Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[BrooklynBus]

6 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

You know what and it may be my fault maybe I'm too much on build and business side. Maybe I am taking people's opinions as truth and overthinking it when somebody just wants to voice there opinion, point of view or just simply get something off there chest. I apologize for that again my intent is not to diminish to someone else's opinion. Just simply offering different point I'm definitely not criticizing and I'm sorry that that's what im giving off from your POV. But I am definitely looking at it objectively and going through the possible what,why and the goals these planners had in mind. So when I hear someone say the MTA is up to no good I'm automatically going to ask how you came to that conclusion and look some type infomation or data I'm just trained too. Maybe that gives off  A** hole vibe (Shurgs) But to me it's objective reasoning and confirmation. And if it's an opinion it's an opinion no need poke and prod. The one thing I can tell you that I know is that I don't know. So if im off or missing something just let me know.But I do think it's important to have another point of view Who wouldn't want the actual designers of this plan to be on a thread like this to explain their point of view? True that's not me but sometimes even having someone say"Hey did you think about this? Or did you take a look at that? Might give you another perspective. And that goes both ways. Comfort is the enemy of progression IMO. But rest asured the respect is there.

Just because someone is planning bus routes with the idea of what is best for the passenger, does not automatically mean they are not considering what it would cost to operate these proposals. I have always kept cost in mind when formulating proposals. The difference between my philosophy and the MTA’s is I believe to attract more passengers, you have to increase your investment in the system. That’s how most business that want to grow operate. I believe there is a direct relationship between ridership and revenue.

The MTA is taking the opposite approach. They don’t want to grow the bus system. They want it to contract to force more people into the already crowded subways. They have traditionally believed there is no relationship between ridership and revenue. That the market is fixed, so the way to maximize profits or reduce losses is to provide less service so that’s what they are doing here, by eliminating bus stops and cutting routes willy nilly,  it by using the data. 

No plan will please everybody, but the objective is to help more people than you hurt. Where is the analysis that shows with these new routes, more riders will require fewer transfers? How do we know that more will require increased numbers of transfers? We don’t because the MTA is ignoring the most important variable which is passenger trip time and have not set up any criteria in advance to measure the success or failure of these proposals. No matter how many riders are lost or how much longer it will take for most to make trips, the MTA will still declare success by finding a few favorable statistics like buses are now traveling an average of 1.3 mph faster, which isn’t hard to accomplish if you eliminate 30 to 50 percent of the stops. 

They say they have t eliminate stops because buses are too slow. I don’t see how an average of 8.3 mph when you have stops, traffic lights, and a speed limit of 25 mph is “too slow” I only average between 9 and 11 mph in my car if I don’t use the highway without making any stops. 

The planners also never ride the bus, so they have no idea why riders choose to take a bus instead of a train when there is a choice. They don’t realize how many use a different route in one direction versus the other because they consider factors like being able to get a seat, something the MTA  ignores in its planning. 

And why do you feel just because someone is passionate about something, they can’t also be objective? 

[RailRunRob]

43 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The MTA decides what they want to do, then goes and cherry picks through the data to support the conclusions it made. They don’t let the data guide the conclusions. As proof, look at all the high volume bus stops they eliminated. The buses won’t save time by doing this. They will just overload adjacent stops. Riders will become inpatient and more will evade the fare by entering the rear door. And as for the lightly used stops eliminated, buses won’t run faster either if most buses would have skipped these stops anyway. 

Also, why would you cutback the Q53 where there is heavy ridership from Woodside with buses filled by the time they reach Queens Center if you are letting the data lead the way to forming your conclusions? 

And why are they ignoring passenger travel time and numbers of transfers needed to complete a trip? 

Again not to sound like a jerk just from my experience there layers data also has to fit into operating budgets. Driver salary, fuel cost ,maintenance all things to have be factored in. Now with that said this is a draft and im sure the design team was also instructed to save were ever they can on route expenditures while meeting certain guildines maybe coverage etc I dont know for sure. But from an agency standpoint Byford gets a budget And just like the private sector they're going to try to cut some corners. As learned from the Bronx and Staten Island express bus redesign the publics going I have to come out and Politicians raise their voice. As to why they're ignoring travel time and transfers for trip Completion? Whatever system they have set up under their guidelines they feel like it's acceptable. Running more buses on the feeder lines etc etc. Happened in CO-OP and it didnt stick. The public needs to give feed back. 

Edited January 1, 2020 by RailRunRob

[BrooklynBus]

2 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Again not to sound like a jerk just from my experience there layers data also has to fit into operating budgets. Driver salary, fuel cost ,maintenance all things to have be factored in. Now with that said this is a draft and im sure the design team was also instructed to save were ever they can on route expenditures while meeting certain guildines maybe coverage etc I dont know for sure. But from an agency standpoint Byford gets a budget And just like the private sector they're going to try to cut some corners. Has learned from the Bronx in Staten Island express bus redesign the publics going I have to come out and Politicians raise their voice. As to why they're ignoring travel time and transfers for trip Completion? Whatever system they have set up under their guidelines they feel like it's acceptable. Running more buses on the feeder lines etc etc. Happened in CO-OP and it didnt stick. The public needs to give feed back. 

But a lot of the MTA thinking is all screwed up like it’s more efficient to run buses without passengers than with them because the trip is completed faster and they pay the drivers less. That’s why the amount of non-revenue miles has skyrocketed in the past ten years, with some buses now traveling half way across a borough out of service. The rationale is that this service isn’t needed for passengers because service guidelines are already being met with existing service. While this works fine in theory, in practice it’s a disaster because buses don’t operate as scheduled. So in reality, when a bus supposed to come every ten minutes, you wait 20 or 30 minutes and in that time sometimes two buses pass you not in service, then when your bus finally comes, it is very crowded or too crowded for you to board and you wait much longer or give up and walk or take a cab and the MTA loses a fare. How is this good business practice? 

Years ago, buses were assigned to the closest depot with all partial trips to and from the depot in service. You rarely saw buses operating not in service. (MaBSTOA even used to operate buses in service on a different route when traveling to the regular route it would run on for the day, to maximize revenue service. The NYCTA contract never permitted that.) Where I live, you can see as many as six out of service buses in a row in the morning rush hour. Not saying they are all needed in service, but the MTA operates far too much non-revenue service.  MTA Bus and NYCT also need to share depots to make Operations more effective. After 15 years, this already should have been done and the MTA doesn’t even mention this. 

[Brillant93]

11 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Again not to sound like a jerk just from my experience there layers data also has to fit into operating budgets. Driver salary, fuel cost ,maintenance all things to have be factored in. Now with that said this is a draft and im sure the design team was also instructed to save were ever they can on route expenditures while meeting certain guildines maybe coverage etc I dont know for sure. But from an agency standpoint Byford gets a budget And just like the private sector they're going to try to cut some corners. Has learned from the Bronx in Staten Island express bus redesign the publics going I have to come out and Politicians raise their voice. As to why they're ignoring travel time and transfers for trip Completion? Whatever system they have set up under their guidelines they feel like it's acceptable. Running more buses on the feeder lines etc etc. Happened in CO-OP and it didnt stick. The public needs to give feed back. 

You can't tell some of these people that on here. To them it has to be their way or the highway. The MTA is a public agency and it has to take the public to make sure the MTA delivers as good as they are supposed to. We as new yorkers take our public transit for granted and its quite sad. Out of all the places in the U.S. we have one of the best, is it perfect? no but its much better than in other places. From the look of the map there is a whole new system that NYC hasn't had before. I'm sure if the communities put their voices where its heard they will work to make it better, look what happened with the Bronx redesign with Co-op city. The community lost their mind and they put those buses back on the map for that area.  

[RailRunRob]

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

Just because someone is planning bus routes with the idea of what is best for the passenger, does not automatically mean they are not considering what it would cost to operate these proposals. I have always kept cost in mind when formulating proposals. The difference between my philosophy and the MTA’s is I believe to attract more passengers, you have to increase your investment in the system. That’s how most business that want to grow operate. I believe there is a direct relationship between ridership and revenue.

I agree with you re investments are key attracting growth you have to know your customer and the only way to do that I have an open line of communication and have an ear to the street. I take it that you worked for the MTA or planning at some point as well that I didn't know.

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

No plan will please everybody, but the objective is to help more people than you hurt. Where is the analysis that shows with these new routes, more riders will require fewer transfers?

That's a great question definitely should be a correlation between the current ridership data and the new estimates. The data using the remix platform is pretty broad standard stuff like line coverage as well as demo and point of reference reach data but again id love the comparison data even if the current network was created in Remix if would go along way.

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The planners also never ride the bus, so they have no idea why riders choose to take a bus instead of a train when there is a choice. They don’t realize how many use a different route in one direction versus the other because they consider factors like being able to get a seat, something the MTA  ignores in its planning. 

I would hope the MTA is getting their planners into the field kind of crazy to think about that if true. Not understanding a persons(riders) journey and interaction with your planed network is unacceptable.

 

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

And why do you feel just because someone is passionate about something, they can’t also be objective? 

No at all passion can definitely be a driving force "Love what you do you'll never work a day in your life" you know the saying. But on the flip it could turn into a bias especially not going through an objective process that was my only point. The one thing I know going into any task is that I can't assume I know for a user or in this case for a rider sometimes I'm too close to the forest to see the trees im not exempt

Edited January 1, 2020 by RailRunRob

[paulrivera]

42 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

why would you cutback the Q53 where there is heavy ridership from Woodside with buses filled by the time they reach Queens Center if you are letting the data lead the way to forming your conclusions? 

Because they're probably not looking at ridership data. They're looking at numbers of buses on the road, right sizing everything to meet loading guidelines, and pushing everyone on the subway whenever possible.

Every bus removed from the road saves at least $300 per day at minimum (and that's just paying the B/O). Multiply that by 365 days and thats $110k per year just for taking one bus off the road. Multiply that by the number of routes in Queens (let's say 75) and that's about $8.25 million in yearly savings just for pulling one bus from every route. Might be closer to $10 mil if you factor in fuel.

[BrooklynBus]

4 hours ago, RailRunRob said:

Even if that's true we should still understand the correct way of doing it which is with data and feedback. Or we're no better then folks at the MTA  were pointing out.

Of course you need data and feedback, but you also need clear criteria to measure success, which the MTA doesn't recognize because they intend to declare success no matter how badly the project fails, as they have done in Staten Island and with the Woodhaven SBS. 

[B35 via Church]

40 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

You know what and it may be my fault maybe I'm too much on build and business side. Maybe I am taking people's opinions as truth and overthinking it when somebody just wants to voice there opinion, point of view or just simply get something off there chest. I apologize for that again my intent is not to diminish to someone else's opinion. Just simply offering different point I'm definitely not criticizing and I'm sorry that that's what im giving off from your POV. But I am definitely looking at it objectively and going through the possible what,why and the goals these planners had in mind. So when I hear someone say the MTA is up to no good I'm automatically going to ask how you came to that conclusion and look some type infomation or data I'm just trained too. Maybe that gives off  A** hole vibe (Shurgs) But to me it's objective reasoning and confirmation. And if it's an opinion it's an opinion no need poke and prod. The one thing I can tell you that I know is that I don't know. So if im off or missing something just let me know.But I do think it's important to have another point of view Who wouldn't want the actual designers of this plan to be on a thread like this to explain their point of view? True that's not me but sometimes even having someone say"Hey did you think about this? Or did you take a look at that? Might give you another perspective. And that goes both ways. Comfort is the enemy of progression IMO. But rest asured the respect is there.

You're absolutely criticizing the commuter & the enthusiast & you're still doing it with this post.....

34 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The MTA decides what they want to do, then goes and cherry picks through the data to support the conclusions it made. They don’t let the data guide the conclusions.

RailRunRob is speaking from the vantage point that the MTA's conclusions are coming from their data.... Apparently, he's taking our criticisms as criticizing the data, because data in & of itself is made to formulate, or derive by a justified conclusion.... The key word in all that is justified....

As you stated, the MTA does not use data to benefit the greater good.,... Numbers aren't always used to support something positive; there isn't much of any benevolency going on here with the MTA.... RailRunRob seems to think that is....

The good thing about numbers is that they can't be refuted.... You know what else is good about numbers? The fact that they can also be suppressed.

 

[RailRunRob]

34 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

it is very crowded or too crowded for you to board and you wait much longer or give up and walk or take a cab and the MTA loses a fare. How is this good business practice? 

 

12 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

You're absolutely criticizing the commuter & the enthusiast & you're still doing it with this post.....

RailRunRob is speaking from the vantage point that the MTA's conclusions are coming from their data.... Apparently, he's taking our criticisms as criticizing the data, because data in & of itself is made to formulate, or derive by a justified conclusion.... The key word in all that is justified....

As you stated, the MTA does not use data to benefit the greater good.,... Numbers aren't always used to support something positive; there isn't much of any benevolency going on here with the MTA.... RailRunRob seems to think that is....

The good thing about numbers is that they can't be refuted.... You know what else is good about numbers? The fact that they can also be suppressed.

 

I'll simplify it even more what I'm asking is what makes you an expert how do you know this? Can you show me send me some links send me some data send me some reports monthly MTA meeting reports? Im not saying the MTA isnt worng I dont work for them neither do you I take it.. So with that said I'm just asking you to show me how you came to these conclusions I wanna know what you know?  How it does it get more basic than that. Are these your opinions or are you stating this as facts? Is it ground in emotion or actual knowledge?  

Edited January 1, 2020 by RailRunRob

[BrooklynBus]

18 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

I agree with you re investments are key attracting growth you have to know your customer and the only way to do that I have an open line of communication and have an ear to the street. I take it that you worked for the MTA or planning at some point as well that I didn't know.

That's a great question definitely should be a correlation between the current ridership data and the new estimates. The data using the remix platform is pretty broad standard stuff like line coverage as well as demo and point of reference reach data but again id love the comparison data even if the current network was created in Remix if would go along way.

I would hope the MTA is getting their planners into the field kind of crazy to think about that if true. Not understanding a persons(riders) journey and interaction with your planed network is unacceptable.

 

No at all passion can definitely be a driving force "Love what you do you'll never work a day in your life" you know the saying. But on the flip it could turn into a bias especially not going through an objective process that was my only point. The one thing I know going into any task is that I can't assume I know for a user or in this case for a rider sometimes I'm too close to the forest to see the trees im not exempt

I was director of MTA bus planning for six months and another year and a half as head of Brooklyn bus planning for another year and a half. Prior to that I was a planner for seven years at the Department of City Planning where I was responsible for the Southwest Brooklyn bus changes of 1978. My first six months at the MTA fits your description of never doing a day of work in your life. I would have done that job for no pay. I remained with the MTA in various capacities for another 23 years. 

What you say about maintaining a lot be if communication and an ear to the street is what I like about Byford. 

The MTA planners are out in the field surveying ridersto get feedback. The problem is how they are using that feedback. They have predetermined we need more Limited and SBS routes and more bus lanes and are using the results of those surveys to justify their predetermined changes conclusions like saying things like 65 percent of riders are not satisfied with reliability and believe buses bunch  too often and citing that as justification for bus lanes, SBS, Limited and reducing bus stops, without ever really evaluating how successful these measures are. Their real objective is to cut costs and that's what these measures do, which they will ever admit. 

Sure some of the planners may ride a bus occasionally, but none of them have a feel for the bus rider and certainly they have no one like B35 via Church who has a broad knowledge of most every route in the system. Thus also naps me ask the question if they are even using input from bus riders and Road Operations or are making their plans in a vacuum with only MetroCard data, GPS data, and population and land use data. 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

1 minute ago, RailRunRob said:

 

I'll simplify it even more what I'm asking is what makes you an expert how do you know this? Can you show me send me some links send me some data send me some reports monthly MTA meeting reports? Im not saying the MTA isnt worng I dont work for them neither do you I take it.. So with that said I'm just asking you to show me how you came to these conclusions I wanna know what you know?  How it does it get more basic than that. Are these your opinions or are you stating this as facts? Is it ground in emotion or actual knowledge?  

It's called actually using the bus routes in question consistently and observing (your and others') ridership habits. It's not rocket science. That is the most effective way by far to understand ridership levels and where people are going. The traffic counters they have on the bus don't even do that, all they do is jot down how many get on/off at the stops. 

[RailRunRob]

15 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The good thing about numbers is that they can't be refuted.... You know what else is good about numbers? The fact that they can also be suppressed.

 

So what is your Northstar? Compass? Guidelines? What is acceptable and what isn't? Is it based on it absolutely can't be what you see from your two eyes?

[checkmatechamp13]

4 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

The QT88 doesn't even look good on paper.... I'd like to hear a Howard Beach, Old Howard Beach, Hamilton Beach, and/or Lindenwood resident's take on that route....

They did everything possible to keep the Q21 around & eventually found something that stuck (remember, the Q21 used to end in Rockaway Park).... Now they're kicking the Q21 out (as this QT83), to terminate on the fringe of Lindenwood (serving much of nobody, directly) to promote a double-edged feeder route (QT88).... Lunacy.

Don't they have it ending at the current Q21/41 terminal? I personally think the Lindenwood routing is good, since it eliminates that one-way loop (where people only have northbound service) and also straightens it out.

But (as a lot of people have mentioned), they went overboard with the separation of these service "classes" so to speak (and even they're not sure what classes these routes fall into. They make the Woodhaven local a red mainline/grid route, but they give it the most basic headways like it's a local/coverage circulator). Then they combine two ridership bases that have no relation to each other, instead of having those branches make up the Woodhaven trunk.

Also make note of the answer to the Frequently Asked Question "Are you cutting service"? In The Bronx and Staten Island express, they emphasised the cost-neutrality, but here they beat around the bush (which makes me believe they did set out to reduce service by a few million dollars, given that there are routes that are seeing reductions in the span & frequency)

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

Look a little closer, the Q3 (QT68) is going to Jamaica Hospital via Hillside.

The Q77 (QT73) goes to the

Both Guy R Brewer routes which cross Farmers Blvd are limited, the one to Far Rockaway is a super limited blue line.

Q114's unique portion is being taken over by the QT62 (Q22) where riders have a choice between the Guy R Brewer or Rockaway Blvd Routes on Rockaway Tpke.

I like it, both the Francis Lewis and Springfield Green Routes go all the way up to Northern Blvd (and further), the others provide connectivity which is currently lacking.

I also just realized the Springfield Bus goes all the way down to Rockaway Blvd so now eastern Queens is connected to Far Rockaway without having to go all the way to Jamaica.

So these routes allow you to get around without going to Jamaica or Flushing (etc) to transfer and getting stuck in the congestion. 

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

Also, the new routes in general are not all using the same roads (Archer Ave, Main Street, Kissena Blvd, Jamaica Ave) and they designed a few to be through routes so they can get in and out without clogging bus lanes and streets with layover buses. 

The QT22 is the current Q22 extended to Cedarhurst, while the QT62 is the current Q7 extended to Cedarhurst. Since the QT13 stops at Farmers but not Springfield, those Springfield Blvd riders have a 3 seat ride on the QT71-QT62-QT13/22 (albeit a direct one instead of backtracking to Jamaica) 

Also note that the QT13 & QT22 don't share any stops in Cedarhurst. The QT13 stops at Peninsula Blvd, while the QT22 ends at Burnside Avenue. 

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

The MTA decides what they want to do, then goes and cherry picks through the data to support the conclusions it made. They don’t let the data guide the conclusions. As proof, look at all the high volume bus stops they eliminated. The buses won’t save time by doing this. They will just overload adjacent stops. Riders will become inpatient and more will evade the fare by entering the rear door. And as for the lightly used stops eliminated, buses won’t run faster either if most buses would have skipped these stops anyway. 

They mention OMNY will allow all-door boarding when it is fully rolled out.

[BrooklynBus]

6 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

 

I'll simplify it even more what I'm asking is what makes you an expert how do you know this? Can you show me send me some links send me some data send me some reports monthly MTA meeting reports? Im not saying the MTA isnt worng I dont work for them neither do you I take it.. So with that said I'm just asking you to show me how you came to these conclusions I wanna know what you know?  How it does it get more basic than that. Are these your opinions or are you stating this as facts? Is it ground in emotion or actual knowledge?  

I can't answer for B35 via Church, but I can for myself. I have come to my conclusions by working with or for the MTA for over 45 years and by personal experience. The quote you used from me about waiting excessive amounts of time for a bus only to get bypassed by not in service buses, I have personally experienced numerous times.  When buses are running every 20 or 30 minutes at 9:30 PM, why should I be bypassed by a not in service bus? Some bus operators even see the stupidity of this and I was picked up last year by one if these "not in service" buses.

You would have had to go through my experiences to know what I know, like the MTA sometimes reorganizes not to make Operations better, but to justify a promotion for a specific individual. You won't find that in a link or board meeting reports. They are also very secretive. Bet you didn't know the MTA was considering taking over the privately operated buses back in 1981. They asked me to use my connections to obtain the schedules from the private bus operators and in reports we weren't even allowed to write the name of the project. We called it Project Q (for Queens) where most of the private routes were. 

As far as my assertion regarding the reasons for increasing not in service bus operations, I have a 10 or 15 year old letter from the then head of buses explaining their rationale. 

[RailRunRob]

19 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

It's called actually using the bus routes in question consistently and observing (your and others') ridership habits. It's not rocket science

I mean that's a given that's a part of planning you send people out and you talk to people you ask questions you listen and you take notes. But then what do with it? how do you correlate that with the 20 other teams of people that were on the 20 other lines? What's the goals? Where did you miss the mark? New goals.. Everyone makes it sound easy yet no one commenting is working the redesign or doing any type of transit planing as far I as I know of beside @BrooklynBus and im in the boat as well. But I do work in transportation software I do it for a living I've been doing it for a while and im just asking objective questions? How the MTA runs their business I don't know. I can only speak from a overall planning respective.

Edited January 1, 2020 by RailRunRob

[BrooklynBus]

10 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Don't they have it ending at the current Q21/41 terminal? I personally think the Lindenwood routing is good, since it eliminates that one-way loop (where people only have northbound service) and also straightens it out.

But (as a lot of people have mentioned), they went overboard with the separation of these service "classes" so to speak (and even they're not sure what classes these routes fall into. They make the Woodhaven local a red mainline/grid route, but they give it the most basic headways like it's a local/coverage circulator). Then they combine two ridership bases that have no relation to each other, instead of having those branches make up the Woodhaven trunk.

Also make note of the answer to the Frequently Asked Question "Are you cutting service"? In The Bronx and Staten Island express, they emphasised the cost-neutrality, but here they beat around the bush (which makes me believe they did set out to reduce service by a few million dollars, given that there are routes that are seeing reductions in the span & frequency)

The QT22 is the current Q22 extended to Cedarhurst, while the QT62 is the current Q7 extended to Cedarhurst. Since the QT13 stops at Farmers but not Springfield, those Springfield Blvd riders have a 3 seat ride on the QT71-QT62-QT13/22 (albeit a direct one instead of backtracking to Jamaica) 

Also note that the QT13 & QT22 don't share any stops in Cedarhurst. The QT13 stops at Peninsula Blvd, while the QT22 ends at Burnside Avenue. 

They mention OMNY will allow all-door boarding when it is fully rolled out.

You cannot have a successful plan from a riders point of view with cost cutting or cost neutrality. There is a direct relationship between service and ridership levels. OMNY may cut down on fare beating, but where do they talk about fare evasion or allowing three legged transfers so trips do not cost more and why aren't they investigating different fare structures or reduced off-peak fares instead of slashing express bus service? Where was their economic analysis that showed ridership wouldn't escalate if off peak fares were reduced? 

[RailRunRob]

18 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I can't answer for B35 via Church, but I can for myself. I have come to my conclusions by working with or for the MTA for over 45 years and by personal experience. The quote you used from me about waiting excessive amounts of time for a bus only to get bypassed by not in service buses, I have personally experienced numerous times.  When buses are running every 20 or 30 minutes at 9:30 PM, why should I be bypassed by a not in service bus? Some bus operators even see the stupidity of this and I was picked up last year by one if these "not in service" buses.

You would have had to go through my experiences to know what I know, like the MTA sometimes reorganizes not to make Operations better, but to justify a promotion for a specific individual. You won't find that in a link or board meeting reports. They are also very secretive. Bet you didn't know the MTA was considering taking over the privately operated buses back in 1981. They asked me to use my connections to obtain the schedules from the private bus operators and in reports we weren't even allowed to write the name of the project. We called it Project Q (for Queens) where most of the private routes were. 

As far as my assertion regarding the reasons for increasing not in service bus operations, I have a 10 or 15 year old letter from the then head of buses explaining their rationale. 

And can 100% respect that 45 years in the game no argument there you understand the inter-workings. Im only asking the questions We build AVL software I know the tools that a agency would have at there disposal and I know the things that my clients ask and what they request data wise and how the information relates to their concerns. So again I wanted to say I was never saying whether the MTA was doing the right thing or the wrong thing. Only asking if this process or that process was taking into consideration by everyone or if we knew if the MTA took the steps as well. Almost like I became the voice of the MTA Along with the target on my back.

Edited January 1, 2020 by RailRunRob

[Around the Horn]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

The planners also never ride the bus, so they have no idea why riders choose to take a bus instead of a train when there is a choice. They don’t realize how many use a different route in one direction versus the other because they consider factors like being able to get a seat, something the MTA ignores in its planning.

At a bare minimum, I would like to see the MTA use more cognitive geography and mental mapping through direct observation in their planning decisions.

We had this discussion in my urban geography class this previous semester: Sure numbers and data are valuable but they can't substitute for what you'll see with your own two eyes. Numbers cannot accurately depict how people (in this instance: the ridership base) conceptualize and use your network without experiencing it for yourself and more importantly conceptualizing it for yourself based on the experience you had and listening to the experiences of others.

I will fully admit that I'm new to this, just a college student, while we have people on here and in this very thread who have been in the transit industry and/or planning for decades so I don't have much standing when I say this but in my personal opinion we need to find a way to combine hard data with people's experiences (and most importantly conceptualizations of) interacting with the network. I'm worried that we are focusing too much on ridership data and not enough on how service is conceptualized by its users.

Now I'm speaking purely theoretically here; the real question is how do we make that a reality. Before I ramble on too much, I'll close my stream of consciousness by leaving that question to the experts. Carry on I guess.

[B35 via Church]

2 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

I'll simplify it even more what I'm asking is what makes you an expert how do you know this? Can you show me send me some links send me some data send me some reports monthly MTA meeting reports? Im not saying the MTA isnt worng I dont work for them neither do you I take it.. So with that said I'm just asking you to show me how you came to these conclusions I wanna know what you know?  How it does it get more basic than that. Are these your opinions or are you stating this as facts? Is it ground in emotion or actual knowledge? 

Really now....

What you're implicating with this line of questioning is that we have to be experts (not that I proclaimed to be any of that nonsense anyway), or work for the MTA to come to the conclusion that the MTA doesn't use data to benefit the greater good.... Their results are the results (as in, the bus routes themselves & how frequently buses are operated on them), I'm not understanding what you don't get about that - or is this you playing devil's advocate again?.... When just about everytime you look, there's some damn service cut being proposed (and eventually made), do I really need financial or managerial reports to come to the conclusion that people will be negatively affected by (whatever) bus route that's now arriving less frequently, than before the fact? No, I don't.

If someone shoots with me with some gun, IDGAF what alloy that bullet was made from....

25 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

I mean that's a given that's a part of planning you send people out and you talk to people you ask questions you listen and you take notes. But then what do with it? how do you correlate that with the 20 other teams of people that were on the 20 other lines? What's the goals? Where did you miss the mark? New goals.. Everyone makes it sound easy yet no one commenting is working the redesign or doing any type of transit planing as far I as I know of beside @BrooklynBus and im in the boat as well. But I do work in transportation software I do it for a living I've been doing it for a while and im just asking objective questions? How the MTA runs their business I don't know. I can only speak from a overall planning respective.

Nah, now that's just false, nobody's making it sound easy.... You're continuing to make a refutation out of something that was never stated or implicated.... That seems to be your basis of this entire exchange & I don't know where it's coming from... It's as if you're taking the critiques of this plan personally, because you're in transportation software....

2 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

So what is your Northstar? Compass? Guidelines? What is acceptable and what isn't? Is it based on it absolutely can't be what you see from your two eyes?

Don't understand what you're trying to ask here....

[BrooklynBus]

6 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

I mean that's a given that's a part of planning you send people out and you talk to people you ask questions you listen and you take notes. But then what do with it? how do you correlate that with the 20 other teams of people that were on the 20 other lines? What's the goals? Where did you miss the mark? New goals.. Everyone makes it sound easy yet no one commenting is working the redesign or doing any type of transit planing as far I as I know of beside @BrooklynBus and im in the boat as well. But I do work in transportation software I do it for a living I've been doing it for a while and im just asking objective questions? How the MTA runs their business I don't know. I can only speak from a overall planning respective.

The problem is what the MTA is doing with the information they receive from the public and how much of the public is even aware of what they are doing and how many will first learn of the changes ten days before they go into affect. Do a little arithmetic. How many daily Queens riders are there (like 700,000) and how many attended all the workshops? I don't believe more than about 30 people attended each workshop and how many did they have? Ten or so? That's 300 riders. So that's less than half of one percent of the riders. Even if we count the few thousand responding to the surveys, it's still a minuscule amount of the riders who are providing feedback. 

At the workshop I attended there were private discussions with the planners (who refused to give you their names), no group questions and answers. The MTA boards just explained the objectives of the study and you were asked to provide all your feedback regarding all your bs comments on a four-square inch post it note, not even an 8 x 11 piece of paper. So how serious is the MTA about getting feedback?

Bet you that individual comments are totally ignored. The only thing they will pay attention to is if multiple riders cite the exact same problem like opposing a bus stop being eliminated or a route change they do not like. 

Its quite different getting information from a one-day survey and from information gathered from personal experience over a long period of time. In the winter people are not thinking about beach service and in the summer they are not thinking about bus disruptions from snowstorms. They need planners who understand the bus system and they do not have any. They have many planners who understand the subways. 

The goals should be to test certain hypotheses with the data collected or to specifically collect data needed even if they need an OD study which they are not doing? How can you even plan bus routes when all you know is the stops people are getting on and off and what their original origin and final destination is? You have no idea how long their trip really takes. The goals shouldn't be to fit the data to your pre-determined conclusions. 

And why should all the funds from congestion pricing go for capital improvements exclusively and none of it to provide new needed bus service? It doesn't make sense to waste money on bus lanes on streets with infrequent bus service which is what Corey Johnson proposed and de Blasio will probably do. 

[RailRunRob]

5 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Really now....

What you're implicating with this line of questioning is that we have to be experts (not that I proclaimed to be any of that nonsense anyway), or work for the MTA to come to the conclusion that the MTA doesn't use data to benefit the greater good.... Their results are the results (as in, the bus routes themselves & how frequently buses are operated on them), I'm not understanding what you don't get about that - or is this you playing devil's advocate again?.... When just about everytime you look, there's some damn service cut being proposed (and eventually made), do I really need financial or managerial reports to come to the conclusion that people will be negatively affected by (whatever) bus route that's now arriving less frequently, than before the fact? No, I don't.

If someone shoots with me with some gun, IDGAF what alloy that bullet was made from....

Nah, now that's just false, nobody's making it sound easy.... You're continuing to make a refutation out of something that was never stated or implicated.... That seems to be your basis of this entire exchange & I don't know where it's coming from... It's as if you're taking the critiques of this plan personally, because you're in transportation software....

Don't understand what you're trying to ask here....

Guy it's not that serious. Again Anything I tell you I'm going to back it up with why I feel that way. Example The redesign is all about cutting service look at the MTA deficit or look at spending on the Subway" And im going to go head and cite my sources (Shurgs) I just expected the same my bad.

[B35 via Church]

3 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Guy it's not that serious. Again Anything I tell you I'm going to back it up with why I feel that way. Example The redesign is all about cutting service look at the MTA deficit or look at spending on the Subway" And im going to go head and cite my sources (Shurgs) I just expected the same my bad.

I wouldn't know it, since you've effectively made a whole argument out of nothing.....

[BrooklynBus]

16 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

At a bare minimum, I would like to see the MTA use more cognitive geography and mental mapping through direct observation in their planning decisions.

We had this discussion in my urban geography class this previous semester: Sure numbers and data are valuable but they can't substitute for what you'll see with your own two eyes. Numbers cannot accurately depict how people (in this instance: the ridership base) conceptualize and use your network without experiencing it for yourself and more importantly conceptualizing it for yourself based on the experience you had and listening to the experiences of others.

I will fully admit that I'm new to this, just a college student, while we have people on here and in this very thread who have been in the transit industry and/or planning for decades so I don't have much standing when I say this but in my personal opinion we need to find a way to combine hard data with people's experiences (and most importantly conceptualizations of) interacting with the network. I'm worried that we are focusing too much on ridership data and not enough on how service is conceptualized by its users.

Now I'm speaking purely theoretically here; the real question is how do we make that a reality. Before I ramble on too much, I'll close my stream of consciousness by leaving that question to the experts. Carry on I guess.

You actually stated it very well. Not rambling at all. The MTA thinks all the answers are in the numbers and that has always been their problem. That and they never learn from their mistakes. They just repeat them. 

When I was in charge of the Brooklyn Study for the MTA back in 1981, the head of the Manhattan study going on at the same time said to me after they collected all their data, that he didn't know what to do with it regarding formulating proposals. He thought after he received the results, it would be obvious which routes to propose changes on, but it doesn't work that way. So he asked me to make proposals for him since I knew the bus routes that he could somehow use the data to justify. In other words, do my own job as well as his. I refused. I don't think he rode a bus in his life. 

[BrooklynBus]

1 hour ago, paulrivera said:

Because they're probably not looking at ridership data. They're looking at numbers of buses on the road, right sizing everything to meet loading guidelines, and pushing everyone on the subway whenever possible.

Every bus removed from the road saves at least $300 per day at minimum (and that's just paying the B/O). Multiply that by 365 days and thats $110k per year just for taking one bus off the road. Multiply that by the number of routes in Queens (let's say 75) and that's about $8.25 million in yearly savings just for pulling one bus from every route. Might be closer to $10 mil if you factor in fuel.

That's not how to plan. You can't look at the data you want to look at and ignore the data that doesn't support what you want to do.

[B35 via Church]

10 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

You can't look at the data you want to look at and ignore the data that doesn't support what you want to do.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it....