September 3, 2017 Bus Service Changes

[DanTheTransitMan]

The M72 is horrible.  Comes once in a blue moon and everyone on the bus seems to be old.  I don't think the M1 should be extended further since it suffers from severe gaps and bunching.  I was surprised that it was extended to SoHo.

 

Yeh and it's because of several rounds of service cuts. A year or two ago the MTA cut service on the M66/M72 and worsened service. A year before that they cut service again. It like they want it to turn into a rush only route. I could actually foresee an increase in ridership on the eastern portion of the line now that the second avenue subway is opened. The on the westside the ridership is decent so I see no reason for the service cuts. On the bunching issue for the M1, all of the fifth avenue routes face bunching problems when they merge together at 110th and because of traffic between 72nd and 59th. The M1 bunched a lot more then it does now because headways where higher, there's a vid of this somewhere on YouTube. This fact shouldn't really affect service improvements because too many buses turn at 8th street anyway which kinda runs the use of the terminal. Oh and just as a personal note. I just remembered that's it's Canal and not Worth street where the MTA is turning buses.

[DanTheTransitMan]

The s/79 needs that bump especially with the pick going through the beginning of January. Come the holidays, the line can be next to the impossible going to and from the mall with a lot of standees even during the day.

 

Honestly the S79 needs to function like what the +SelectBusService+ was invisioned to accomplish. Which was implement a BRT type of system in NYC meaning off board fare payment at all stops and "roomier" buses ie articulated ones on line that are branded as such. The line currently does not have any of the features of SelectBus and really behaves like a limited. The only saving grace is that I believe that they implemented traffic signal priority on Hylan Blvd which helps but doesn't make a big difference. What I said IS the problem with SBS and the MTA needs to fix it because lines like the B46, Bx6, Q70, and the line mentioned above are not performing as good as they can just because the MTA doesn't want to invest a little capital. Oh and for Gods sake the Q44 and the Bx12 get new buses while the M15 stay with same old ones, come on. Bull.

[checkmatechamp13]

Honestly the S79 needs to function like what the +SelectBusService+ was invisioned to accomplish. Which was implement a BRT type of system in NYC meaning off board fare payment at all stops and "roomier" buses ie articulated ones on line that are branded as such. The line currently does not have any of the features of SelectBus and really behaves like a limited. The only saving grace is that I believe that they implemented traffic signal priority on Hylan Blvd which helps but doesn't make a big difference. What I said IS the problem with SBS and the MTA needs to fix it because lines like the B46, Bx6, Q70, and the line mentioned above are not performing as good as they can just because the MTA doesn't want to invest a little capital. Oh and for Gods sake the Q44 and the Bx12 get new buses while the M15 stay with same old ones, come on. Bull.

 

All articulated buses means is less frequent service. No thanks. As for off-board fare payment, dwell times aren't too much of an issue, and there's no point in making people choose between the S79 and the S53/59/78/93 before they get to the stop.

[P3F]

All articulated buses means is less frequent service. No thanks. As for off-board fare payment, dwell times aren't too much of an issue, and there's no point in making people choose between the S79 and the S53/59/78/93 before they get to the stop.

What would be great, is if you could dip the SBS tickets into the farebox on the parallel local buses.

 

Maybe in another century...

[DanTheTransitMan]

All articulated buses means is less frequent service. No thanks. As for off-board fare payment, dwell times aren't too much of an issue, and there's no point in making people choose between the S79 and the S53/59/78/93 before they get to the stop.

 

Not entirely, that's really only an idea circulated here in parrot. Look at the M15 Select, 2 minute headways during the AM rush; that's just silly. Then look at the Q44 they didn't really decrease headways on that line once it got the Novas so it's not really a general statement of fact or a truism for that matter.

What would be great, is if you could dip the SBS tickets into the farebox on the parallel local buses.

 

Maybe in another century...

 

They allow you to board the locals if you show them your ticket or at least they're supposed to.

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

Not entirely, that's really only an idea circulated here in parrot. Look at the M15 Select, 2 minute headways during the AM rush; that's just silly. Then look at the Q44 they didn't really decrease headways on that line once it got the Novas so it's not really a general statement of fact or a truism for that matter.

 

They allow you to board the locals if you show them your ticket or at least they're supposed to.

Checkmate's idea is not just some idea, it's basic operation logic. Larger vehicles = less required to handle demand.The M15 SBS only has a 2 minute headway for a half hour window in the AM Rush. Considering that the following half hour saw headways widened from 3 to 4 minutes, service was not increased on the route. Any route running at a low headway with artics would run at a lower headway without them so even the M15 is seeing less service now then it would need with 40 footers in operation. What's so silly about 2 minute headways on the M15?

 

The Q44 did get a hefty service cut when LFSA's first took over and that is the reason why it was given artics to begin with. The last thing the frugal MTA was willing to do was keep 40 footers running at low headways on a 13 mile long route with 100 minute trip times and growing ridership (before SBS came). 

 

As far as I'm concerned artics should only be on routes like the M15 where the service is frequent with or without them and the B46 should be next in line to get them. If the Q44 headways pre-artic were too costly there's no excuse to keep B46 headways super low with the declining usage on that route. 

[DanTheTransitMan]

Checkmate's idea is not just some idea, it's basic operation logic. Larger vehicles = less required to handle demand.The M15 SBS only has a 2 minute headway for a half hour window in the AM Rush. Considering that the following half hour saw headways widened from 3 to 4 minutes, service was not increased on the route. Any route running at a low headway with artics would run at a lower headway without them so even the M15 is seeing less service now then it would need with 40 footers in operation. What's so silly about 2 minute headways on the M15?

 

The Q44 did get a hefty service cut when LFSA's first took over and that is the reason why it was given artics to begin with. The last thing the frugal MTA was willing to do was keep 40 footers running at low headways on a 13 mile long route with 100 minute trip times and growing ridership (before SBS came). 

 

As far as I'm concerned artics should only be on routes like the M15 where the service is frequent with or without them and the B46 should be next in line to get them. If the Q44 headways pre-artic were too costly there's no excuse to keep B46 headways super low with the declining usage on that route. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                          Before that 2 minute operating window from 6:45 to 7:25 M15 select buses had little to no ridership, then at around 6:30 ridership spikes so on the whole the service cuts in the morn are justified. And on the Q44 the only thing that MTA did was switch headways times from every 3 to 4 minutes to every 4 to 5 mintues.

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

                                                                                                                                                                                                          Before that 2 minute operating window from 6:45 to 7:25 M15 select buses had little to no ridership, then at around 6:30 ridership spikes so on the whole the service cuts in the morn are justified. And on the Q44 the only thing that MTA did was switch headways times from every 3 to 4 minutes to every 4 to 5 mintues.

That's a service cut, isn't it? 3-4 minute headways means 16-18 BPH. 4-5 minute headways means either 13 or 14 BPH.  Also PM Rush headways changed from 4 minutes northbound to 6 minutes following the introduction of artics. The PM rush is the worst period for wide gaps on this route so you can see what kind of effect that would have.

[checkmatechamp13]

What would be great, is if you could dip the SBS tickets into the farebox on the parallel local buses.

 

Maybe in another century...

 

To be fair, you're officially allowed to board the local with the +SBS+ ticket but some B/Os don't know the rule. In any case, dwell times aren't an issue on the S79 like they are on some other +SBS+ routes.

 

That's a service cut, isn't it? 3-4 minute headways means 16-18 BPH. 4-5 minute headways means either 13 or 14 BPH.  Also PM Rush headways changed from 4 minutes northbound to 6 minutes following the introduction of artics. The PM rush is the worst period for wide gaps on this route so you can see what kind of effect that would have.

 

Agreed. Let me put it this way: The general rule is off-peak, you replace 5 standards with 4 artics. So basically, this latest service increase from 15 minute headways (4 buses per hour) to 12 minute headways (5 buses per hour) wouldn't have happened if the S79 had artics.

 

Yeah, going from 3-4 minute headways to 4-5 minute headways isn't that big of a deal, but when the headways get larger, the difference gets more noticeable. 

[B35 via Church]

I am piling a list of notable service changes. I will not post all the changes at once though. For now, here are notable service changes for Bronx, Brooklyn, and Manhattan buses.

 

 

** summary of recent bus changes (inside spoiler tag which annoyingly shows upon a quoted post)**

 

Queens and Staten Island Service Changes will be posted up soon. Share your opinions with the poll listed above and/or in the comments below.

 

Voted the last option..... You can keep score on how many positive commentaries I have to these changes.... Direct reflection as to why I chose as such (in the poll)..... Anyway, let's start this off.....

 

 

The Bronx:

Bx6: So this narrative continues with bus service in this city.... Shocking development.

Bx12: Yeah, summer's over.... Can't wait for winter.

Bx40/42: As opposed to what? Short turn trips....

 

 

Brooklyn:

B47: With regards to SB AM rush service.... Are you trying to say that trips running the full route now run every 10-12 (instead of 12-14) & short turn trips now run every 6-8 (instead of every 8)? The way you state it seems a little confusing..... Anyway, I see those summary of changes all amounting to a service redistribution....

 

B52: Always thought there was a little too much off-peak service on that route & not enough peak service....

 

B61: smh... They just got through increasing PM rush hour service earlier this year, didn't they? If not sometime late last year.... Now they're decreasing PM rush hour service.... *shrugs*

 

B65: The route is a coverage route, but I cannot agree with trying to give it coverage headways (which is the road it's really looking like it's going down).... That has been my general sentiment about the B65 for years.....

 

B83: Any service decreases I see happening to the B83 tends to irritate me, because I see restructuring Penn. av. service as being such an easy fix (just as easy as it was to run the damn thing to Gateway).... Well that, and it goes against my beliefs regarding how the two routes should operate within the network (which is backed by current ridership habits).....  I'll explain....

 

See, there's a greater demand for the B83, but the B20 covers more of Penn.... Instead of increasing the amt. of B20 short turn trips (as they've done over the years) to facilitate Penn., I strongly believe the B83 overall should have significantly more service than the B20.... Turn the B20 into a coverage route east of Penn (the B15 [and the B13, but that's a north-south route] got that whole area by the Pink & Cypress houses on lock anyway) & turn the B83 into "the" Penn. av route already.... I also think the B83 should run 24/7, but that's another topic.....

 

Instead, they're going to continue status quo w/ the B20 & continue to chip away at B83 service.... Status quo being, chipping away at the amount of trips running to Ridgewood & dicking around w/ short turn service.... Giving off this illusion of more reliable service along Penn.... I'm not buying it, because there's no evidence of it.... The B20 is still less reliable than the B83, period, end of story....

 

 

Manhattan:

M1: I didn't have a problem with it being extended to Worth by itself, I abhorred the original/proposed routing they had it taking (8th st to [3rd av <-> Bowery], to end at Worth) to get there..... Now I just peeped the bus map & I see buses ending at Centre/Grand running via B'way? So they played it safe by having it run via B'way (instead of Bowery) & deciding not to have it deal w/ Canal st....

 

I'm going against the consensus here; I can't knock the MTA on this one.... If it means not putting up w/ the failed experiment (the M55) or the parking lot (Bowery, south of Houston) that the M103 has to contend with, I'm good.... To hell with me though, I think this catch on with Manhattanites (although I haven't check the new timetable yet).... That gap b/w 6th & Bowery was beyond annoying (NB service); I spoke about that gap on here before & finally they did something to address it...

 

M10: Kind of saw service decreases coming w/ this route (even though I sided w/ the cutback to Columbus Cir.) - it was only a matter of when.... I mean, it was always one of, if not the most efficient north-south "distance" Manhattan routes (once you got up to 57th from Penn anyway).... Thing is, now it's gotten that much more efficient - as that route is losing ridership at a rapid rate....

 

M15 SBS: Well ya look at that... more SBS service, what a f***** surprise!

 

M22: I don't have much a use for the route anymore, but how are things actually going w/ the route these days? Whenever I'm in Chinatown or down around Park Row, I barely even see em anymore.... Hopefully the more eastern portion of the route still carries......

 

M34: Great that they're increasing the catchment area of service under the "M34" umbrella (meaning M34& M34a), now if they can just, somehow, you know, quell & eliminate the magical disappearing of buses along 34th.... I'd rather wait for the M42 over the M34 & that's saying a LOT !

 

M98: Don't know how many & in how many ways I've said it, but I still think the MTA is misusing this route.... It should be the equivalent to the M101 & not this distant 3rd or 4th cousin of it (I couldn't tell you who the hell my 3rd or 4th cousin is, but I digress)..... So it's immaterial to me if they chip away at this bastardized rendition of the route.... They want everyone on M101's anyway.

 

M100: Great, more M101 justification....

[Future ENY OP]

Voted the last option..... You can keep score on how many positive commentaries I have to these changes.... Direct reflection as to why I chose as such (in the poll)..... Anyway, let's start this off.....

 

 

Brooklyn:

B47: With regards to SB AM rush service.... Are you trying to say that trips running the full route now run every 10-12 (instead of 12-14) & short turn trips now run every 6-8 (instead of every 8)? The way you state it seems a little confusing..... Anyway, I see those summary of changes all amounting to a service redistribution....

 

B52: Always thought there was a little too much off-peak service on that route & not enough peak service....

 

B61: smh... They just got through increasing PM rush hour service earlier this year, didn't they? If not sometime late last year.... Now they're decreasing PM rush hour service.... *shrugs*

 

B65: The route is a coverage route, but I cannot agree with trying to give it coverage headways (which is the road it's really looking like it's going down).... That has been my general sentiment about the B65 for years.....

 

B83: Any service decreases I see happening to the B83 tends to irritate me, because I see restructuring Penn. av. service as being such an easy fix (just as easy as it was to run the damn thing to Gateway).... Well that, and it goes against my beliefs regarding how the two routes should operate within the network (which is backed by current ridership habits)..... I'll explain....

 

See, there's a greater demand for the B83, but the B20 covers more of Penn.... Instead of increasing the amt. of B20 short turn trips (as they've done over the years) to facilitate Penn., I strongly believe the B83 overall should have significantly more service than the B20.... Turn the B20 into a coverage route east of Penn (the B15 [and the B13, but that's a north-south route] got that whole area by the Pink & Cypress houses on lock anyway) & turn the B83 into "the" Penn. av route already.... I also think the B83 should run 24/7, but that's another topic.....

 

Instead, they're going to continue status quo w/ the B20 & continue to chip away at B83 service.... Status quo being, chipping away at the amount of trips running to Ridgewood & dicking around w/ short turn service.... Giving off this illusion of more reliable service along Penn.... I'm not buying it, because there's no evidence of it.... The B20 is still less reliable than the B83, period, end of story.......

 

B47: I've been saying this for a long time. Split the operation from the southern portion to the Northern portions of the route. Meaning: Flatbush- Kings Plaza to Rutland (B78 revival)

Grand Ave: WoodHull to Ralph, Rush hours to Rutland Road.

 

B52: Since I work around the Downtown area, there's been an influx of Fresh Pond buses during the mid-day hours. Lots of frequent Downtown service, but imagine the traffic downtown and the weird route the B52 travels. Gates // Greene Avenue.

 

B83 is an interesting route. It definitely needs 24/7 service. However, it doesn't cover enough of Penn Avenue. Although it takes a direct route to Van sicklen to Starrett City-Canarsie and Gateway Mall. What's missing is a direct Penn Avenue route that can go to Gateway.

[DanTheTransitMan]

In regards to what B35 via Church said, I guess they figure that most routes that run along the M100's route are more practical to use ie the Bx15, M60, and M101. The only problem is that a lot of people want to get to areas along the northern portions of the route especially around Broadway. I've seen a lot of buses that are jam packed in the northern portion of that route going either NB or SB, and I've seen a lot of M101's that are totally empty. Also I believe the M100 ran at 5 to 6 minute intervals not so long ago. I guess it's just another route that the MTA wants to relegate to the back burner.

[Cait Sith]

Manhattan:

M1: I didn't have a problem with it being extended to Worth by itself, I abhorred the original/proposed routing they had it taking (8th st to [3rd av <-> Bowery], to end at Worth) to get there..... Now I just peeped the bus map & I see buses ending at Centre/Grand running via B'way? So they played it safe by having it run via B'way (instead of Bowery) & deciding not to have it deal w/ Canal st....

 

I'm going against the consensus here; I can't knock the MTA on this one.... If it means not putting up w/ the failed experiment (the M55) or the parking lot (Bowery, south of Houston) that the M103 has to contend with, I'm good.... To hell with me though, I think this catch on with Manhattanites (although I haven't check the new timetable yet).... That gap b/w 6th & Bowery was beyond annoying (NB service); I spoke about that gap on here before & finally they did something to address it...

 

M10: Kind of saw service decreases coming w/ this route (even though I sided w/ the cutback to Columbus Cir.) - it was only a matter of when.... I mean, it was always one of, if not the most efficient north-south "distance" Manhattan routes (once you got up to 57th from Penn anyway).... Thing is, now it's gotten that much more efficient - as that route is losing ridership at a rapid rate....

 

M15 SBS: Well ya look at that... more SBS service, what a f***** surprise!

 

M22: I don't have much a use for the route anymore, but how are things actually going w/ the route these days? Whenever I'm in Chinatown or down around Park Row, I barely even see em anymore.... Hopefully the more eastern portion of the route still carries......

 

M34: Great that they're increasing the catchment area of service under the "M34" umbrella (meaning M34& M34a), now if they can just, somehow, you know, quell & eliminate the magical disappearing of buses along 34th.... I'd rather wait for the M42 over the M34 & that's saying a LOT !

 

M98: Don't know how many & in how many ways I've said it, but I still think the MTA is misusing this route.... It should be the equivalent to the M101 & not this distant 3rd or 4th cousin of it (I couldn't tell you who the hell my 3rd or 4th cousin is, but I digress)..... So it's immaterial to me if they chip away at this bastardized rendition of the route.... They want everyone on M101's anyway.

 

M100: Great, more M101 justification....

 

I actually don't think the M55 is a failed experiment. Ridership has been going up. Northbound service definitely saw an increase in ridership. Southbound is going up in a slower pace. It definitely has more people riding it than 3-4 months ago. It's going through the same motions as the B32 did in my opinion.

 

The change from Bowery to Broadway is more to do with construction around the Worth Street area(it's currently one-way for a small portion of it). In the long run, it's more logical for them to run the M1 on Broadway because the turnaround would be easier. I feel as if they wanted to send the M1 down Bowery to compensate for M103 service, which can be sporadic in the Chinatown area. There's also no right turns onto Grand Street from Bowery.

 

M22 still tends to pick up a lot during the rush hour, but after 7-ish.....it doesn't really carry much at all. The way these M22 cuts are planned, it makes it seem as if they want folks piling on the M9.

[DanTheTransitMan]

I actually don't think the M55 is a failed experiment. Ridership has been going up. Northbound service definitely saw an increase in ridership. Southbound is going up in a slower pace. It definitely has more people riding it than 3-4 months ago. It's going through the same motions as the B32 did in my opinion.

 

The change from Bowery to Broadway is more to do with construction around the Worth Street area(it's currently one-way for a small portion of it). In the long run, it's more logical for them to run the M1 on Broadway because the turnaround would be easier. I feel as if they wanted to send the M1 down Bowery to compensate for M103 service, which can be sporadic in the Chinatown area. There's also no right turns onto Grand Street from Bowery.

 

M22 still tends to pick up a lot during the rush hour, but after 7-ish.....it doesn't really carry much at all. The way these M22 cuts are planned, it makes it seem as if they want folks piling on the M9. 

That or the fact that prior to 2010 the M1 ran along Broadway along with the M6. Would actually make sense to bring that route back because there are a few places that I could see a bus stop between CPS and 47th street along Broadway.

[MysteriousBtrain]

M22 still tends to pick up a lot during the rush hour, but after 7-ish.....it doesn't really carry much at all. The way these M22 cuts are planned, it makes it seem as if they want folks piling on the M9.

Honestly I think the M9 is Bound to replace the M22 sometime in the future since the M9's route is longer. The only real "use" I see on the M22 is the non duplicate section east of the (and maybe the city hall section too).

[Cait Sith]

Honestly I think the M9 is Bound to replace the M22 sometime in the future since the M9's route is longer. The only real "use" I see on the M22 is the non duplicate section east of the (and maybe the city hall section too).

 

And that's exactly why it won't be replaced. Ridership on Madison Street between Pike & the FDR is relatively decent during the midday and rush hour. The closure of the Pathmark on Cherry Street also had a slight impact on ridership.

[B35 via Church]

Some quotes...

 

With all these 30 min frequencies I'm afraid eventually, off peak ridership will just be all gone.

Of those that won't resort to using alternative means of travel, all it'll mean is that said ridership will be distributed onto other routes.....

 

Hopefully this is a step towards splitting the S74 at the ETC and having the S84 run local south of the SIE with the S74 terminating there during rush hour like the S76.

No argument from me on this one.... East of ETC on the S74 should be replaced with a coverage route extended somewhere northward (at the very least, to the mall)....

 

Yeah, this one confuses me...isn't the M34 to Waterside identical to the M34A? Why not just say they are adding more M34A runs?

That would implicate all those M34's going to Waterside are straight up service additions..... It's not the case, fam....

 

The M34 trips that are running to Waterside now, were once M34 trips that ran to the ferry terminal.... 

In other words, there's less service to/from the ferry terminal now.....

 

Did anyone see a Q37B run in service?

Driving along Atlantic coming home this week, nope.... I only saw buses signed as "Q37".

(I was on the lookout for them, after that Q37 "Bypass Aqueduct" discussion that was ongoing on here)

 

 

That M34 to Waterside is an interesting one. I guess they're trying to cover some of the M34As that tend to go missing once they get to the West Side....

 

Ridership on that side is gradually going up

...(in blue) is what I was going to say in response to your first post (in brown)....

I also find this to be out of the... blue, and rather interesting.

 

Were there any services changes to the B37? I see B37 buses running more frequently now.

I'm seeing more bunching occurring more frequently (on the Atlantic av end).... Don't know if there were any recent changes to the route....

 

Tbh I think this relabeling is silly. I really think the Q37 should be removed from the Casino all together, because the Casino provides its own buses anyway.

I want to agree to that, but at the same time, the Q37 needs any ridership generator it can get.....

 

Not entirely, that's really only an idea circulated here in parrot. Look at the M15 Select, 2 minute headways during the AM rush; that's just silly. Then look at the Q44 they didn't really decrease headways on that line once it got the Novas so it's not really a general statement of fact or a truism for that matter.

I don't see anything wrong with parroting one of the principles of logistics (doing more with less)...

 

As to your examples.... The increase in service that came with the M15 SBS' came large in part with a service decrease of the M15 locals....

The fact that resulted in 2 minute headways isn't a testament to / illustrative of artics not generally coming with less frequent service... Matter fact, it's irrelevant... What it doesn't seem like you're considering is the service levels that the M15 SBS would have, if 40 footers were still in operation on the route.... Just bringing up the fact that M15 SBS' are running every 2 minutes, is only one-half of the equation.....

 

The Q44 definitely came with a service decrease when artics became the norm on that route... No matter how minute it was, it was still a decrease... That general statement Checkmate made holds true here....

 

All in all, the MTA sure as hell isn't going exude any willingness to replacing each 40 footer on some route with a corresponding articulated bus for the sheer f*** of it with no drawbacks whatsoever.... Not in this lifetime anyway

[MetroTransitTee]

Yeah, The other day I saw 3 buses bunched up. I honestly don't get it. This route is not that busy but buses still tend to pile up. It's honestly ridiculous.

[B35 via Church]

B47: I've been saying this for a long time. Split the operation from the southern portion to the Northern portions of the route. Meaning: Flatbush- Kings Plaza to Rutland (B78 revival)

Grand Ave: WoodHull to Ralph, Rush hours to Rutland Road.

 

B52: Since I work around the Downtown area, there's been an influx of Fresh Pond buses during the mid-day hours. Lots of frequent Downtown service, but imagine the traffic downtown and the weird route the B52 travels. Gates // Greene Avenue.

 

B83 is an interesting route. It definitely needs 24/7 service. However, it doesn't cover enough of Penn Avenue. Although it takes a direct route to Van sicklen to Starrett City-Canarsie and Gateway Mall. What's missing is a direct Penn Avenue route that can go to Gateway.

We both have been saying that about the B47 for years - too bad the MTA doesn't see the problem (or fail to do anything about it).... Most of their recent merges have been absolute failures & IMO, this route is the most glaring one....

 

I can't imagine how many of those B52 midday trips crawl the route after it hits Broadway.... I used to use it as an alternative to the B38 or B26 (being that it carried less ppl. than those 2 routes) to Ridgewood, but the problem, without fail, would be the crawling & even stalling (at stops where nobody is being picked up or dropped off at) north of Bushwick (av), short of the terminal....

 

In regards to what B35 via Church said, I guess they figure that most routes that run along the M100's route are more practical to use ie the Bx15, M60, and M101. The only problem is that a lot of people want to get to areas along the northern portions of the route especially around Broadway. I've seen a lot of buses that are jam packed in the northern portion of that route going either NB or SB, and I've seen a lot of M101's that are totally empty. Also I believe the M100 ran at 5 to 6 minute intervals not so long ago. I guess it's just another route that the MTA wants to relegate to the back burner.

...which is what I find so irritating about the M101 & I'm glad you pointed that out.... As regarded as the M101 is spoken of around the forums (not just this one), there are more trips that carry very light (because buses are all on top of each other) that some wouldn't or don't want to believe.... There has been numerous occasions I've been up along 125th waiting for one, where I see people fighting their way onto the thing & when you look down the block, there's another one right there.... I'm like f*** that, you all go right ahead w/ the pushing & shoving.... Next bus comes & no more than 2 or 3 mins. later the bus is less than a handful people short of carrying air....

 

M100 is treated secondarily because the M101 is the LTD with the vast majority of the service along Amsterdam, etc....

So much potential I see with the M98 & it's being squandered; Hunter College area to Washington Heights, JFC.....

 

I actually don't think the M55 is a failed experiment. Ridership has been going up. Northbound service definitely saw an increase in ridership. Southbound is going up in a slower pace. It definitely has more people riding it than 3-4 months ago. It's going through the same motions as the B32 did in my opinion.

 

The change from Bowery to Broadway is more to do with construction around the Worth Street area(it's currently one-way for a small portion of it). In the long run, it's more logical for them to run the M1 on Broadway because the turnaround would be easier. I feel as if they wanted to send the M1 down Bowery to compensate for M103 service, which can be sporadic in the Chinatown area. There's also no right turns onto Grand Street from Bowery.

 

M22 still tends to pick up a lot during the rush hour, but after 7-ish.....it doesn't really carry much at all. The way these M22 cuts are planned, it makes it seem as if they want folks piling on the M9.

I still see it as a failed experiment, even though they fixed that problem it initially had with insufficient runtime (which had the lion's share of physical buses running in one direction & either one trip (or literally nothing) in the other direction).... I don't doubt more riders are using the thing now, but there's still the problem of riders wanting service past Bryant Park.... It's a stub....

 

I wouldn't really compare the growing pains (lol) the B32 had, to this M55 - for the simple fact that a riderbase had to be established with the B32 (which largely came from those likely going.... well shit, this route is actually more reliable than the B62 - and it's closer to my house).... The riderbase was already there w/ the M55 (in the form of the M5 that got truncated).... I don't think there's much of anyone that doubted that the M5 needed to be split... My issue is how it was done.

 

With the M1 extension, I'm relieved that again, there's something running b/w 6th & Bowery due north now.... If construction was the reason that killed off running buses along Bowery, then I say kudos to the city (or whoever/whatever's responsible) for it.... Another positive AFAIC is that it now supplements more of the M55 along B'way..... I'm all for this M1 extension; it stops short of Canal & it doesn't run all the way down to the Ferry like it used to.....

 

So basically, nothing's really changed in that regard w/ the M22, b/c that's how I remember it as well.... I'm not surprised that they'd try anything to try to justify that M9 routing west of City Hall Park.... Always wondered how the M22 would fare if it ran down to Liberty... That way the M9 can get cut back to Park Row w/ the M103 & have it be called a day.... Let the M9 worry about (more of) the headache it has to deal with north of Delancey....

 

Honestly I think the M9 is Bound to replace the M22 sometime in the future since the M9's route is longer. The only real "use" I see on the M22 is the non duplicate section east of the (and maybe the city hall section too).

M22's bread & butter has always been the portion at & east of Park Row, but the usage used to be better (than what it is now) to/from the area around BMCC & W. Broadway (Chambers st )... That part of the route never really recovered from that construction that crippled Chambers st about a decade or so ago.... You can't have the M9 replace the M22, as it serves different sections of the LES....

[checkmatechamp13]

I actually don't think the M55 is a failed experiment. Ridership has been going up. Northbound service definitely saw an increase in ridership. Southbound is going up in a slower pace. It definitely has more people riding it than 3-4 months ago. It's going through the same motions as the B32 did in my opinion.

 

The change from Bowery to Broadway is more to do with construction around the Worth Street area(it's currently one-way for a small portion of it). In the long run, it's more logical for them to run the M1 on Broadway because the turnaround would be easier. I feel as if they wanted to send the M1 down Bowery to compensate for M103 service, which can be sporadic in the Chinatown area. There's also no right turns onto Grand Street from Bowery.

 

M22 still tends to pick up a lot during the rush hour, but after 7-ish.....it doesn't really carry much at all. The way these M22 cuts are planned, it makes it seem as if they want folks piling on the M9.

 

The thing is the M55 isn't a new route. It's just a renaming of the southern portion of the M5 (that came with decreased service). If anything, the "increased ridership" is people who abandoned the route when they saw that the tight runtimes were resulting in unreliable service, and got word that the schedule was fixed up (and also some people who thought the M5 was simply being truncated with no replacement).

 

At best, ridership will stabilize around the same level it was before the M5 was split. I can't see it being like the B32 where it keeps seeing large increases year after year.

 

1) No argument from me on this one.... East of ETC on the S74 should be replaced with a coverage route extended somewhere northward (at the very least, to the mall)....

 

2) I'm seeing more bunching occurring more frequently (on the Atlantic av end).... Don't know if there were any recent changes to the route....

 

1) By east of the ETC, you mean heading towards St. George? Right now, that's the busier portion of the route (there's a lot of short-turns that run just from St. George to the ETC). That part could hold its own.

 

West of the ETC, I would restructure it in conjunction with the S55/56. With all the coverage gaps and looping around, the whole "deep" South Shore (meaning, west of Richmond Ave) needs to have its routes restructured from scratch.

 

2) There's some construction going on around Downtown Brooklyn (something like Warren Street-3rd Street or something) that's causing northbound buses to run along 4th Avenue for a few blocks. Not sure how much it impacted reliability.

[B35 via Church]

The thing is the M55 isn't a new route. It's just a renaming of the southern portion of the M5 (that came with decreased service). If anything, the "increased ridership" is people who abandoned the route when they saw that the tight runtimes were resulting in unreliable service, and got word that the schedule was fixed up (and also some people who thought the M5 was simply being truncated with no replacement).

 

At best, ridership will stabilize around the same level it was before the M5 was split. I can't see it being like the B32 where it keeps seeing large increases year after year.

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

 

 

1) By east of the ETC, you mean heading towards St. George? Right now, that's the busier portion of the route (there's a lot of short-turns that run just from St. George to the ETC). That part could hold its own.

 

West of the ETC, I would restructure it in conjunction with the S55/56. With all the coverage gaps and looping around, the whole "deep" South Shore (meaning, west of Richmond Ave) needs to have its routes restructured from scratch.

 

2) There's some construction going on around Downtown Brooklyn (something like Warren Street-3rd Street or something) that's causing northbound buses to run along 4th Avenue for a few blocks. Not sure how much it impacted reliability.

 

I got what CS was saying in regards with how the B32 was, coming up..... At the same time, even if those are all new riders on the M55  (those that never used to take the M5 before the split), I don't see that usage coming close to replicating the usage the M5 used to have b/w the current M55 stretch (I still say service up to 57th & Columbus Circle plays a significant part in that).... You're not going to get too many ppl. willing to do that xferring b/w the M55 & the M5 for that appx. mile distance (Bryant Park - CC)...

 

I don't see the M55 returning to that state you mention though (about the same passenger activity the M5 had b/w the Bryant Park area & S. Ferry)....

I'd say it'll garner a mixture of [newfound ridership & [(significantly less) riders that used to take the M5] (both of which include pax. xferring off other routes) & will stagnate right there.... To sum it up, the influx CS is talking about, I'm inclined to believe is the M55's maxing out.... I can't really see it getting any better (which is where I concur with that very last statement of yours).....

 

42nd is of course a major destination (generally speaking), but 59th was more pivotal a destination for/on the M5....

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

 

 

1) That should have read, west of the ETC; I would keep the S74 as is b/w St. George & ETC.

 

2) I've thought about that.... That construction plays a part, but I think it's something else down the line that's causing buses to bunch as well.... Whenever I sporadically take the B37 after getting off the stinkin LIRR, it's only to the 39th (for the B35)....

[Mysterious2train]

I'll only talk about Manhattan here but the MTA realy screwed up on this one. Reducing M72 service is foolish. At any point during the day that line sees a lot of ridership. If ridership is dwindling at any point during the day (usually during noon) then thehandicapped and elderly take over other riders places. Honestly I liked the pre 2010 setup where you had the M30 and M72 serving the east side, crowds over there really got intense during the morning rush. They've been cutting service on that line for years and it sucks. The cuts on the M10 are also really bad because service on the B and C lines between 116th street and Columbus Cirle is infrequent throughout to say the least and a few people, myself included would rather bus it then have to wait for the train. Oh and on the M98 why would they continue to damage service on a line that has suffered a slew cuts since, again, 2010. I would like to see the M98 extended back down to it's old southern terminal at 34th street and lex. with a possible extention west towards Penn station, where the M4,Q32, and BxM2 currently terminate. Would provide a needed relief on the M101 and might help spur ridership that has been going away from the 3rd avenue/Lexington avenue corridors for years. Who wouldn't want more limited service on a line that makes a bunch of stops and is plagued by slow speeds. The only real positive aspect of these "improvements" is the M1 extention down to Broadway/Worth. Even with that the M1 would be much better off if it went to City Hall or Chambers Street. Ideally I would like to see the MTA add service on buses throughout Manhattan not take it away and I would also I would  like to see the MTA create new routes or routing options like the M55 (even if that route is qualified as a cut).

 

I agree the MTA is usually too cut-happy but in this case it's fairly logical that ridership on the UES crosstowns would decrease now that the SAS is open. For the M66 and M72 It's only two blocks from Second Avenue to York Avenue which is not far for the able-bodied. I admittedly never took the M30 before it was eliminated but I imagine it would suffer as well since the parallels it end-to-end.

 

Just an anecdote, but my family used the M66 semi-regularly a few years ago to visit a relative at Sloan Kettering. We would generally come from either my home in Brooklyn (taking the or to the to the to the M66 - some elderly relatives came along, so we often took the M66 just from Lexington to York, but one weekend when the was running express we took the M31 instead), or, from the relative's home in Long Island (taking the LIRR to the to the M66). If the SAS was open, we would have just taken the and never bothered with the M66.

 

 

Manhattan:

M1: I didn't have a problem with it being extended to Worth by itself, I abhorred the original/proposed routing they had it taking (8th st to [3rd av <-> Bowery], to end at Worth) to get there..... Now I just peeped the bus map & I see buses ending at Centre/Grand running via B'way? So they played it safe by having it run via B'way (instead of Bowery) & deciding not to have it deal w/ Canal st....

 

I'm going against the consensus here; I can't knock the MTA on this one.... If it means not putting up w/ the failed experiment (the M55) or the parking lot (Bowery, south of Houston) that the M103 has to contend with, I'm good.... To hell with me though, I think this catch on with Manhattanites (although I haven't check the new timetable yet).... That gap b/w 6th & Bowery was beyond annoying (NB service); I spoke about that gap on here before & finally they did something to address it...

 

The M1 terminating at Grand Street is only temporary, because of the construction work on Worth Street right now. Once that's done, the plan is to re-extend it back to Worth Street. I agree that putting it back on Broadway was a smart choice. 

[Union Tpke]

I haven't seen any Q37 labeled Q37B. I am not sure if there is a code for that.

[Around the Horn]

I haven't seen any Q37 labeled Q37B. I am not sure if there is a code for that.

 

There is. Some buses were using it before the change.

[bobtehpanda]

M22's bread & butter has always been the portion at & east of Park Row, but the usage used to be better (than what it is now) to/from the area around BMCC & W. Broadway (Chambers st )... That part of the route never really recovered from that construction that crippled Chambers st about a decade or so ago.... You can't have the M9 replace the M22, as it serves different sections of the LES....

 

I feel like it's both the construction, and how far apart those stops on the one-way loop section are (did the M22 run like this prior to Park Row being closed?)

 

CT to Stuyvesant was a big ridership generator back in the day, but once the construction started people started hoofing it and realized that with the crap headways on the bus it's usually faster by a margin of about ten minutes or so, at least coming from Chatham Sq.