MTA will reduce bus service this summer, according to agency

[QM1to6Ave]

I think this thread should be merged with the other one regarding the April 2015 committee materials.

 

 

IMO, they shouldn't just apply it to overcrowded routes, but also to necessary and well-executed service improvements. For example, I fully support the idea of improving coverage in areas like Spring Creek & Hunts Point. However, creating little dinky shuttles on 30 minute headways only serves the most transit-dependent people who are actually willing to wait around, or plan their lives around the schedule. So ridership and revenue are lower, and fewer people actually benefit from the money invested into these new services.

 

AFAIC, if the MTA managed to get the bus system to the point where the routes were structured perfectly (and kept pace with the changing neighborhoods so that the "perfect system" were maintained), I wouldn't mind if they saved a few million here and there from routine schedule changes.

 

The bus system needs to be more balanced. We have too many areas served by super-busy routes that are often overcrowded, and too many areas where they have either bare-bones service, or no service at all (in other words, the MTA isn't tapping into the latent ridership that's present). And then not enough of the plain, old middle-ridership routes where they get a respectable amount of ridership to maintain a decent frequency, but not so much that they're overcrowded. And because of this distribution, overall ridership doesn't reach its full potential.

 

 

They often don't include revenue in these calculations. 

 

But in any case, I think the idea is that since they're making East 15th Street into a pedestrian plaza, it'll make it more pleasant for the passengers to walk along as they make their transfer (while the bus change improves reliability on the rest of the route). I mean, if you take the to Utica and catch the B46, the southbound stop is one short block south of Eastern Parkway and that's one of the most popular bus-subway transfers in the city.

Totally agree!

[Interested Rider]

I agree with Checkmate Champ that this thread should be consolidated with the April 2016 meeting thread and the one started by Brooklyn Bus (Allan Rosen) should be consolidated into this thread as well. In reference to Gotham Bus Co.'s comments please see Brooklyn Bus' comments on the B/36 route change which provides further information of the subject as well as my own comments on the two threads about this disaster in the making for this community.

What this unnecessary and absolutely stupid action by the New York City Department of Transportation proves to me is that once again why no person who is any position in the New York City Department of Transportation (past or present) should not be permitted to be a member of the MTA board.  Since NYCDOT's actions impacts directly upon the MTA, it places the MTA in a position where the MTA has no alternative as it  has to listen to them and follow their orders. This is absurd as the health and welfare of the riding public is not considered when the NYCDOT paper pushers and their bosses with their anti-transit agendas force this garbage upon communities that don't want their junk or need it.

Hopefully as the investigations catch fire, the participants in this matter will start spending more time on other things and this proposal can disappear forever along with the geniuses that proposed this idea in the first place.

 

. 

[bobtehpanda]

FTR, My sole stance in this particular discussion is that there is a difference between operating costs & farebox revenue... With that said, there being this conveyance or implication that a routing change isn't cost-neutral because it could/may/will result in a loss of riders (finding alternate ways to get to the subway via a cab or whatever) IMO is grossly conflating things....

 

I agree. Even if the MTA or DOT were to hypothetically try and model loss of revenue, how would they? There are so many factors that affect ridership (weather, opening/closing of businesses and homes, school being in or out of session, etc.) that are highly variable that you probably couldn't reliably predict ridership based on moving a bus stop a few hundred feet away.

[B35 via Church]

I agree. Even if the MTA or DOT were to hypothetically try and model loss of revenue, how would they? There are so many factors that affect ridership (weather, opening/closing of businesses and homes, school being in or out of session, etc.) that are highly variable that you probably couldn't reliably predict ridership based on moving a bus stop a few hundred feet away.

They can't.... That tantamounts to forecasting.

[BrooklynBus]

Can someone please explain to me how a route change that removes the bus route from stopping directly at the subway station is revenue neutral? 

When you take away the stop at the station and place it a considerable distance away, don't you lose revenue as riders find alternate ways to get closer to the station? I think that anyone in their right mind would ask the same question as it makes no sense.

This is another one of those cases where I land up shaking my head in total disbelief as it proved once again why I insist that everyone of these great and fine outstanding citizens who come up with these great ideas and fancy words which are meaningless will have to drive a bus to and from work every day or as I say, welcome to the real world!

I believe they said cost neutral, not revenue neutral. The only look at operating miles in determining costs, not the effects on revenue which they treat separately. That is one reason why they make so few improvements. When they add or extend a service, the assumption is no change in revenue. Same when they decrease service. That is not one thing wrong with their mindset.

 

So when they speak of cost neutral, they mean the mileage savings is so small as to not have any affect on operating the service.

[IAlam]

I remember one guy stating the route should be eliminated, and everyone else giving their reasons why it should remain..... If this is the same discussion that's being referred to, where you suggested it should be extended to connect to the 111/114......

Yeah that one, and I still think it should have the connection. It's literally one stop!

[TransitJusticeForAll]

I know I'm late to this story. I just now read it and I'm disgusted. After the M5 Bus hearing, it looks like the MTA still doesn't get the message.....LEAVE OUR BUSES ALONE!!!!!!!

[Gotham Bus Co.]

I know I'm late to this story. I just now read it and I'm disgusted. After the M5 Bus hearing, it looks like the MTA still doesn't get the message.....LEAVE OUR BUSES ALONE!!!!!!!

 

Of course, you realize that "leaving your buses alone" means no cuts and no increases.

[Fresh Pond]

I know I'm late to this story. I just now read it and I'm disgusted. After the M5 Bus hearing, it looks like the MTA still doesn't get the message.....LEAVE OUR BUSES ALONE!!!!!!!

Service is always slightly decreased over the summer with a lot of lines. School is closed, school trippers are cut, and chances are you won't even notice a wait in bus times.

[TransitJusticeForAll]

Of course, you realize that "leaving your buses alone" means no cuts and no increases.

Let me rephrase that..... Leave THE buses alone. How bout that?

Service is always slightly decreased over the summer with a lot of lines. School is closed, school trippers are cut, and chances are you won't even notice a wait in bus times.

Listen, when I read that article, I see trouble and it's not good. Schools are not entirely closed because think about it. You have summer school and summer camp kids/counsellors from school districts that use the buses.

[checkmatechamp13]

Let me rephrase that..... Leave THE buses alone. How bout that? Listen, when I read that article, I see trouble and it's not good. Schools are not entirely closed because think about it. You have summer school and summer camp kids/counsellors from school districts that use the buses.

 

OK, so that means for the summer pick, no cuts and no increases. The S53, M14, Bx10, M116, Q43, Q77 (Saturday schedules) and B63, Bx36, M101, Q15, and S74 (Sunday schedules) won't see any increases. It's a net reduction of $27,000. That's less than half the annual salary for a B/O, not including benefits or the other costs involved in operating a bus. (Variable maintenance, fixed maintenance, fuel, etc)

 

Page 125

 

And the summer school/camp ridership is much less than the ridership from school kids during the year. Aside from that, these are all weekend changes. They're independent from the standard reduction of service that occurs every summer when they eliminate trippers and stuff like that.

 

More ridership (during a given time period) = More service (for that time period). Likewise, less ridership (during a given time period)  = less service (for that time period). There's been routes where the service was increased during rush hour and reduced midday or vice versa. I know offhand, the S53 just saw a decrease in midday headways because ridership shifted to the S93, but it saw an increase in Saturday service because ridership grew.

[DetSMART45]

Anything about what BrooklynBus made mention of regarding summer-trips to your seaside, or is "regular service" sufficient for all of those beach-goers?

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

OK, so that means for the summer pick, no cuts and no increases. The S53, M14, Bx10, M116, Q43, Q77 (Saturday schedules) and B63, Bx36, M101, Q15, and S74 (Sunday schedules) won't see any increases. It's a net reduction of $27,000. That's less than half the annual salary for a B/O, not including benefits or the other costs involved in operating a bus. (Variable maintenance, fixed maintenance, fuel, etc)

 

Page 125

 

And the summer school/camp ridership is much less than the ridership from school kids during the year. Aside from that, these are all weekend changes. They're independent from the standard reduction of service that occurs every summer when they eliminate trippers and stuff like that.

 

More ridership (during a given time period) = More service (for that time period). Likewise, less ridership (during a given time period)  = less service (for that time period). There's been routes where the service was increased during rush hour and reduced midday or vice versa. I know offhand, the S53 just saw a decrease in midday headways because ridership shifted to the S93, but it saw an increase in Saturday service because ridership grew.

The weekday reductions go beyond eliminating trippers though. I can tell you that the Bx12 Select runs on a 3-4 minute headway for the AM peak during the school year and during the past couple of summers that has been reduced to 5-6 minutes. 17 BPH cut down to 11 and this is westbound. Eastbound is an even 10 BPH. There's no way nearly a third of Bx12 SBS users are schoolkids so there's something else going on there.

[checkmatechamp13]

Anything about what BrooklynBus made mention of regarding summer-trips to your seaside, or is "regular service" sufficient for all of those beach-goers?

 

I don't see any routes like the B1/49, Bx29, Q35 (well, that's MTA Bus, but I didn't see it in the one where they mentioned the Q111/113), so I'm assuming regular service is considered sufficient.

 

The thing about beach riders is that they're often in the reverse-peak, far from what would be considered the peak load point (which is what  usually determines the frequency on the line). So on the B49 for example, it would just mean that during the summer, the section south of the SHB station would be just as busy as the sections further north, instead of being less crowded. Of course, it's very possible that the crowds from the beaches would make that portion the busiest part of the route.

 

And there's this too. Presumably, it means the B1 will run on a school-open schedule even when school isn't open (I guess to accommodate beach goers in the summer). Unless it just meant on weekdays during the school year.

 

The weekday reductions go beyond eliminating trippers though. I can tell you that the Bx12 Select runs on a 3-4 minute headway for the AM peak during the school year and during the past couple of summers that has been reduced to 5-6 minutes. 17 BPH cut down to 11 and this is westbound. Eastbound is an even 10 BPH. There's no way nearly a third of Bx12 SBS users are schoolkids so there's something else going on there.

 

You have a point there. I mean, even with regular people, some take vacations during the summer, but down by 1/3....yeah, something's definitely wrong. 

[Cait Sith]

Let me rephrase that..... Leave THE buses alone. How bout that? Listen, when I read that article, I see trouble and it's not good. Schools are not entirely closed because think about it. You have summer school and summer camp kids/counsellors from school districts that use the buses.

 

My friend...they do this every summer. Some subway lines also get reduced as well. You're overthinking this. You probably haven't noticed this before.

 

Relax. Summer time usually gets the least amount of ridership within the four seasons anyway.

 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Exactly. The news tends to hype things up for no reason.

[IAlam]

Honestly the subway and busses aren't that bad during the summer. When I worked in the summer I found myself taking the first to and from Manhattan and it was very empty. Now that the school year has started (almost over) I still take the same trains and the amount of passengers almost doubled. This also applied to the bus cause the bus I take is the exact same at the exact same time

[Gotham Bus Co.]

Let me rephrase that..... Leave THE buses alone. How bout that? Listen, when I read that article, I see trouble and it's not good. Schools are not entirely closed because think about it. You have summer school and summer camp kids/counsellors from school districts that use the buses.

 

Again, "leaving the buses alone" means actually leaving them alone — i.e. no cuts, no adds, no adjusting running times due to changes in traffic conditions, no nothing.

[DetSMART45]

My friend...they do this every summer. Some subway lines also get reduced as well. You're overthinking this. You probably haven't noticed this before.

 

Relax. Summer time usually gets the least amount of ridership within the four seasons anyway.

 

Ah, yes ... BUT what you're discounting are the economic trends of the past 6-7 years.  We have been moving further and further into service-industry, plus part-time positions.  Some people are now working two or three part-time jobs, when before they weren't.

 

Granted, in the concrete canyons of Manhattan, you'll still have the white collars taking the "traditional" summer vacations, but those coffee slingers, shelf fillers or cashiers (that those people encounter) still have to be around -- those businesses don't cut their hours just because of lower volumes because one group of their clientele may be away, other groups may replace them (plus the NYC tourist season).

 

The other problem is that even if the MTA "had" to adjust schedules because of lower ridership volumes, they're just going to do everything business as usual anyways -- meaning things don't all of a sudden run any better than if those trips were kept in place.  Subways will still be sardine cans, buses will still operate off-schedule, railroads could still face the same delays (if not more because of construction work).  So for saving a miniscule amount of money overall (if that) on paper, it makes no difference in efficiency terms to the riding public.

 

What should be happening is to use the time to improve the service end of things with all regular schedules intact.  With lighter volumes (if that's truly the case), maybe they could learn some things to take into future scheduling/adjustments.  I just think this is really unnecessary, because it's not really doing anything different in the end.  They should be able to show some sort of positive trade-off for the reduced service, not keep things as usual just for a little "savings" that'll end up being meaningless once the full year numbers are considered -- because they'll end up spending that "savings" (and then some, usually) before the fiscal year is up.

[bobtehpanda]

Ah, yes ... BUT what you're discounting are the economic trends of the past 6-7 years.  We have been moving further and further into service-industry, plus part-time positions.  Some people are now working two or three part-time jobs, when before they weren't.

 

Granted, in the concrete canyons of Manhattan, you'll still have the white collars taking the "traditional" summer vacations, but those coffee slingers, shelf fillers or cashiers (that those people encounter) still have to be around -- those businesses don't cut their hours just because of lower volumes because one group of their clientele may be away, other groups may replace them (plus the NYC tourist season).

 

The other problem is that even if the MTA "had" to adjust schedules because of lower ridership volumes, they're just going to do everything business as usual anyways -- meaning things don't all of a sudden run any better than if those trips were kept in place.  Subways will still be sardine cans, buses will still operate off-schedule, railroads could still face the same delays (if not more because of construction work).  So for saving a miniscule amount of money overall (if that) on paper, it makes no difference in efficiency terms to the riding public.

 

What should be happening is to use the time to improve the service end of things with all regular schedules intact.  With lighter volumes (if that's truly the case), maybe they could learn some things to take into future scheduling/adjustments.  I just think this is really unnecessary, because it's not really doing anything different in the end.  They should be able to show some sort of positive trade-off for the reduced service, not keep things as usual just for a little "savings" that'll end up being meaningless once the full year numbers are considered -- because they'll end up spending that "savings" (and then some, usually) before the fiscal year is up.

 

But retailers do cut their hours during non-busy seasons; tourists might come during the summer, yes, but there are tourists year round, and it's not as if there's a lot of nice, summer-themed stuff to do in New York that you couldn't do better or cheaper in other locations. Given that we already see the effect of holidays and seasons on transit ridership (the record-setting days have all been in October, where there are no major time-off holidays and everyone is at work or in school), this is not an unreasonable thing to do. In fact, peer agencies often do more; European agencies will generally schedule all capital-intensive work requiring full-line shutdowns during the summer because workers will be somewhere else taking holiday (and the same goes for infrastructure work in general).

 

I think that part of the reason why this is "a bad thing" is because of how it's framed. The MTA is run by penny pinchers and is constantly monitored by groups that thinks it has "two sets of books" (which it does, but that's just capital vs operations, not some sort of graft scheme), so they are under pressure to show cost savings wherever they can squeeze them out. However, we need to realize that providing all that service in the school year is very expensive as well.

 

School trippers, in general, are just more expensive to provide. School opening and closing times are not coordinated, so they all tend to open and close at the same time, and on top of that, their opening/closing times tend to coincide neatly with rush hour, especially when you take into account afterschool activities and such. So it requires additional peak trips. Given that the MTA doesn't really use part-time operators and only really schedules work in fixed eight-hour shifts (which was the case before the last contract negotiations; correct me if I'm wrong), additional peak trips are very expensive, because they require hiring an additional driver who is going to be sitting around in the middle of the day. Scheduling additional off-peak trips is relatively cheaper, because you'd just be using a driver already scheduled to work during that time who doesn't have a run.

 

So, you can think of it as "saving money", but you can also think of it as "less trips during the summer = more money for school trippers when school is in session." If you just averaged out the service over the entire year, school in session would result in overcrowded buses and school out of session would result in under-utilized buses. (The expense of providing for school has also gone up ever since the Bloomberg administration decided to unilaterally shred apart its school bus network and dump the kids onto the MTA without giving it additional money.)

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

Just to clear a few things up here... 

- School ridership dynamics are a subject worthy of it's own thread given it's a lot more complicated then a feeder system to and from schools. Many people are commuting between boroughs or to the other side of their borough to head to school with our school choice system these days so the subways are absorbing a lot more student usage then buses. (Thinking about it now that could be an unstated reason for declines in bus usage)

- On heavily used routes like the Bx12 there are no clear school trippers in the schedule so the kids are not getting any additional service that the adult riders didn't demand themselves. It's better off with routes like that keeping their full load of school year service over the summer to avoid some overcrowding.

- Teens still make plenty of trips via transit over the summer. They may not be as concentrated in the AM Rush and mid-afternoon hours as they are over the school year but let's not act like these people are disappearing during July and August. There's plenty of youngsters out on the subways and buses when I'm using them over the summer.

 

I find little difference between school travel amongst high schoolers and peak hour work trips amongst adults these days. 

[Cait Sith]

But retailers do cut their hours during non-busy seasons; tourists might come during the summer, yes, but there are tourists year round, and it's not as if there's a lot of nice, summer-themed stuff to do in New York that you couldn't do better or cheaper in other locations. Given that we already see the effect of holidays and seasons on transit ridership (the record-setting days have all been in October, where there are no major time-off holidays and everyone is at work or in school), this is not an unreasonable thing to do. In fact, peer agencies often do more; European agencies will generally schedule all capital-intensive work requiring full-line shutdowns during the summer because workers will be somewhere else taking holiday (and the same goes for infrastructure work in general).

 

I think that part of the reason why this is "a bad thing" is because of how it's framed. The MTA is run by penny pinchers and is constantly monitored by groups that thinks it has "two sets of books" (which it does, but that's just capital vs operations, not some sort of graft scheme), so they are under pressure to show cost savings wherever they can squeeze them out. However, we need to realize that providing all that service in the school year is very expensive as well.

 

School trippers, in general, are just more expensive to provide. School opening and closing times are not coordinated, so they all tend to open and close at the same time, and on top of that, their opening/closing times tend to coincide neatly with rush hour, especially when you take into account afterschool activities and such. So it requires additional peak trips. Given that the MTA doesn't really use part-time operators and only really schedules work in fixed eight-hour shifts (which was the case before the last contract negotiations; correct me if I'm wrong), additional peak trips are very expensive, because they require hiring an additional driver who is going to be sitting around in the middle of the day. Scheduling additional off-peak trips is relatively cheaper, because you'd just be using a driver already scheduled to work during that time who doesn't have a run.

 

So, you can think of it as "saving money", but you can also think of it as "less trips during the summer = more money for school trippers when school is in session." If you just averaged out the service over the entire year, school in session would result in overcrowded buses and school out of session would result in under-utilized buses. (The expense of providing for school has also gone up ever since the Bloomberg administration decided to unilaterally shred apart its school bus network and dump the kids onto the MTA without giving it additional money.)

Especially since the MTA, at one point, was thinking of cutting school trippers altogether because of the amount it would cost.

 

 

 

Ah, yes ... BUT what you're discounting are the economic trends of the past 6-7 years.  We have been moving further and further into service-industry, plus part-time positions.  Some people are now working two or three part-time jobs, when before they weren't.

 

Granted, in the concrete canyons of Manhattan, you'll still have the white collars taking the "traditional" summer vacations, but those coffee slingers, shelf fillers or cashiers (that those people encounter) still have to be around -- those businesses don't cut their hours just because of lower volumes because one group of their clientele may be away, other groups may replace them (plus the NYC tourist season).

 

The other problem is that even if the MTA "had" to adjust schedules because of lower ridership volumes, they're just going to do everything business as usual anyways -- meaning things don't all of a sudden run any better than if those trips were kept in place.  Subways will still be sardine cans, buses will still operate off-schedule, railroads could still face the same delays (if not more because of construction work).  So for saving a miniscule amount of money overall (if that) on paper, it makes no difference in efficiency terms to the riding public.

 

What should be happening is to use the time to improve the service end of things with all regular schedules intact.  With lighter volumes (if that's truly the case), maybe they could learn some things to take into future scheduling/adjustments.  I just think this is really unnecessary, because it's not really doing anything different in the end.  They should be able to show some sort of positive trade-off for the reduced service, not keep things as usual just for a little "savings" that'll end up being meaningless once the full year numbers are considered -- because they'll end up spending that "savings" (and then some, usually) before the fiscal year is up.

 

This is assuming that the summer cuts are big.....in which they are not. The reductions are very minor and always have been. The media just makes it much worse than it seems. Most of the savings from the summer cuts goes back into the school trippers that's provided during the school season, considering at one point the MTA wanted to axe all school trippers because of the costs(especially in Staten Island, where express buses are being used for trippers).

[bobtehpanda]

Just to clear a few things up here... 

- School ridership dynamics are a subject worthy of it's own thread given it's a lot more complicated then a feeder system to and from schools. Many people are commuting between boroughs or to the other side of their borough to head to school with our school choice system these days so the subways are absorbing a lot more student usage then buses. (Thinking about it now that could be an unstated reason for declines in bus usage)

- On heavily used routes like the Bx12 there are no clear school trippers in the schedule so the kids are not getting any additional service that the adult riders didn't demand themselves. It's better off with routes like that keeping their full load of school year service over the summer to avoid some overcrowding.

- Teens still make plenty of trips via transit over the summer. They may not be as concentrated in the AM Rush and mid-afternoon hours as they are over the school year but let's not act like these people are disappearing during July and August. There's plenty of youngsters out on the subways and buses when I'm using them over the summer.

 

I find little difference between school travel amongst high schoolers and peak hour work trips amongst adults these days. 

 

I mean, it's not just about school trippers. People take holiday. There are actual holidays which people might extend their vacations past. School in session means no teachers. Sure, someone working at Dunkin is not going to get vacation days, but they get sick days, and people who work in hospitals (and there is one along the Bx12) do take holiday as well even if it is an essential service.

 

There are young people goin around, sure, but this is more towards the middle of the day and the evening; what child would wake up at the same time they wake up at during the school year if they didn't have to? Back when I was in school I noticed general ridership go down in the summer months, even with the reduced service.

[checkmatechamp13]

School trippers, in general, are just more expensive to provide. School opening and closing times are not coordinated, so they all tend to open and close at the same time, and on top of that, their opening/closing times tend to coincide neatly with rush hour, especially when you take into account afterschool activities and such. So it requires additional peak trips. Given that the MTA doesn't really use part-time operators and only really schedules work in fixed eight-hour shifts (which was the case before the last contract negotiations; correct me if I'm wrong), additional peak trips are very expensive, because they require hiring an additional driver who is going to be sitting around in the middle of the day. Scheduling additional off-peak trips is relatively cheaper, because you'd just be using a driver already scheduled to work during that time who doesn't have a run.

 

Well, it's the AM peak that's a little heavier, since the schoolkids get out around 2-3PM, while rush hour is usually around 4-7PM, so the peak is spread out. But it's the highest peak that determines your capital costs and how many B/Os you need on the payroll. 

 

Just to clear a few things up here... 

- School ridership dynamics are a subject worthy of it's own thread given it's a lot more complicated then a feeder system to and from schools. Many people are commuting between boroughs or to the other side of their borough to head to school with our school choice system these days so the subways are absorbing a lot more student usage then buses. (Thinking about it now that could be an unstated reason for declines in bus usage)

- On heavily used routes like the Bx12 there are no clear school trippers in the schedule so the kids are not getting any additional service that the adult riders didn't demand themselves. It's better off with routes like that keeping their full load of school year service over the summer to avoid some overcrowding.

- Teens still make plenty of trips via transit over the summer. They may not be as concentrated in the AM Rush and mid-afternoon hours as they are over the school year but let's not act like these people are disappearing during July and August. There's plenty of youngsters out on the subways and buses when I'm using them over the summer.

 

I find little difference between school travel amongst high schoolers and peak hour work trips amongst adults these days. 

 

I believe the Bx12 local has a PM trip from St. Thomas Aquinas.

 

Especially since the MTA, at one point, was thinking of cutting school trippers altogether because of the amount it would cost.

 

This is assuming that the summer cuts are big.....in which they are not. The reductions are very minor and always have been. The media just makes it much worse than it seems. Most of the savings from the summer cuts goes back into the school trippers that's provided during the school season, considering at one point the MTA wanted to axe all school trippers because of the costs(especially in Staten Island, where express buses are being used for trippers).

 

The trippers are only so the regular buses don't get overcrowded. They would be violating their guidelines by cutting them.

 

And the express buses being used for trippers is actually to save money (since those are South Shore schools), and it's fairly recent and only applies to a few schools and routes.

[TransitJusticeForAll]

Again, "leaving the buses alone" means actually leaving them alone — i.e. no cuts, no adds, no adjusting running times due to changes in traffic conditions, no nothing.

I meant DO NOT cut any bus service. That's what I meant, if you were confused.