SI Express Route Public Hearing Request, M4 Truncation, July 2018 Schedule Changes

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

So you would eliminate the whole thing? 😛

In all seriousness, the map is set to private.

Not to get to East Harlem I don't.

 

That's the other thing everyone is overlooking. There is NO subway that goes from East to West to connect East Harlem with western parts of Manhattan. Severing the M101 at 125th cuts off a one seat ride to various connections and this bit about the M98 being the savior... That route has its own problems with reliability, so I'm not sure how it's supposed to be so much better than the M101. Both routes need help and the M98 doesn't even travel along 125th.

[B35 via Church]

27 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Ugh this forum is buggy. I wrote a long list which didn't post here. My point was that all of this is being proposed because of the horrendous congestion. Signal priority, enforced bus lanes, and true LTD service could make such a route work. I would make it SBS and none of this LTD then local stops. No more than 25 stops from end to end.

True about the congestion, but I also personally think the M101 routing from start to finish is rather antiquated....

As for SBS-ing the route, they could try it - but they'd run into the same issue w/ having B46 SBS' running along Broadway (for example).....

125th st is the elephant in the room they would have to address.... The M60 SBS utilizes (and is bogged down by) 125th, but it moves like lightning along Astoria blvd..... Anyway, Amsterdam for the M101 is wide enough, so that wouldn't be too much of an issue.... The issues plaguing 3rd/Lex themselves they would also have to address/tackle..... I don't see how they can pull off an M101 SBS from Cooper Union to Ft. George, quite honestly......

19 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

So you would eliminate the whole thing? 😛

aye, give me some credit... I don't work at 2 Broadway

Seriously, see if the link works now.... Thanks though.

13 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

That's the other thing everyone is overlooking. There is NO subway that goes from East to West to connect East Harlem with western parts of Manhattan. Severing the M101 at 125th cuts off a one seat ride to various connections and this bit about the M98 being the savior... That route has its own problems with reliability, so I'm not sure how it's supposed to be so much better than the M101. Both routes need help and the M98 doesn't even travel along 125th.

I'm not seeing this need to preserve the M101 as is....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

True about the congestion, but I also personally think the M101 routing from start to finish is rather antiquated....

As for SBS-ing the route, they could try it - but they'd run into the same issue w/ having B46 SBS' running along Broadway (for example).....

125th st is the elephant in the room they would have to address.... The M60 SBS utilizes (and is bogged down by) 125th, but it moves like lightning along Astoria blvd..... Amsterdam is wide enough, so that wouldn't be too much of an issue.... The issues plaguing 3rd/Lex themselves they would also have to address/tackle..... I don't see how they can pull off an M101 SBS from Cooper Union to Ft. George, quite honestly......

aye, give me some credit... I don't work at 2 Broadway

Seriously, see if the link works now.... Thanks though.

Well quite frankly tackling traffic and congestion is a MUST across the city, otherwise we're just getting shorter bus routes to sit in traffic. This bit about the M98... How is it supposed to be better than the M101 with its current reliability issues? I personally think 125th is fine most of the day. Obviously something needs to be done about rush hour at night and afternoons when kids get out. At night I have been able to outwalk buses so none of the lines are benefitting and that isn't a reason to chop up the routes. You have to address the congestion which the DOT has refused to do. This entire restructuring will fail unless the can get the DOT to do their jobs. It's that simple. There are times when it takes me 20 minutes to go maybe 5 blocks. That's a problem and it isn't because we're making stops. We're just sitting in traffic. 

[B35 via Church]

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Well quite frankly tackling traffic and congestion is a MUST across the city, otherwise we're just getting shorter bus routes to sit in traffic. This bit about the M98... How is it supposed to be better than the M101 with its current reliability issues? I personally think 125th is fine most of the day. Obviously something needs to be done about rush hour at night and afternoons when kids get out. At night I have been able to outwalk buses so none of the lines are benefitting and that isn't a reason to chop up the routes. You have to address the congestion which the DOT has refused to do. This entire restructuring will fail unless the can get the DOT to do their jobs. It's that simple. There are times when it takes me 20 minutes to go maybe 5 blocks. That's a problem and it isn't because we're making stops. We're just sitting in traffic. 

Getting from Washington Hgts. to E. Harlem via the M98 is more efficient than the M101, even with HRD being what it is..... The M101 along Amsterdam exists large in part, to complement the M100 (hence the fact that it doesn't even run LTD in that part of the route).... I'm not asking you or anyone else to agree with what I'm suggesting, but at the same time, we (myself included) can't complain about traffic/congestion & keeping these long ass routes intact at the same time......

If we tackle congestion city-wide, the M98 would certainly not be any worse than the M101....

[checkmatechamp13]

Just now, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

That's the other thing everyone is overlooking. There is NO subway that goes from East to West to connect East Harlem with western parts of Manhattan. Severing the M101 at 125th cuts off a one seat ride to various connections and this bit about the M98 being the savior... That route has its own problems with reliability, so I'm not sure how it's supposed to be so much better than the M101. Both routes need help and the M98 doesn't even travel along 125th.

We're not overlooking the lack of crosstown subway service in Upper Manhattan. If anything, that's been the main point of this discussion we've been having. In any case, that's where these discussions regarding the M3 & M4 also come into play. 

18 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

aye, give me some credit... I don't work at 2 Broadway

Seriously, see if the link works now.... Thanks though.

1

It works now.

I guess I might as well ask: How do you feel about the idea of combining the M3 & M116? The eastern part of 116th Street is busier (pedestrian-wise, activity-wise, etc) than the eastern part of 106th, so if you're going to go across on 116th to 5th/Madison, you might as well continue all the way to the East River. If you still want to maintain your old M4 split idea, you can have the northern portion run via Broadway-96th-5th/Madison-106th and still have the other portion run from 135th & Broadway to Midtown. 

1 minute ago, B35 via Church said:

Getting from Washington Hgts. to E. Harlem via the M98 is more efficient than the M101, even with HRD being what it is..... The M101 along Amsterdam exists large in part, to complement the M100 (hence the fact that it doesn't even run LTD in that part of the route).... I'm not asking you or anyone else to agree with what I'm suggesting, but at the same time, we (myself included) can't complain about traffic/congestion & keeping these long ass routes intact at the same time......

If we tackle congestion city-wide, the M98 would certainly not be any worse than the M101....

2

BTW, considering the times I've seen the M98 running in West Harlem (usually via 135th-St. Nicholas, but I even saw a bus on Amsterdam once), how would you feel about making it the standard route and adding a couple of stops (e.g. 135th & Lenox, St. Nicholas & 145th, St. Nicholas & 168th, and then terminate with the Bronx buses at the GWB Bus Terminal?) 

Also, a modification of your M102 idea would be to have the M100/101 paired up, cut the M102 to 86th Street, but extend it to Riverbank State Park with the Bx19. That way it provides a reliable alternative for the Bx19's intra-Manhattan riders, not just the ones east of Amsterdam. (The only issue is, hopefully there's enough space at the terminal, with the M11 & Bx19 already there). Of course, the service you save from not having the M102 buses running all the way down to 8th Street would be reinvested in the M98/103. 

Also, I would use standard 40-foot buses on that version of the M102 (I mean, with the headways the existing M102/103 run on, they should really just be using standards anyway). 

[Gotham Bus Co.]

On 4/27/2018 at 12:57 PM, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

-Stop having the damn operators switch at 99th street. It kills way too much time.  Extremely frustrating. They should switch drivers elsewhere.  

Do you have another location in mind that is closer to the depot?

[B35 via Church]

Sometimes I get these new post notifications, sometimes I don't... very strange....

 

6 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

It works now.

I guess I might as well ask: How do you feel about the idea of combining the M3 & M116? The eastern part of 116th Street is busier (pedestrian-wise, activity-wise, etc) than the eastern part of 106th, so if you're going to go across on 116th to 5th/Madison, you might as well continue all the way to the East River. If you still want to maintain your old M4 split idea, you can have the northern portion run via Broadway-96th-5th/Madison-106th and still have the other portion run from 135th & Broadway to Midtown.

Cool..... I'll get around to drawing up the 3rd/Lex plan too, so I won't have to remember what threads I'm posting these ideas in... I'm getting old =(

Anyway, I would leave the M116 as a separate service.... You wouldn't think so, but that route is a lifesaver for getting around the park (something which the poor Bx33 a mile north can't accomplish, respectively).... The M7 exists for that purpose also, but I've always noticed a bit of a prevalence for the M116 over the M7 along W. 106th.... As R68 Broadway (I think it was) said recently, it's (M116) one of the 4 routes since 2010 that's gained ridership in the borough.... While I haven't paid much attention to where/what those M116 riders are generally doing after disembarking at the last stop (Broadway), I have noticed a significant increase in people using the buses on that end of the route & I'm not just talking about a handful of trips either (Hey, I like fanning the M60 from that end)..... The eastern portion of the route always held its own.....

 

32 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

BTW, considering the times I've seen the M98 running in West Harlem (usually via 135th-St. Nicholas, but I even saw a bus on Amsterdam once), how would you feel about making it the standard route and adding a couple of stops (e.g. 135th & Lenox, St. Nicholas & 145th, St. Nicholas & 168th, and then terminate with the Bronx buses at the GWB Bus Terminal?) 

Also, a modification of your M102 idea would be to have the M100/101 paired up, cut the M102 to 86th Street, but extend it to Riverbank State Park with the Bx19. That way it provides a reliable alternative for the Bx19's intra-Manhattan riders, not just the ones east of Amsterdam. (The only issue is, hopefully there's enough space at the terminal, with the M11 & Bx19 already there). Of course, the service you save from not having the M102 buses running all the way down to 8th Street would be reinvested in the M98/103. 

Also, I would use standard 40-foot buses on that version of the M102 (I mean, with the headways the existing M102/103 run on, they should really just be using standards anyway). 

Generally speaking, I like the idea of a less insular version of the M98 - But at the same time, I don't want it making too many turns to accomplish the task either....

A plan that entails coupling the M100 / (northern portion of the) M101 & having the suggested M102 supplementing the Bx19 (within Manhattan) was something I was thinking about when I made (post #86) in this thread earlier.... I will agree that there is more Bx19 usage @ Broadway over Amsterdam, however, my thinking is that you don't need a 3rd route inside Riverbank (being that the Bx19 bunches like shit & the fact that it's an artic route on top of it, I'm not sure there'd be enough space in there throughout most instances of the day) & the suggested M102 from Ft. George, etc. acts an alternative to the M100 for getting to E. Harlem (and points south as well)..... A less involved idea would be to have the M100 serve more of E. Harlem (meaning, south of 125th), but I think the M100 starting across the street from the M15 there (125th/2nd) suffices.

Yes, if there's to be an influx in M103 local service & the M102 not (having) to serve as much of 3rd/Lex, there's less of a need for artics on the suggested M102.... The artics on the M102 would go to the M103.... I'm not sure though if there's enough 40'ers at Tuskegee to run the M31 & the suggested M102 though.....

 

[checkmatechamp13]

7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Anyway, I would leave the M116 as a separate service.... You wouldn't think so, but that route is a lifesaver for getting around the park (something which the poor Bx33 a mile north can't accomplish, respectively).... The M7 exists for that purpose also, but I've always noticed a bit of a prevalence for the M116 over the M7 along W. 106th.... As R68 Broadway (I think it was) said recently, it's (M116) one of the 4 routes since 2010 that's gained ridership in the borough.... While I haven't paid much attention to where/what those M116 riders are generally doing after disembarking at the last stop (Broadway), I have noticed a significant increase in people using the buses on that end of the route & I'm not just talking about a handful of trips either (Hey, I like fanning the M60 from that end)..... The eastern portion of the route always held its own.....

Generally speaking, I like the idea of a less insular version of the M98 - But at the same time, I don't want it making too many turns to accomplish the task either....

A plan that entails coupling the M100 / (northern portion of the) M101 & having the suggested M102 supplementing the Bx19 (within Manhattan) was something I was thinking about when I made (post #86) in this thread earlier.... I will agree that there is more Bx19 usage @ Broadway over Amsterdam, however, my thinking is that you don't need a 3rd route inside Riverbank (being that the Bx19 bunches like shit & the fact that it's an artic route on top of it, I'm not sure there'd be enough space in there throughout most instances of the day) & the suggested M102 from Ft. George, etc. acts an alternative to the M100 for getting to E. Harlem (and points south as well)..... A less involved idea would be to have the M100 serve more of E. Harlem (meaning, south of 125th), but I think the M100 starting across the street from the M15 there (125th/2nd) suffices.

Yes, if there's to be an influx in M103 local service & the M102 not (having) to serve as much of 3rd/Lex, there's less of a need for artics on the suggested M102.... The artics on the M102 would go to the M103.... I'm not sure though if there's enough 40'ers at Tuskegee to run the M31 & the suggested M102 though.....

11

Fair enough about the M116.

With the M102, one idea could be to extend it up Riverside Drive to end around the hospital (but then of course, you're throwing the hospital traffic into the mix). I mean, Riverside Drive is downhill from Broadway, so there's that factor in providing coverage/ridership. But yeah, the more I think about it, the more I would side with your idea (It definitely wins points on the efficiency/simplicity side of things). 

One idea I was thinking of was extending the M100 to 116th & Pleasant to serve that Target, but then I realized that it's basically just one little shopping plaza (not much larger than the West Shore Plaza which I'm also not wild about). 

BTW, do you happen to know the overnight turnaround scenarios on the Bx19 & Bx6? I tried watching them on BusTime, and it looks like they just make a U-turn in the middle of the street.

And thinking about it, you could take some artics from Tuskeegee and give them to Kingsbridge to put on the M100 (and in exchange, they give Tuskegee some 40-footers for the M102 from the UES-Fort George). I'm not wild about artics on the M100 (there's really not too many routes I'm wild about having them on, honestly), but it might be a better fit in that case.

[S78 via Hylan]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

BTW, do you happen to know the overnight turnaround scenarios on the Bx19 & Bx6? I tried watching them on BusTime, and it looks like they just make a U-turn in the middle of the street.

The Bx19, I could tell you. It makes a right on Broadway, turns around at 146 St, then makes the left back onto 145 St. 

Not too sure about the overnight Bx6, though.

[checkmatechamp13]

I'm watching the video of the committee meeting, and this little portion irks me:

Basically, he says that the express bus stops on Staten Island are/were spaced more closely than the local bus stops. That's simply not true. Their own presentation shows the express bus stops are spaced every 0.26 miles (approximately 5 "city blocks" apart) while the local bus stops are spaced every 0.16 miles (approximately 3 "city blocks" apart). 

Now, there's some areas where there is express service offered, but no local service (e.g. Huguenot Avenue corridor), but that's an entirely separate issue.

The other thing is that he mentioned that ridership was concentrated at some stops more than others. That's going to be the case in any transit system. Having around 66-70% of ridership concentrated at around 50% of the stops isn't that much of a skewed distribution. While I don't think it's a huge deal either way whether the buses stop every 5 blocks or every 8 blocks (0.41 miles), let's not make it seem as if hardly anybody is going to be affected bus the stop removals.

The next exchange in that conversation could've been clarified better. It wouldn't make much sense to show a neighborhood map of the high frequency routes that basically shows 1 or 2 lines, so I think it's pretty obvious that those are two separate concepts, but one board member asked for clarification and the other one fumbled around with the answer.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Some takeaways from the video on the latest meeting from above:

-Moerdler and Vanterpool make some EXCELLENT points about things the  needs to start speaking about or becoming more active.

-I don't understand why Trottenberg "doesn't know" about cashless payment.  It needs to happen.  Coins are slow, get stuck in the farebox, and hold everyone up.

-Putting all of the express buses on 5th Avenue won't solve anything if those bus lanes aren't enforced, which is the case now.

[Brillant93]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Some takeaways from the video on the latest meeting from above:

-Moerdler and Vanterpool make some EXCELLENT points about things the  needs to start speaking about or becoming more active.

-I don't understand why Trottenberg "doesn't know" about cashless payment.  It needs to happen.  Coins are slow, get stuck in the farebox, and hold everyone up.

-Putting all of the express buses on 5th Avenue won't solve anything if those bus lanes aren't enforced, which is the case now.

Yeah bus lanes here are just there and aren’t enforced much. I was downtown Brooklyn and the bus lanes on Livingston street just was washed away and not enforced at all. I don’t know why the DOT put them but don’t enforce them. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, Brillant93 said:

Yeah bus lanes here are just there and aren’t enforced much. I was downtown Brooklyn and the bus lanes on Livingston street just was washed away and not enforced at all. I don’t know why the DOT put them but don’t enforce them. 

It isn't the DOT that has to enforce the lanes but rather the NYPD, and they aren't any better since they often leave their vehicles parked in the bus lane.

[Brillant93]

5 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It isn't the DOT that has to enforce the lanes but rather the NYPD, and they aren't any better since they often leave their vehicles parked in the bus lane.

Pretty ashame because who can hold them accountable at this point? 

[WestFarms36]

8 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It isn't the DOT that has to enforce the lanes but rather the NYPD, and they aren't any better since they often leave their vehicles parked in the bus lane.

Your Taxpayer Dollars are hard at work!

[IAlam]

7 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Some takeaways from the video on the latest meeting from above:

-Moerdler and Vanterpool make some EXCELLENT points about things the  needs to start speaking about or becoming more active.

-I don't understand why Trottenberg "doesn't know" about cashless payment.  It needs to happen.  Coins are slow, get stuck in the farebox, and hold everyone up.

-Putting all of the express buses on 5th Avenue won't solve anything if those bus lanes aren't enforced, which is the case now.

Cashless isn't the only thing the MTA should be looking at what about fare boxes that also accept cash? They exist everywhere outside NYC and I've never had a problem with depositing cash on a bus regardless of how worn out and wrinkly my bills are. I swear seeing people put $6.50 in a fare box with only quarters is not only cringy it takes up too much time. I should be able to pop in a $5 bill and maybe 2 singles if I don't care about the 50 cents. 

[Jdog14]

17 minutes ago, IAlam said:

Cashless isn't the only thing the MTA should be looking at what about fare boxes that also accept cash? They exist everywhere outside NYC and I've never had a problem with depositing cash on a bus regardless of how worn out and wrinkly my bills are. I swear seeing people put $6.50 in a fare box with only quarters is not only cringy it takes up too much time. I should be able to pop in a $5 bill and maybe 2 singles if I don't care about the 50 cents. 

When they collect the money the bills will shred.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

23 minutes ago, IAlam said:

Cashless isn't the only thing the MTA should be looking at what about fare boxes that also accept cash? They exist everywhere outside NYC and I've never had a problem with depositing cash on a bus regardless of how worn out and wrinkly my bills are. I swear seeing people put $6.50 in a fare box with only quarters is not only cringy it takes up too much time. I should be able to pop in a $5 bill and maybe 2 singles if I don't care about the 50 cents. 

Well which is it? Cashless or cash?? Bills are a form of cash, you it seems like you're confused.

[officiallyliam]

29 minutes ago, IAlam said:

Cashless isn't the only thing the MTA should be looking at what about fare boxes that also accept cash? They exist everywhere outside NYC and I've never had a problem with depositing cash on a bus regardless of how worn out and wrinkly my bills are. I swear seeing people put $6.50 in a fare box with only quarters is not only cringy it takes up too much time. I should be able to pop in a $5 bill and maybe 2 singles if I don't care about the 50 cents. 

It's time we moved away from paying with currency on the bus; most major cities have done so or are doing so. Adding the option to pay with bills on-board will do nothing other than slow down the already deadly-slow boarding process. If people really must use cash, we could have a farebox at the bus stop (like the SBS coin machines) that could convert cash or coins in to a MetroCard transfer, though this would be expensive. We should be moving towards eliminating cash from bus boarding, certainly not encouraging its further use.

[FLX9304]

On 4/20/2018 at 5:28 PM, MysteriousBtrain said:

While I can accept the M4 cut, was rerouting the M4 to the original Q32 terminal ever considered? Also confused as to if this is planned to be permanent.

they did had the Q32 cut to 52nd St & 5th Ave, and if the 4 got cut to 41st, then there will still be 4 routes south of 41st: M1, 2, 3, & 55. 

 

[Brillant93]

I think there should be protected bus lanes  right next to the bike lanes that are also protected on the big avenues in manhattan. And there would be pedestrian bus stops. I think the DOT need to look into it. 

[Future ENY OP]

Staten Island Bus redesign updates:  As of 5/18/18. 

Buses traveling via the Lincoln Tunnel will travel via 42nd in both directions: SIM8, SIM22, SIM23, SIM24, SIM25, SIM26, SIM30. 

SIM7 will operate north of Hylan to Midland Avenue instead of Father Capodanno.  

SIM8 is extended to Woodrow & Huguenot. 

Monday night 5/21: Open House at College of Staten Island- Williamson Theater. 1P Building. 2800 Victory Boulevard. 

[checkmatechamp13]

11 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

Staten Island Bus redesign updates:  As of 5/18/18. 

Buses traveling via the Lincoln Tunnel will travel via 42nd in both directions: SIM8, SIM22, SIM23, SIM24, SIM25, SIM26, SIM30. 

SIM7 will operate north of Hylan to Midland Avenue instead of Father Capodanno.  

SIM8 is extended to Woodrow & Huguenot. 

Monday night 5/21: Open House at College of Staten Island- Williamson Theater. 1P Building. 2800 Victory Boulevard. 

The update was as of last month's meeting (April 23rd). It's just that they never updated the Civic Connect website to reflect the revised plan.

[Future ENY OP]

3 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The update was as of last month's meeting (April 23rd). It's just that they never updated the Civic Connect website to reflect the revised plan.

Copy copy Checkmate..

I'm only guessing that after Monday night's meeting there will be additional updates before the August launch date..

Hopefully, they can create additional lines for Super Express-Midtown and Super Express Downtown.

[checkmatechamp13]

For those keeping track, here were the changes each update (from what I recall off the top of my head):

June 2017: Original Proposal Released

October 2017: X19/SIM2 extended to Tottenville from Huguenot/Hylan, Annadale Road served by SIM4/SIM8 instead of SIM31, SIM15 routed through Richmondtown (not sure if it was an error, but they originally had it running straight down Richmond Road like the S74). "Midtown via NJ" buses routed via 34th Street & 5th/Madison Avenue instead of 42nd Street & 5th/6th Avenue. Staten Island stop locations added.

March 2018: Numbers/designations added to routes. West Street, Water Street, and 6th Avenue via FDR service added/maintained, Super-express on SIM4/5/6/8 added. "Midtown via NJ" routes operate via 42nd Street eastbound and 34th Street westbound. SIM21 receives slight extension to Woods of Arden Road, and SIM31 rerouted via FDR (and Gannon Avenue) instead of via NJ. 

April 2018: SIM7 routed via Hylan Blvd, SIM8 extended/rerouted to cover Woodrow Road, "Midtown via NJ" buses operate via 42nd Street in both directions.