New Bus Newark Initiative

[davemackey]

NJT announced an initiative today to overhaul the bus network serving Newark. This is perhaps the nerve center of NJT bus operations with 38 routes serving the city, light rail, NEC and PATH, and routes into NYC from there. Read about it: https://www.njtransit.com/newbus

 

[67thAve]

About time, though I did hear word of this a few months prior. I understand network redesigns are now the "hip" thing to do, but Newark's network really is antiquated, and therefore really does need a refresh. Some places do redesigns pretty often, but New Jersey is not one of them (for instance, French urban networks tend to get redesigned relatively frequently, with the timing typically coinciding with a change in the operating contract).

I did see something that this is simply the first stage of a future statewide bus network redesign, which will be interesting to see.

Edited January 25, 2021 by 67thAve

[Mtatransit]

Whats more antiquated is the Central NJ local bus routes. That area's route need to be blown up and redrawn, because the only people NJT is serving well is on US Rt 9 and heading into NYC. 

[checkmatechamp13]

20 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

Whats more antiquated is the Central NJ local bus routes. That area's route need to be blown up and redrawn, because the only people NJT is serving well is on US Rt 9 and heading into NYC. 

I think they'll end up getting to other parts of NJ later on, but they want to focus on their largest city first. 

[checkmatechamp13]

Looking at the presentation after the two public meetings, I notice they basically have a frequency-based concept and a coverage-based concept (pages 14 and 15 respectively).

Based on what you can make out from these maps, any thoughts on these? 

[bobtehpanda]

I don't see indications that they're really anything more than just broad outlines.

That being said I don't know why they're trying to tie higher frequency to all day transit and coverage to peak focused transit when I feel like those are two separate axes.

[bobtehpanda]

Also even with coverage based routing some of those routes in the center portion look a lot more zig-zaggy than they need to be.

[Lex]

On 5/17/2021 at 1:00 PM, bobtehpanda said:

I don't see indications that they're really anything more than just broad outlines.

That being said I don't know why they're trying to tie higher frequency to all day transit and coverage to peak focused transit when I feel like those are two separate axes.

NJT doesn't really want to run Newark's buses. (At least, that's what I get the impression of...)

[R10 2952]

Honestly, NJT often acts like it doesn't want to run any routes aside from a few high-volume routes in and out of PABT.  Places like Morristown, Boonton and Pompton Lakes haven't seen regular, usable intrastate bus service since around 1980.

Public officials keep assuming the problem is commuters turning their back to public transit in the state, but in truth it's the other way around- NJT in many cases has turned its back to the commuters.

Edited May 19, 2021 by R10 2952

[Cait Sith]

5 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

Honestly, NJT often acts like it doesn't want to run any routes aside from a few high-volume routes in and out of PABT.  Places like Morristown, Boonton and Pompton Lakes haven't seen regular, usable intrastate bus service since around 1980.

Public officials keep assuming the problem is commuters turning their back to public transit in the state, but in truth it's the other way around- NJT in many cases has turned its back to the commuters.

Part of that isn't their fault. The Christie Administration is a large part as to why NJT's public image is pretty bad in various areas of the state. Christie kept cutting away at their funding which resulted in a lot of bus service being cut in areas where there's hardly any alternatives. It was also during his tenure where rail service was at its absolute worst. Jon Corzine for some part of his tenure wanted to expand bus service in areas with little to no alternatives.

Also, Lakeland has basically taken over the important services around Morristown, Boonton and some other places within that area that are basically transit deserts. Regular, local service around those parts of NJ has been in the pits way before the 1980s, ridership has always been on the low end, and it continues to be, which is why some of those areas have 30ft buses instead of regular sized local buses.

 

8 hours ago, Lex said:

NJT doesn't really want to run Newark's buses. (At least, that's what I get the impression of...)

Not quite, they won't let go of their biggest money maker routes to the contractors. Imagine them sending off routes like the 1, 13 and 39 off to Coach USA? Oh brother!

 

[biGC323232]

4 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

Part of that isn't their fault. The Christie Administration is a large part as to why NJT's public image is pretty bad in various areas of the state. Christie kept cutting away at their funding which resulted in a lot of bus service being cut in areas where there's hardly any alternatives. It was also during his tenure where rail service was at its absolute worst. Jon Corzine for some part of his tenure wanted to expand bus service in areas with little to no alternatives.

Also, Lakeland has basically taken over the important services around Morristown, Boonton and some other places within that area that are basically transit deserts. Regular, local service around those parts of NJ has been in the pits way before the 1980s, ridership has always been on the low end, and it continues to be, which is why some of those areas have 30ft buses instead of regular sized local buses.

 

Not quite, they won't let go of their biggest money maker routes to the contractors. Imagine them sending off routes like the 1, 13 and 39 off to Coach USA? Oh brother!

 

Word..There's no way in hell Coach Usa or Acadamy Would be able to handle those routes...Not even metioning other heavy rts like 21,25,27,34,62,70...Like u said oh brother

[go25]

15 hours ago, biGC323232 said:

Word..There's no way in hell Coach Usa or Acadamy Would be able to handle those routes...Not even metioning other heavy rts like 21,25,27,34,62,70...Like u said oh brother

Agree with this sentiment. They (Coach USA) have trouble keeping schedule with the 24 and 31 routes they have... 

[checkmatechamp13]

There are two meetings on August 12th (3-5pm and 6-8pm). Registration available here: https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k22leh80R5OlBz6U1RP2YA?utm_medium=email&utm_source=getresponse&utm_content=NewBus+Newark+Public+Meeting&utm_campaign=

[Lawrence St]

Ever since NJ Transit abandoned the original Boonton Line, there's also no direct bus replacement from Bay St, Arlington, or Rowe St to Hoboken or Midtown.

[checkmatechamp13]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

Ever since NJ Transit abandoned the original Boonton Line, there's also no direct bus replacement from Bay St, Arlington, or Rowe St to Hoboken or Midtown.

Not run by NJT, but DeCamp did cover Arlington with their #99 bus.

[Lawrence St]

2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Not run by NJT, but DeCamp did cover Arlington with their #99 bus.

Hows the ridership on the 99 bus?

[jaf0519]

https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c2d31a03238c4ec189e00bcf3dc63931

The draft plan is up. I have a feeling people are going to be upset if they live in areas where service is being eliminated since I looks like NJ Transit is looking at frequency over coverage.

[checkmatechamp13]

Specifically, here's the draft plan in PDF form

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Specifically, here's the draft plan in PDF form

The link may have been modified or something, but this is the same document.

One of the areas that's getting screwed is the Scotch Plains area. The 59 bus will now operate on the 113S route between Plainfield and Wesfield (and not deviating to anywhere north of the RVL), while the 65 & 66 are both being discontinued. So it's basically making people take the 114, and transfer to the 70 for service to Newark, or the 52 for Elizabeth. 

Also IMO, some of these new shuttles seem kinda unnecessary. The 9 segment on Raymond Boulevard could be covered with the new 3 & 4 together at a similar frequency (and then maybe leave the Wilson Ave portion to the 9). The 14 could have also been covered by the 3 & 4, instead of having such a standalone route. It's not even coordinated with the 3/4 buses based on their frequencies. 

Edited August 12, 2021 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[checkmatechamp13]

On 8/12/2021 at 6:48 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

One of the areas that's getting screwed is the Scotch Plains area. The 59 bus will now operate on the 113S route between Plainfield and Wesfield (and not deviating to anywhere north of the RVL), while the 65 & 66 are both being discontinued. So it's basically making people take the 114, and transfer to the 70 for service to Newark, or the 52 for Elizabeth. 

Also IMO, some of these new shuttles seem kinda unnecessary. The 9 segment on Raymond Boulevard could be covered with the new 3 & 4 together at a similar frequency (and then maybe leave the Wilson Ave portion to the 9). The 14 could have also been covered by the 3 & 4, instead of having such a standalone route. It's not even coordinated with the 3/4 buses based on their frequencies. 

One of the things that I wish they mentioned was taking the #114 to the #99 to reach Weequahic (even if Weequahic doesn't generate much outbound ridership). They pretty much just mention the #52/114/117 (the #117 really doesn't connect to any Newark-bound routes). and leave it to the passenger to figure out. As a matter of fact, they don't even mention the #70!

In any case, offhand, I like the fact that more routes will be serving Penn Station rather than the Lincoln Park area (#41, #11/28/29)

Hopefully the #773/775 will be coordinated so that they provide an effective 15 minute headway (or close to it, since the #775 is longer) between Orange & Livingston Mall. And to a lesser extent, the #771/775 between Downtown Livingston & Orange. I do like the general structure of those three routes.

But one thing I'm definitely disappointed in, is they didn't restructure the #72/74 significantly). My proposal was to have the #74 run down McCarter Highway to Downtown Newark, and either cut the #72 back to a Bloomfield - Paterson route, or combine it with the #94 to Irvington). Franklin Avenue could be covered by a standalone route (possibly combined with one of the routes heading north out of Passaic towards Bergen County).

[njbus86]

does anyone know if the video from the most recent meetings are available on-line anywhere?

[checkmatechamp13]

@njbus86 Not as far as I know.

Also, quick point brought up in the Zoom meeting, the #105 might be extended to South Orange on the weekends. (Basically, I asked if they were eliminating weekend service on Irvington Avenue, since the new #107 would only run on weekdays, and basically they said it's a renumbering and the #105 would operate similar to the way the #107 local does today, implying it would be extended to South Orange on the weekends).

[go25]

This idea of them overhauling the entire Newark bus network needs to go back to the drawing board or be thrown out completely.

[B35 via Church]

Put this off long enough... Let's get started:

 

I can understand wanting to break up the real NJT #1 & I agree with simplifying the thing in general... The one thing I do like is that they're taking away the serving of River Terminal on it (nothing whatsoever should be actually terminating there on top of it, like some trips on the real NJT #1 does, as to not have too many trips ending at Euclid)... Something subtle that I also like is having the Jersey City split doing the #108 routing around East Ferry, instead of doing the real NJT #1 routing via Ferry st. in both directions.....

However, I don't agree with how they're breaking it up - in the sense that the Jersey City split is a split of a split, to justify throwing that significant of a difference in service on the Ivy Hill - East Ferry split... While I think the Ivy Hill - East Ferry split should have more service than any of the Jersey City splits, I wouldn't have TWO Jersey City splits (well period, but) to have coverage headways ran on each of them....

Basically, if not for having the full route of the #1 running b/w Ivy Hill & JSQ, I can agree with their proposed #1.... As for the Jersey City splits, I would do more with their proposed #4 (as in, give it more service in general, as well as having it serve a little more of Newark (west of Penn), and have it serve the correctional facility) & wouldn't even bother with their proposed #3 - as there is simply more patronage to/from JSQ on the real NJT #1 than there is to/from Exchange Pl; those folks are too busy piling on #80's & #81's).... I would try my hand with creating an east-west route along Communipaw av. that would run b/w Hudson Mall & Newport Mall, before retaining having the #1 run to Exchange Place.... Basically a #4 (the A&C route #4, I mean) that would run along Communipaw to Hudson Mall, instead of it turning off at Ocean to parallel the NJT #6....

==================================

So they're getting rid of 2 or 3 trips on the #11 that doesn't run through (what I suppose you could call) downtown Little Falls... Big deal.... AFAIC, this entire route should be discontinued... Of the respective portions where each of the 3 Bloomfield av. services (#11, #28, #29) eventually separate from each other, the #11's portion is the weakest.... If we compare usage on the #11 & the #28 north of Bloomfield av., separate from anyone on either route seeking Willowbrook Mall, the #11 quite noticeably underperforms compared to the #28.... Basically, most of that part of the #11 is #191 & #195 food, as most of those folks up in that area are seeking NYC way more than they are Downtown Newark.... So I would have more #28 service in general in place of the #11....

....Buses would either short turn to run b/w Newark & Montclair State Univ., or run the full gambit b/w Newark & Willowbrook mall... The short turns would serve all local stops, but the service to/from Willowbrook Mall would serve all local stops b/w Newark & Bellevue Plaza (Upper Montclair), then would run nonstop b/w Bellevue Plaza & Willowbrook Mall.... Those trips would operate as #28x's.... I would also eliminate the #28's routing b/w MSU & Willowbrook Mall..... Here's a map of what I'm saying with all of this.... It would essentially accomplish the same thing for most folks that bother embarking #11's to/from Willowbrook Mall.... Putting that another way, the #11 is a defacto express #28 b/w Willowbrook Mall & Bloomfield av. (and beyond) for most of those riders.... I've taken way too many #11's to realize this phenomenon.

==================================

Yeah, you could pretty much see a truncation happening with #13; usage does tend to die off around the bus garage.... What's somewhat funny about this is that there wouldn't be a need for any of the FOUR NB route suffixes anymore (all trips would end at the garage, so that's the #13B right there.... service north of the garage would be gone, so there's the #13C & #13N.... and the #13M appears to be eliminated also; which are basically the short turns that stop dead around the Newark/Belleville border).... Hopefully the #13V & the #13T suffixes would be used in both directions & not just for SB trips (even though I don't think anything should be ending at Valley Fair in general)....

==================================

Something else that falls under something rather obvious is a truncation of the #21 to Main/Day... By itself, I don't have a problem with it.... Patronage up to West Orange isn't all too great; buses have a propensity to tank in Orange... Although you do get riders that use it (#21), the #71, & the #73 interchangeably b/w Orange & Newark, the #21 is still the main draw....

At the same time, they're using that actuality (#21 being the main draw) to do away with the #71, #73, and #79x as is - to break up service west of Orange... While it makes logistical sense, I don't really see that flying all too well from passengers; the piling onto (what will be even more sluggish) #21's from points east of Orange to xfer at Main/Day for bus service west of Orange.... No express service to/from Newark, to boot - as all of the express variants would perish.... Be there as it may, as for those broken up versions of the #71/#73/#79:

• The proposed #771 looks to be the most promising... It serves Essex Green shopping ctr. (which encompasses the lion's share of #71 usage west & north of Orange; the #71 more often than not, carries a shit ton of air past that point), rt. 10 corridor in general (which is currently piecemealed b/w several routes), and I suppose what you could call the core of the #79 route in Parsippany (where it dips down south of rt. 46 to eventually come back up to rt.46).... You can't really tell, but the #771 will probably end at the Morris Hills Shopping Ctr. like the #29x & the (full) #79 does..... However though, if you need service to Morris Corporate Ctr. I, II, or III (the current #79 service area over there along Interpace Pkwy), you're screwed....
• The proposed #773 is a combination of [the #73 b/w Orange & St. Barnabas Hosp.] & [the discontinued routing of the Coach USA #31 b/w St. Barnabas Hosp. & Livingston Mall].... This will catch on quickly, being that that #771 would serve rt. 10, it'd leave the #773 here as a quicker link b/w Orange & Livingston Mall.... The Northfield av. portion sees a little better than straggler level ridership, so it's not like these buses would be carrying a lot of air, per se.... While I still think the #73 should be left running to/from Newark, I will admit that a lot of riders from points west of Orange do tend to disembark in Orange (Erie Loop specifically, more often than not).... Also, while the #70 is more popular at Livingston Mall than the #73 is, a higher percentage of riders on the #73 are seeking the mall....
• The proposed #774 comes off to me as lazy... While the #71 shouldn't be serving that loop, extracting that part of the #71 & making a standalone (loop) route out of it, I don't see boding well at all.... I think the problem with the Fairfield loop is that not too many folks that live around the #29 & the #71 either work for any of those companies in the general area surrounding the loop, or the ones that do, opt to drive to work.... I would try my hand at targeting whatever Paterson area residents that may work for those companies in Fairfield instead.... Meaning, I would have a route doing most of the current Fairfield loop, running via Essex Mall (instead of ending there), to terminate at Willowbrook Mall instead (for all the bus connections there).... Something like this....
• The proposed #775 basically takes the worst performing part of the #21 & some of the worst performing parts of the #71, combines it with the #73's stint along S. Livingston av, to eventually end at Livingston Mall.... I can't see too many people utilzing this over the #773....

==================================

 

I'll try to condense this into 2 parts instead of 3 & finish this up sometime before the middle of the week.... Leave whatever comments you may have to this, if you want to.

Edited September 20, 2021 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

@B35 via Church Do you think it would work well if the #771/773/775 acted as limited-stop routes along Main Street (while the #21 itself acted as a local), or is ridership too spread out along the corridor for limited-stop service to work?

That's definitely a good idea to extend the #774 to Willowbrook Mall...connnects industrial Fairfield (and even Essex Mall itself) with routes to/from all over Northern NJ

Do you have any better suggestions on how to handle the #775 service area, or do you think it's just the luck of the draw that the higher-ridership corridors got divided up between the #771 & #773, and the #775 is basically getting the leftovers?

On a side note, is there any significant ridership in the Livingston area on the #71/73, or is it pretty much dead mileage? (At least heading towards Orange/Newark if anything)