTA is no better look at their horrible scheduling. God help you if you must transfer from 90 to 97 or between the 90 series. Take it from someone who used em on several occasions they can't even time transfers properly missing connections by 10 minutes or less. Sometimes I only made connections when one bus was "CONVENIENTLY LATE"!!!

I have one example of a cut SEPTA can make without hurting anyone. : 19 eliminated and select 70 trips rerouted to grant ave to torresdale Trenton line station and additional at rush to meet peak trains. 70 full route trips unaffected only short turns rerouted to cover 19. Then 77 extension to torresdale ave with upgraded rush service offsetting rerouted 70 trips. We are way off topic as it is we will discuss this further elsewhere.

Edited December 3, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[dkupf]

As I said, I also hate SEPTA's schedulers.

 

But I do think that SEPTA's service planners are relatively better than the NYCT.  At least SEPTA's planners are willing to try different things in order to get service to their standards.  BTW, I don't like their cost recovery ratio "standards" either, because there will always be a bus route that doesn't meet them.  But I digress.

 

NYCT and MTA Bus have "guidelines", but they refuse to publish them.  But what I do know is that if ridership doesn't meet all or part of certain minimums at the maximum load point (MLP), the point where a certain route has the most riders on board, NYCT and MTA Bus would simply eliminate span and/or discontinue the route.  A major change in span (more than plus-or-minus 59 minutes) and/or route discontinuation is subject to a "public hearing".

 

But NYCT and MTA Bus can get around this by incrementally adding or eliminating span 59 minutes at a time.

[bobtehpanda]

As I said, I also hate SEPTA's schedulers.

 

But I do think that SEPTA's service planners are relatively better than the NYCT.  At least SEPTA's planners are willing to try different things in order to get service to their standards.  BTW, I don't like their cost recovery ratio "standards" either, because there will always be a bus route that doesn't meet them.  But I digress.

 

NYCT and MTA Bus have "guidelines", but they refuse to publish them.  But what I do know is that if ridership doesn't meet all or part of certain minimums at the maximum load point (MLP), the point where a certain route has the most riders on board, NYCT and MTA Bus would simply eliminate span and/or discontinue the route.  A major change in span (more than plus-or-minus 59 minutes) and/or route discontinuation is subject to a "public hearing".

 

But NYCT and MTA Bus can get around this by incrementally adding or eliminating span 59 minutes at a time.

 

Except they do not add or decrease service span 59 minutes at a time; the MTA, unlike many peer agencies in North America, will stick to clockface departures for 30 and 60 minute intervals.

 

MTA does have meetings. However, the problem is that very few people can make these, because New Yorkers are a very busy, generally apathetic people.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

MTA does have meetings. However, the problem is that very few people can make these, because New Yorkers are a very busy, generally apathetic people.

 

It's not necessary to actually attend an MTA public hearing.  Written comments submitted by mail or through the web site have exactly the same standing in the official record as spoken testimony.

[dkupf]

I have been always curious about ridership levels along Boston Rd within the NYC city limits.  How is it?  Is service just right?  Should there be additional service and/or span within the city limits?

 

I would change the Bee-Line 60, 61, and 62 to boarding only northbound, alighting only southbound.

 

Should this be done, the Bx30 would have to be restructured to operate between Fordham Plaza and Ropes Ave-Boston Rd.

 

I would also extend the Bee-Line 52 to operate via the current Bx30 within Co-Op City to Erskine Place with unlimited boarding and alighting privileges, but MUST have similar frequencies and span within the NYC city limits as the current Bx30, with reimbursement.  (In this case, I think that it would be less expensive for the MTA to pay Bee-Line than operating a separate route.)

 

However, if riderhip levels along Boston Rd are relatively poor, then I would prefer to maintain the status quo.

[Turbo19]

I have been always curious about ridership levels along Boston Rd within the NYC city limits.  How is it?  Is service just right?  Should there be additional service and/or span within the city limits?

 

I would change the Bee-Line 60, 61, and 62 to boarding only northbound, alighting only southbound.

 

Should this be done, the Bx30 would have to be restructured to operate between Fordham Plaza and Ropes Ave-Boston Rd.

 

I would also extend the Bee-Line 52 to operate via the current Bx30 within Co-Op City to Erskine Place with unlimited boarding and alighting privileges, but MUST have similar frequencies and span within the NYC city limits as the current Bx30, with reimbursement.  (In this case, I think that it would be less expensive for the MTA to pay Bee-Line than operating a separate route.)

 

However, if riderhip levels along Boston Rd are relatively poor, then I would prefer to maintain the status quo.

In regard to Boston Road, to make Westchester's service closed door in an attempt to capture ridership for an NY route would be counter productive, and really only cause inconvinence where it isn't needed.

[dkupf]

But how is ridership along Boston Rd within the NYC city limits?  Are buses crowded?  Does Bee-Line service need more span?

[B35 via Church]

And why not?  Filling in service gaps, where feasible, will boost ridership and revenue.  And that's a good thing.

 

Sure, but that shouldn't be the only thing..... Nevermind it being the 29, whatever route you wanna choose - You proposing a route travel from Co-op to Wakefield is rather devoid of what residents in either of those communities need/want (especially co-op).... 

 

I have been always curious about ridership levels along Boston Rd within the NYC city limits.  How is it?  Is service just right?  Should there be additional service and/or span within the city limits?

 

I would change the Bee-Line 60, 61, and 62 to boarding only northbound, alighting only southbound.

 

Should this be done, the Bx30 would have to be restructured to operate between Fordham Plaza and Ropes Ave-Boston Rd.

 

I would also extend the Bee-Line 52 to operate via the current Bx30 within Co-Op City to Erskine Place with unlimited boarding and alighting privileges, but MUST have similar frequencies and span within the NYC city limits as the current Bx30, with reimbursement.  (In this case, I think that it would be less expensive for the MTA to pay Bee-Line than operating a separate route.)

 

However, if riderhip levels along Boston Rd are relatively poor, then I would prefer to maintain the status quo.

To changing service along Boston rd, I wouldn't bother.... I'd keep the Bee line buses along Boston rd; the amt. of folks along it traveling within The Bronx isn't the greatest..... I actually think the 30 would lose (total) ridership if you took it off serving gun hill, etc. on over to 205th ..... to having it run from Fordham plz. via Boston or whatever..... 

 

But how is ridership along Boston Rd within the NYC city limits?  Are buses crowded?  Does Bee-Line service need more span?

Along the BL-60/62 portion, I'd go as far as to say it's weak..... Too many folks traveling to New Roc', White Plains (60), of xferring to some other bus route in lower westchester county once it hits new rochelle (this is where/why the crowds are what they are on the 60/61)......

[dkupf]

Then, it's settled.

 

When it comes to Boston Road, the Bx30, and the Bee-Line 52, the routings should be maintained.

 

Probably the best thing I said in this thread, eh?

 

LOL.

 

But I continue to insist that the Bx16 should operate via E 233 St between Webster and Baychester Avenues, with a Bx29 extension as a replacement for Bx16 Baychester/Nereid Avenues service.

Edited December 6, 2013 by dkupf

[Q43LTD]

Again with this Bx29 to Wakefield thing? What will be the fate of the Bx31? That runs on 233 between Katonah and Laconia.

[dkupf]

The Bx31 routing would not change.

[Q43LTD]

If that's the case, you're over serving 233 then...

[jolusoji]

I been curious about one route  which it is the bx39.Can the mta make a limited 39 that ends at wakefield and the local 39  ends at gun hill.because There are too many buses around randall/white pains during rush hour 7:30-815.I suggeting headways 5 mins.also if mta has eniugh 60 ft buses.replace the bx 36 with 60 ft buses to co allinded the bx 39

[jolusoji]

I been curious about one route  which it is the bx39.Can the mta make a limited 39 that ends at wakefield and the local 39  ends at gun hill.because There are too many buses around randall/white pains during rush hour 7:30-815.I suggeting headways 5 mins.also if mta has enough 60 ft buses.replace the bx 36 with 60 ft buses to co allinded the bx 39

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=768989323117330&set=a.679686865380910.1073741829.100000188080536&type=1&theater

[GreatOne2k]

Suggested changes

 

Bx15 S/B
weekdays

 

Change 4:15am Bx15 to 4:20am Bx15 to keep an even 20 minute headway

Change 6:56pm Bx15 to 6:56pm Bx15 LTD two Bx15 buses are scheduled to leave at this time

Change 7:06pm Bx15 to 7:06pm Bx15 LTD two Bx15 buses are scheduled to leave at this time

Change 7:16pm Bx15 to 7:16pm Bx15 LTD another Bx15 bus is scheduled to leave at 7:18pm

Change 7:26pm Bx15 to 7:26pm Bx15 LTD another Bx15 bus is scheduled to leave at 7:30pm

 

Saturday

Add 4:20am bus to 149 St to maintain the 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

Add 4:40am bus to 149 St to maintain the 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

Change 5:30am bus to 5:20am bus to maintain 20 minute headway

Change 5:45am bus to 5:40am bus to maintain 20 minute headway

 

Sunday

Change 4:25am bus to 4:20am bus to maintain 20 minute headway

Add 4:40am bus to maintain the 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

Add 5:20am bus to maintain the 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

Change 5:30am bus to 5:35am bus to begin a 15 minute headway

 

Bx15 N/B

weekdays

Add 4:53am bus from 149 St to Fordham Plaza to maintain the average 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

Change 7:47pm Bx15 bus from 12 Av to Fordham Plaza to Bx15 LTD

 

Saturday

Add 4:53am bus from 149 St to Fordham Plaza to maintain the average 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

Add 5:13am bus from 149 St to Fordham Plaza to maintain the average 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

 

Sunday

Change 4:02am bus from 149 St to Fordham Plaza to 4:12am bus to maintain a 20 minute headway

Add 4:52am bus from 149 St to Fordham Plaza to maintain the 20 minute headway to replace the Bx55 and the (8) train

Add 5:12am bus from 149 St to Fordham Plaza, eliminate 5:35am bus from 149 St to Fordham Plaza

Change 4:57am bus from 12 Av to Fordham Plaza 5:07am bus, this will maintain a continuous 20 minute headway north of 149 St

 

Bx39 S/B

 

Sunday

Add 11:20pm trip from 241 St to Clason Point (Sunday S/B service currently ends too early), next trips would be shuttles to Gun Hill Road at 30-35 minute headways 11:50pm, 12:25am, 1:00am

Edited January 10, 2014 by GreatOne2k

[Mysterious2train]

Suggested changes

 

Bx15 S/B

weekdays

 

Change 4:15am Bx15 to 4:20am Bx15 to keep an even 20 minute headway

Change 6:56pm Bx15 to 6:56pm Bx15 LTD two Bx15 buses are scheduled to leave at this time

Change 7:06pm Bx15 to 7:06pm Bx15 LTD two Bx15 buses are scheduled to leave at this time

Change 7:16pm Bx15 to 7:16pm Bx15 LTD another Bx15 bus is scheduled to leave at 7:18pm

Change 7:26pm Bx15 to 7:26pm Bx15 LTD another Bx15 bus is scheduled to leave at 7:30pm

 

Totally agree with this. What's the logic in ending Limited service so early and then having two locals leaving Fordham Plaza right at the same time?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Totally agree with this. What's the logic in ending Limited service so early and then having two locals leaving Fordham Plaza right at the same time?

So that they don't get slammed probably... I assume there must be enough demand at the local stops as well to not provide Limited Stop service...

[Mysterious2train]

Totally agree with this. What's the logic in ending Limited service so early and then having two locals leaving Fordham Plaza right at the same time?

 

 

So that they don't get slammed probably... I assume there must be enough demand at the local stops as well to not provide Limited Stop service...

No, that's not what I mean. During the PM Rush, the Bx15 local and the Bx15 LTD are both scheduled to leave the first stop at the same time. (They're both running on 10 minute headaways). Once Limited service ends, the frequency of service stays the same, so instead of having 1 Local bus and 1 Limited bus leaving at the same time, there are now 2 local buses leaving at the same time.

 

Limited service ends pretty arbitrarily (and notably earlier than on the Bx55) but I suppose it ends arbitrarily on a lot of routes.