bus rapid transit phase ii: public input · 2020-05-15 · bus rapid transit phase ii: public input...
TRANSCRIPT
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II:Public Input
•
Table of ConTenTs
ExEcUTIvE SUmmARy i
cHAPTER 1 | WoRkSHoP PURPoSE AND STRUcTURE 1
cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS 9
cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS 26
APPENDIx A | LIST of oRgANIZATIoNS & ELEcTED offIcIALS REPRESENTED AT THE WoRkSHoPS 42
June 2010
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT ExEcUTIvE SUmmARy
eXeCUTIVe sUMMaRY
Inthefallof2008,theNewYorkCityDepartmentofTrans-portation(DOT)andMTANewYorkCityTransit(NYCT)be-ganexploringopportunitiesfortheexpansionofBusRapidTransit (BRT) in New York City. Public input is a criticalcomponentofthiseffort,andsointhespringof2009DOTandNYCTsoughttoengageNewYorkersinadialogueonthefutureofBRT.Thiseffortincludedsevenpublicwork-shopsacross thecity andanonline survey, thegoalsofwhichwereto:
• educate the public about bRT and current bRT projects;
• solicit feedback on unmet transit needs that may be appropriate for bRT; and,
• solicit feedback on bRT’s package of features.
Over325peopleparticipatedintheworkshops,includingrepresentativesfrom47communityandbusinessgroups,andstaffmembersfromtheofficesof23localelectedof-ficials. Inaddition,over600peoplecompletedtheonlinesurvey. The workshop and survey participants providedDOTandNYCTwithawealthoffeedbackonlocaltransitneedsandcommunityissues,whichwillhelpguidethetwoagenciesastheymoveforwardwithplanningforaddition-alBRTroutes.Fromallthepubliccomments,onecentralthemeemerged:NYCTandDOTshoulddomoretomeetthetransitneedsofNewYorkersthroughimprovementstothecity’sbussystem.
outreach approachThe outreach effort was designed tomaximize opportu-nities for residentsandstakeholdergroups tovoice theirideasandopinions.Theworkshopsusedaseriesofinter-activeexercisestostimulateaconversationonBRT.Par-ticipantsweredivided intogroupsofeight to tenpeopleand assigned to tables with a facilitator. The facilitators
guidedeachgroupthroughadiscussionofpotentialBRTcorridorsandofBRTfeatures,suchasoff-boardfarepay-ment,real-timebusarrivalinformation,transitsignalprior-ity,andbuslanesandbusways.Eachparticipantfilledoutaquestionnaireoverthecourseoftheworkshopandnotetakerscapturedcommentsateachtable.Theonlinesurveyfollowedasimilarformatandalsoprovidedtheopportunityforopen-endedresponses.
summary of Public Comments Overall,theworkshopsandsurveyindicatedthatthepub-licissupportiveofBRTexpansionandotherbusimprove-ments and feels that these initiativeswill improve transitserviceinNewYorkCity.98%ofworkshopattendeesand97%ofsurveyrespondentsexpressedsupportforBRTex-pansion.Participantsprovidedarangeofviewpointsandideas,fromwhichseveralkeythemescameforward:
TRansIT needs • Overall,participantssawmostofthetransitneedcor-
ridorsidentifiedbyDOTandNYCTasgoodcandi-datesforBRT.Participantsfrequentlyrecommendedextensionstothesecorridors,aswellassuggestedtheirown.Themapsonpages12-20inchapterIIpresentthetransitcorridorsthatparticipantsidenti-fiedashavingthegreatestneedforfasterservice.
• ManyparticipantsencouragedDOTandNYCTtoimplementimprovementstobusservicequickly,par-ticularlythosethatdonotinvolvecomplexconstruc-tionorhighcapitalcosts.
i
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
bRT feaTURes • Overall,participantsstatedthatBRTfeatures,such
asoff-boardfarepaymentandtransitsignalpriority,wouldspeedupbustravelandmakeridingthebusmoreconvenientandlessstressful.Manypartici-pantsexpressedadesireforquickimplementationofspecificBRTfeatures,suchasreal-timebusarrivalinformationdisplaysatbusstops.
• Ofthefeaturesdesignedtoimprovebusspeedandreliability,frequentservicewasviewedasthemostdesirablefeatureamongparticipants.Ofthefea-turesdesignedtoimprovecomfortandconvenience,real-timebusarrivalinformationwasbyfarthemostpopularfeature.
• Inregardstosubway-likestationspacing,participantswereconcernedabouttheaccessibilityofBRTandbusservicefortheelderlyanddisabledriders.
• Mostparticipantssupportedtheconceptoftrafficsignalpriorityforbuses,butstatedthatDOTshouldcarefullyanalyzeandmonitorimpactsontrafficandpedestrians.TSPsystemsshouldensurethatpedes-trianhaveenoughtimetosafelycrossstreets.
• Mostparticipantssupportedtheconceptofoff-boardfarepayment,butstatedthatNYCTandDOTshouldhaveadequateenforcementinplacetopreventfareevasionandthatsecurityconcernsatsomestationswouldneedtoaddressed.
bUs lanes and bUswaYs • Overall,participantsvoicedsupportfortheimple-
mentationofbuslanesandbuswayswhenbroadlydefined,statingthatthesefeatureswouldspeedbusservicebyallowingbusestoavoidtrafficconges-tion.Manyparticipantsstatedthatforbuslanestobeeffective,DOTandNYCTwillneedtoinstitutemorerobustenforcementmeasuresagainstillegalparking.
• Concernsaboutspecifictreatmentsandcorridorsfellintotwogeneralcategories:(1)thatillegallyparkedvehicleswouldinhibittheeffectivenessofbuslanes,and(2)thatbuslanesandbuswayswouldeliminateparkingspacesandincreasetrafficformotorists.Participantsalsoraisedquestionsaboutpedestrian,bicyclist,anddriversafetyandimpactsonlocalbusinesses.
• Notreatmentwastheclearfavoriteamongpartici-pants,althoughcurbsidelanesweretheleastpopulartreatment,duetoconcernsovertheireffectivenessandimpactsonparkingandcommercialdeliveries.
• Whenconsideringabuslaneorbusway,participantsstatedthatDOTandNYCTneedtocarefullyanalyzepotentialtraffic,pedestriansafety,parkingavailabil-ity,anddeliveryimpacts.Asuccessfulbuslaneorbuswaydesignmustbetailoredtotheneedsofthespecificcorridor.
PlannIng PRoCess • Participantsstatedthatcontinuedcommunityin-
volvementthroughouttheplanningofindividualBRTcorridorsandotherbusimprovementprojectswillmaketheprojectbetterandisessentialforsuccessfulprojectimplementation.
ii
1
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 1 | WoRkSHoP PURPoSE AND STRUcTURE
The PurposeInAprilof2009,theNewYorkCityDepartmentofTrans-portation(DOT)andMTANewYorkCityTransit(NYCT)re-leased“IntroductiontoBusRapidTransitPhaseII,”areportonthefutureofBusRapidTransit(BRT)inNewYorkCity.Thereportidentifies31unmettransitneedsacrossthecitythatmaybecandidates forBRTanddiscussespotentialimprovementstothepackageofBRTfeaturestobeimple-mentedonfutureroutes(NewYorkCitypiloteditsfirstBRTroute, theBx12SelectBusServiceonFordhamRoad intheBronx,startinginthesummerof2008).ThePhaseIIreportispartofalargerplanningeffortbyDOTandNYCTtodevelopacomprehensiveBRTsystemacrossthecity.
Publicengagementisacriticalpartofthisprocess,asfeed-back from residents and community stakeholders helpsDOTandNYCTtobetterunderstandthetransitneedsoflocalneighborhoodsandaddresslocalconcerns,suchasparking availability and traffic congestion. In conjunctionwiththereleaseofthePhaseIIreport,DOTandNYCTheldsevenpublicworkshopsbetweenMay28,2009andJune18,2009onthefutureofBRTinNewYorkCity.Thegoalsoftheworkshops,heldacrossthefiveboroughs,wereto:
• educate the public about bRT• solicit feedback on unmet transit service
needs that may be appropriate for bRT• solicit feedback on bRT features
Over325peopleparticipatedintheworkshops,themajor-ityofthemregularbusriders.Inadditiontotheworkshops,DOTandNYCTpostedanonlineBRTsurvey,completedbyover650respondents,whichfollowedasimilarformattotheworkshops.ThisreportpresentsasummaryoftheresultsoftheworkshopsandtheonlinesurveyandwillhelptoinformtheworkofDOTandNYCTasthetwoagenciesmoveforwardwithplanningforaPhaseIIBRTprogram.
1. woRkshoP PURPose and sTRUCTURe
DowntownBrooklynBRTWorkshop
2
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
workshop structure Theworkshopsusedinteractiveexercisesandvisualaidstostimulateanin-depthconversationonBRTandtopro-vide participants with ample opportunity to voice theirideas and opinions. In contrast to a public hearing, par-ticipantswererandomlydividedintogroupsofeighttotenandassignedtotableswithafacilitatorandanotetaker.Thefacilitators,amixofNYCDOTandNYCTstaffandcon-sultant staff, guided eachgroup through a series of dis-cussion units; the facilitator’s rolewas to ask questions,guidethediscussion,and,mostimportantly,tolisten.Thenotetakerrecordedparticipantcommentsandkepttrackofthetimespentoneachdiscussionunit.Inaddition,eachparticipantfilledoutaquestionnaireoverthecourseoftheworkshop.Theworkshoptookabout90minutesandwasdividedintofourparts:
(1) InTRodUCTIon: the participants introduced them-selves and where shown a brief video, the purpose ofwhichwastogiveeachparticipantabaselineunderstand-ingofBRTandtheBx12SelectBusServiceproject.Thefacilitatorlaidoutthegoalsoftheworkshopandansweredquestionsaboutthevideo. (2) seRVICe need CoRRIdoRs – MaP eXeRCIse:the
purposeofthisunitwastosolicitparticipantfeedbackontransitneedsthatmightbeappropriateforBRT.Alargemapof the borough inwhich theworkshopwas taking placewasplacedoneachtable,(seesampleabove);thesemapsshowedtheserviceneedcorridorsidentifiedbyDOT/NYCTinthePhaseIIreport(forexample,UticaAvenueinBrook-lynandtheNorthShoreinStatenIsland).Eachparticipantusedstickerstoindicatewheretheylivedandplacestheyfrequently traveled to (place of employment, local shop-ping,etc.).ThefacilitatorthenaskedparticipantsfortheirthoughtsoneachoftheDOT/NYCT-identifiedserviceneedcorridors.Participantsusedmarkerstomodifythesecor-ridorsandtoaddcorridorsoftheirown.Attheendofthediscussion,eachparticipantwasaskedtoidentifythethreeserviceneedcorridorstheybelievedweremostimportant.Thisfeedbackwasrecordedontheboroughmapsandineachparticipant’squestionnaire.
SampleWorkshopMap
3
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 1 | WoRkSHoP PURPoSE AND STRUcTURE
BRTFeaturesExercise
3) bRT feaTURes – feaTURes gaMe boaRd:thepurposeofthisunitwastosolicitparticipantfeedbackonthepackageoffeatureswhichmakeupaBRTservice.A“BRTFeaturesGameBoard,”shownleft,wasplacedoneachtable.Thegameboard illustrates BRT’s five speed and reliabilityfeaturesandthreecomfortandconveniencefea-tures. For the speed and reliability features, thegame board also indicates the estimated traveltimesavingsthefeatureachieves(basedona30minutebustrip).Thefacilitatoraskedparticipantsfor their opinions of each feature andwhat thatfeaturemeant to them (i.e. how frequent is fre-quentservice?)Participantsthenusedstickerstoindicateonthegameboardwhethertheylikedordislikedeachfeatureorfeltitwasnotimportant.Afterfurtherdiscussionoftheresults,participantsrecordedtheirresponsesintheirquestionnaires.
4
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
Samplebuswayrendering Sampleoff-setbuslanerendering
Samplecurbsidebuslanerendering
4) bUs lanes and bUswaYs - PhoTo based Ren-deRIngs:thepurposeofthisunitwastosolicitparticipantfeedbackonarangeofBRTbuslaneandbuswaydesigns.Participants were shown a series of three photo-basedrenderings demonstrating different bus lane and buswaytreatments (samples shown above and at left) andwereaskedfor theiropiniononeach.Thenotetaker recordedtheadvantagesanddisadvantagesidentifiedbythegroupdirectly on the renderings. At the end of the discussion,participantsusedstickerstoindicatewhethertheylikedordislikedagivendesign.Thisfeedbackwasalsorecordedineachparticipant’squestionnaire.
During thecourseof theworkshops,staff fromDOTandNYCTwerealsopresenttoanswerquestionsaboutnon-BRTrelatedissues.
5
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 1 | WoRkSHoP PURPoSE AND STRUcTURE
workshop date location Total Participants
Bronx May28,2009 TheHub 29
QueensI June2,2009 JacksonHeights 52
QueensII June3,2009 DowntownJamaica 27
BrooklynI June9,2009 DowntownBrooklyn 40
BrooklynII June10,2009 BrooklynCollege/Flatbush 40
StatenIsland June16,2009 NewDorp 39
Manhattan June18,2009 GarmentDistrict 97
Inadditiontocommunitymembers,workshopattendeesincludedrepresentativesofcivicorganizations,electedofficials,andbusinessgroups,including:
AppendixAincludesadetailedlistoftheorganizationsandelectedofficialsrepresentedattheworkshops.
attendanceAtotalof324participantsattendedthesevenworkshopsheldacrossthefiveboroughs.Manhattanhadthehighestturn-outwith97participants,whileJamaicahadthelowestturnoutwith27participants.
• staffrepresentativesof23electedofficialsfromthecity,state,andfederallevel;
• membersandstafffrom12communityboards;• representativesandstafffrom25community,
civic,andadvocacyorganizations;
• representativesfromfivebusinessimprovementdistricts;and
• staffmembersfromfivegovernmentagenciesatthecity,state,andregionallevel.
6
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
outreach effectiveness Participantswereasked in theirquestionnaireshow they learnedabout theworkshops.SignspostedonNYCTbuseswerethemosteffectiveapproachtoattractingparticipants.The“Other”categorylikelyincludesrepresentativesofelectedofficialsandcommunityboardmemberswhowerecontacteddirectlybyDOTandNYCTstaffandoutreachbycommunitygroupstotheirmembers.
outreach Method number of Participants Percentage
SignPostedOnNYCTBus 97 35%
DOTEmailAnnouncement 52 19%
DOTTextMessage 4 1%
DOTWebsite 25 9%
NPRRadio 4 1%
Other 99 35%
7
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 1 | WoRkSHoP PURPoSE AND STRUcTURE
Participant Transportation UseParticipants were asked which mode of transportation they used most frequently for travel within their borough ofresidence.Aboutathirdofrespondentsreportedrelyingprimarilyonthelocalbussystemforintra-boroughtravel.
Most frequent Mode of Transportation for Intra-boro Travel number of Participants Percentage
LocalBus 119 31%
Subway 94 25%
ExpressBus 13 3%
Car 29 8%
Walk 40 11%
Bike 19 5%
StatenIslandRailroad 4 1%
Combination:CarandSubway 1 0%
Combination:BusandSubway 25 7%
Combination:BusandTrain 5 1%
Combination:BusandExpressBus 1 0%
Combination:Bike,CarandBus 1 0%
Combination:Bike,CarandWalk 19 5%
Combination:NotSpecified 3 1%
NoResponse 5 1%
*note that a small portion of participants checked more than one mode.
8
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
Participantswerealsoaskedhowoftentheyridethebus.Aboutthree-quartersofworkshopparticipantsreportedusingthebusatleastonceaweek.Overall,frequentbusriderswerewellrepresentedatthesevenworkshops.
bus Use frequency number of Participants Percentage
Lessthanonceperweek 30 15%
Onetothreedaysperweek 52 27%
Fourtosevendaysperweek 95 48%
Noresponse 19 10%
Participants’ awareness of bRTAtthebeginningoftheworkshop,participantswereaskedto provide a one-sentence description of BRT in theirquestionnaires. A few respondents stated that theywerenot familiarwith theconceptandhadcome to thework-shop to learnmore, but a significant number exhibited afamiliaritywithBRT.Manyoftheresponsescapturedwhatparticipants saw as BRT’s primary features and benefits.DescriptionsatmultipleworkshopslikenedBRTtoamorecost-effectivelightrailsystem.Thefollowingisasamplingoftheresponses.BRT:• “…isasmart,modernwaytomovelargenumbers
ofpeoplerapidlyabovegroundforareasonableinvestment;themostcost-effectivesolutiontourbantransport.”
• “…consistsofexclusivebuslanes,off-boardfarecollection,enclosedstationsandbusservicethatfeelslikeametro.”
• “…isadedicatedbuslaneroutethatfacilitatesacceleratedbustrafficwithoutinterferencefromautomobiletraffic.”
• “…isthegreatesthopeforefficienttransportationforthosethatdonothaveaccesstoasubway.”
• “…isabuswithpriorityoperationindedicatedtrafficcorridors,minimaldwelltimewithonboardfareinspectionofprepaidtickets,minimalstops,increasedridershipanddecreasedtriptime.”
• “…isalightrailsystemwithoutexpensiveinfrastructure.”
9
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
key findings
oVeRall feedbaCk on bRT• Participantswereoverwhelminglysupportiveof
implementingBRTinNewYorkCity:74%ofpartici-pantswhocompletedthequestionnaireindicatedthattheywouldsupporttheexpansionofBRT.24%saidtheywouldsupportBRTexpansion,buthadsomeconcerns.2%ofparticipantsstatedthattheydidnotsupportanyexpansionofBRT.
• ManyparticipantsexpressedadesireforquickimplementationofBRTorofspecificBRTfeatures,suchasreal-timebusarrivalinformationdisplaysatbusstops.
seRVICe needs • Participantsrespondedpositivelytotheserviceneed
corridorsidentifiedbyDOTandNYCT.• ParticipantswerefrequentlyinterestedinBRTser-
vicesthattookthemallthewaytotheirdestination—notjustservicesthatconnectedthemtothenearestsubway—andexpressedadesireforinter-boroughBRTroutes.
• ParticipantsoftenaddedserviceneedcorridorsoftheirownorextendedtheDOT/NYCT-identifiedser-viceneedcorridors.Participant-identifiedneedsweremostoftenfocusedonunderservedareas,suchasHuntsPointintheBronxandRedHookinBrooklyn.
• Participantstendedtofocusmostoncorridorsneartheirresidence.
bRT feaTURes • TheeightBRTfeaturesreceivedmostlypositive
feedback.Manyparticipantsstatedthatthesefea-tureswouldspeedupbustravelandmakeridingthebusmoreconvenientandlessstressful.
• Inthespeedandreliabilitycategory,frequentservicewasthemostpopularfeature.Runningways,off-boardfarepayment,trafficsignalpriority(TSP),andsubway-stylestationsspacingalsoreceivedpositivefeedback,butalsoraisedanumberofconcernsandquestions.
• Inthecomfortandconveniencecategory,real-timebusarrivalinformationwasbyfarthemostpopularfeature.BRTvehicleswerealsopopular,especiallythelow-floorfeature.Enhancedstationswereoftenseenaslessimportant.
bUs lanes and bUswaYs • Participantsvoicedsupportfortheimplementationof
buslanesandbuswayswhenbroadlydefined.Manyparticipantsstatedthatbuslanesandbuswayswouldspeedupbusservicebyhelpingbusestoavoidtraf-fic.Whenitcametospecifictreatments,however,anumberofparticipantsraisedconcerns.
• Concernsfellintotwogeneralcategories:(1)concernsthatillegallyparkedcarsandtruckswouldinhibittheeffectivenessofbuslanesandbusways,and(2)concernsthatbuslanesandbuswayswouldeliminateparkingspacesandincreasetrafficformotorists.
• Participantsalsoraisedquestionsaboutpedestrian,bicyclist,anddriversafetyandimpactsonlocalbusinesses.
II. woRkshoP fIndIngs
Throughthecourseofthesevenworkshops,severalkeythemesemerged:
10
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
Participant feedback on service needs objeCTIVes and aPPRoaCh Theworkshopmap exercisewas designed to: (1) solicitfeedback from participants on the DOT/NYCT-identifiedcorridorsidentifiedin“IntroductiontoBRTPhaseII,”and (2)allowparticipants tosuggestotherpotentialcorridorsfor consideration. Participant feedback was captured inthreeways:questionnaireresponses,marked-upboroughmaps, and comments recorded by the note takers. Thisanalysisfocusesonparticipantcommentsandideasthatwerementionedthemostfrequentlyandthatgeneratedthemostinterestfromparticipants.
oVeRall CoMMenTsSeveraltrendswereapparentacrossthesevenworkshops:
• ParticipantsrespondedpositivelytotheDOT/NYCT-identifiedcorridorsandsawmostofthemasgoodcandidatesforBRTorimprovedbusservices.
• ParticipantsfrequentlyextendedormodifiedtheDOT/NYCT-identifiedcorridors;sometimesparticipantsconnectedtwoormorecorridors.
• ParticipantsfromtheBronx,Brooklyn,Queens,andStatenIslandexpressedaninterestinbettertransitconnectionstootherboroughs;oftenthesepartici-pantsstatedadesireforinter-boroughconnectionsthatdidnotrequiretravelingthroughManhattan.
• Participantstendedtofocusmostoncorridorsneartheirresidence.
11
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
The bronx oVeRall feedbaCk• BronxparticipantsindicatedthatDOT/NYCTshould
placethehighestpriorityonareasunderservedbythesubwaysystem,suchastheWebsterAvenue/ThirdAvenuecorridor,HuntsPointandMelrose.
• Bronxparticipantsexpressedadesireforimprovedeast-westconnections,asmostsubwayserviceintheBronxrunsnorth-south.SuggestedroutesincludedGunHillRoadand161stStreet.
• Bronxparticipantsalsonotedtheimportanceofcreat-ingatransitlinktoQueensthatdidnotrequiretravelthroughManhattan.Thiswassuggestedaspartofanumberofpotentialcorridors.
PRIoRITY CoRRIdoRs•webster avenue/Third avenue Corridor
- Almostallparticipantswantedtoseethecorridorextendednorth-southandconnectedtoeast-westserviceinthenorthernBronx,potentiallyonGunHillRoad.
- Thiscorridorreceivedthehighestoverallranking,althoughsomeparticipantsquestionedtheneedforBRTgiventhehighfrequencyofexistingbusservices.
•HuntsPointPeninsula- AllfiveparticipanttablesidentifiedHuntsPoint(particularlythewesternsection)asahighpriorityforBRT,bothforemployeeswhoworkedintheareaandresidents.
- ParticipantsexpressedaneedforimprovedtransitwithinHuntsPoint,aswellasbetterconnectionstootherareasintheBronxandbeyond.
- SuggestionsincludedconvertingtheBx6routetoBRT.
•SoundviewCorridor- Severalparticipanttablesidentifiedthearea’scur-renttransitoptionsasunreliableandinsufficient,andnotedthatitisdifficultforpedestriansintheareatoaccesssubwaystopsandotherpartsoftheBronx.
- ParticipantswantedbetterconnectivitywithinSoundview,aswellastootherpartsoftheBronx.
- FouroutoffiveparticipanttableswantedtoextendtheSoundviewcorridoreast-west,potentiallyalong161stStreet.
12
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
Bx12 SBS
2
1
34
Underserved Area
Service Need
Phase I BRT Route
Participant Identified Corridors
DOT/NYCT Identified Corridors
Underserved Area
Service Need
5
6
7
1. Third Avenue/Webster Avenue Corridor 2. Soundview Corridor3. Bruckner Expressway – express bus corridor4. Major Deegan Expressway – express bus corridor 5. Hunts Point Corridor6. South Bronx East-West Corridor 7. North Bronx East-West Corridor
bronx service needs
13
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
brooklyn oVeRall feedbaCk • ParticipantsatbothBrooklynworkshopsfrequently
suggestedextendingtheDOT/NYCT-identifiedcorridorstoQueens,includingtoJFKandLongIslandCity.
PRIoRITY CoRRIdoRs•Utica avenue Corridor
- AttheFlatbushworkshop,participantsrankedthiscorridorasoneofthetwomostimportantneeds;thecorridoralsorankedhighattheDowntownBrooklynworkshop.
- ParticipantsfromsoutheastBrooklynexpressedadesireforafasterandlesscrowdedtransitcon-
nectiontoDowntownBrooklynandManhattan.- AnumberofparticipantssuggestedextendingthecorridorsouthonFlatbushAvenuetothe
Rockaways;otherparticipantssuggestedexten-sionstoDowntownBrooklyn(insteadoftheWil-liamsburgBridgebusplaza)andManhattan.
- ParticipantsalsosuggestedotherpotentialcorridorstobetterservesoutheastBrooklyn,
includingFlatbushAvenue,identifiedasthemostcongestedtransitcorridorinBrooklyn,andRemsenAvenue,identifiedasaroutetobetterserveCanarsie.
•RedHook- FouroutoffiveparticipanttablesattheDowntownBrooklynworkshopidentifiedRedHookasanun-derservedareathatisdifficulttogettowithoutacar;theareawasalsofrequentlyraisedattheFlatbushworkshop.
- ThemostcommonsuggestionwasforaBRTroutebetweenRedHookandDowntownBrooklyn.Par-ticipantsalsosuggestedroutesfromRedHooktoLongIslandCity,Greenpoint,andtheWilliamsburgEastRiverwaterfront.
- RedHookwasalsofrequentlyaddedasanexten-siontoothercorridors,includingtheBushwicktoDowntownBrooklynCorridorandtheWilliamsburgEastRiverWaterfrontCorridor.
•SouthernBrooklynEast-WestCorridor- AttheFlatbushworkshop,participantsrankedthiscorridorasoneofthetwomostimportantneeds.
- Participantsstatedthattripsalongthiscorridorwerelongandslowandthatmanypartsofthecorri-dorwereunderservedbytransit.SomeparticipantsnotedthatatripacrosssouthernBrooklyncantakeupto2hours.
- SomeparticipantssuggestedextensionstotheGatewayMallandsouthtoBrightonBeach.
•WilliamsburgEastRiverWaterfrontCorridor/ bushwick to downtown brooklyn
- Thesetwocorridorswerefrequentlycombined,andbothreceivedsignificantinterestattheDowntownBrooklynworkshop.
- ParticipantsfeltthattheWilliamsburgEastRiverwaterfrontwasisolatedfromtransitandthatbothareaswereunderservedandgrowing.
14
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
B44 SBS
4
6
5
3
7
1/2
Underserved Area
Service Need
Phase I BRT Route
Participant Identified Corridors
DOT/NYCT Identified Corridors
Underserved Area
Service Need
Extension
8
9
10
1 & 2. Utica Avenue/ Southeast Brooklyn Corridor3. Southern Brooklyn East-West Corridor4. Central Brooklyn East-West Corridor5. Bushwick to Downtown Brooklyn Corridor6. Williamsburg East River Waterfront 7. Gowanus Expressway – express bus corridor8. Flatbush Avenue Corridor9. Red Hook Corridor10. Queens Connections
10
brooklyn service needs
15
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
ManhattanoVeRall TRends • Manhattanparticipantsvoicedoverwhelmingsupport
forbettereast-westcrosstownservice,especiallyacrossCentralPark.All10tablesidentifiedexistingcrosstownbusroutesaspossibilitiesforBRT,particu-larly125thStreet,86thStreet,59thStreetand23rdStreet.
PRIoRITY CoRRIdoRs•UpperWestSide/UpperEastSideCrosstown Corridor
- Participantsrankedthiscorridorasthehighestpriority.
- 86thStreetreceivedthegreatestattention;participantsstatedthattheM86isveryslowandover-crowded.
- 96thStreet,72ndStreet,and66thStreetwerealsomentioned.
•MidtownCrosstownCorridor- Participantsrankedthiscorridorasahighpriority.- ParticipantsalsoexpressedaneedforL-shapedroutesthatwouldconnecttheUpperWestSidetotheeastsideofMidtownandtheUpperEastSidetothewestsideofMidtown.
•125thStreetCrosstownCorridor-Participantsrankedthiscorridorasahighpriority.
•WestSideCorridor- Participantsidentifiedthefarwestsideasahighgrowthareathatlackseasyaccesstothesubwaysystem.
- SomeparticipantssuggestedextendingservicenorthtoWashingtonHeightswithapotential
connectiontotheexistingBx12SBS.
16
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
5
Bx12 SBS
6
1
2
3
M15 SBS
Service Need
Phase I BRT Route
Participant Identified Corridors
DOT/NYCT Identified Corridors
Service Need
M34 SBS
4
"L" Shaped Routes
1. 125th Street Corridor2. Upper West Side-Upper East Side Corridor3. 14th Street Corridor4. West Side Corridor5. 57th Street Corridor 6. 23rd Street Corridor
Manhattan service needs
17
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
QueensoVeRall feedbaCk• ParticipantsatbothQueensworkshopsidentifieda
needforeast-westserviceacrossnorthernQueens;someidentifiedcorridorsextendingallthewayfromManhattantotheNassauCountyborder.
• Queensparticipantsalsoexpressedadesireforbetterconnectionstotheairports,particularlyLaGuardia.TheLaGuardiaAirport/EastElmhurstCorridorwasfrequentlyextendedbotheast-westandnorth-south.
• AnumberofQueensparticipantsexpressedaneedforbetterconnectionstoDowntownBrooklynviaanumberofroutes.
• AnumberofQueensparticipantsnotedthatconges-tioninDowntownJamaicaandDowntownFlushingslowsdownbusservice.
PRIoRITY CoRRIdoRs•NorthernQueens-LIC-ManhattanCorridor:
- ThisreporthascombinedtheDOT/NYCTQueens-Manhattancorridorwiththeparticipant-identifiednorthernQueenseast-westcorridor.
- AlmostalltablesattheJacksonHeightsworkshopsuggestedextendingtheQueens-ManhattancorridoreastviaNorthernBoulevardtoconnectwithDown-townFlushing.
- Someparticipantssuggestedfurtherextensions,includingeasttoNassauCountyandsouthtoJamaicaalongtheproposedJamaicatoFlushingCorridor.
- Participantssawthiscorridorasfillinganeedforimprovedintra-Queenstransitandasrelievingcongestiononthe7trainandtheLongIslandExpressway.
•LaGuardiaAirport/EastElmhurstCorridor:- Thiscorridorwasahighpriorityatalmostall tablesattheJacksonHeightsworkshopandwasfrequentlydiscussedattheJamaicaworkshop.
- Participantsstatedthatthecorridorwouldpro- videimprovedairportaccessforQueensresidents.
- Someparticipantssuggestedextendingthecor- ridornorth-southalongWoodhavenBoulevard toJamaica,whileotherssuggestedextendingthecorridoreast-westtoLongIslandCityand
theBronx.
•JamaicaAvenue/HillsideAvenueCorridor: - ThisCorridorreceivedthehighestrankingattheJamaicaworkshop,andalsorankedhighattheJacksonHeightsworkshop.
- Jamaicawasseenbyparticipantsasakeytrans-ferpoint,whichprovidedaccesstootherpartsofQueens,aswellasBrooklynandManhattan.
- SomeparticipantsbelievedthatthiscorridoralreadyhadadequateserviceandthataddingmorebuseswouldcreateadditionalcongestioninDowntownJamaica.
18
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
2 4
5
6
7
8
9
3
JamaicaStudy
Underserved Area
Service Need
Participant Identified Corridors
DOT/NYCT Identified Corridors
Extension
Study Area
1. LaGuardia/East Elmhurst Corridor2. Middle Village Corridor 3. Utopia/Fresh Meadows Corridor4. Hillside Avenue/Jamaica Avenue Corridor5. Southeast Queens Corridor6. Flushing to Jamaica Corridor7. Queens-Manhattan Connections8. Long Island Expressway – express bus corridor 9. Long Island City East River Waterfront Corridor 10. Northern Boulevard Extensions11. Woodhaven Boulevard Extension
10 10
11
Queens service needs
19
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
staten Island oVeRall TRends • ManyparticipantsstatedthatStatenIslandersrelyon
theircarsforlocaltravel;somequestionedtheutilityofBRTonStatenIslandandsuggestedothertrafficimprovements,suchastheturninglane/trafficsignalchangesonHylanBoulevard,wouldhavegreaterbenefitsforresidents.
• Ratherthanfocusonlocaltrips,participantsempha-sizedtheneedforbetterinter-boroughtransitconnec-tions.ManyparticipantssawBRTashavinggreaterpotentialforcommuters,ratherthananoptionforlocalerrandsandintra-islandtravel.
• SuggestionsweremadeatthreetablesforatransithubatGrasmerewithconnectionstotheNorthShorecorridorandtheStatenIslandRailroad.
PRIoRITY CoRRIdoRs•HylanBoulevard
- Thiscorridorreceivedattentionatalltables,butsomeparticipantsfeltthataBRTroutewasunnec-essarybecauseofrecentimprovementstotrafficsignaltiming.
- ParticipantssuggestedextensionstoBayonneandtoRichmondAvenue.
•NorthShoreCorridor- Anumberofparticipantswereinterestedinstimulat-ingeconomicdevelopmentinthisareawitha BRTroute.ParticipantsidentifiedRichmondTerraceandSnugHarborasgrowthareasfordevelopmentandtourism.
- Participantssuggestedextensionssouthtothe TeleportorFreshKills,aswellasconnectionstoNJTransit’sHudsonBergenLightRail(HBLR)inBayonne.
•BayonneConnection- ParticipantssuggestedbetterconnectionstoBayonneandtoHBLRatallfivetables.
20
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
S79SBS
1
2
3
Underserved Area
Service Need
Participant Identified Corridors
DOT/NYCT Identified Corridors
Extension
Phase I BRT Route
1. North Shore Corridor2. West Shore Corridor3. Staten Island Expressway – express bus corridor4. Bayonne Extensions
4
4
staten Island service needs
21
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
feature feedback Comments
Frequentservice Overwhelminglysupported Participantsexpressedadesireforbusservicethatoperatedona5-10minutefrequency.
Subway-stylestationspacing Generallysupported Manyparticipantsfeltthisfeaturewouldspeedupservice,butsupporthingedonpreservationoflocalservice,particularlyforelderlyanddisabledriders.
TransitSignalPriority Generallysupported Someparticipantsexpressedconcernsoverpedestriananddriversafety.Othersstatedthatthisfeaturewouldreducebusdelays.
Off-boardfarepayment Generallysupported Manyparticipantsfeltthisfeaturewouldspeeduptheboardingprocess.Someparticipantsexpressedconcernsoverfareevasion,safety,andmachinereliability.
Buslanesandbusways Generallysupported Someparticipantsstatedthatthisfeaturewouldspeedbusesthroughtraffic.Otherparticipantsexpressedconcernsovertraffic,parking,safety,andeffectiveness.
sPeed and RelIabIlITY feaTUResAll speed and reliability features—frequent service, sub-way-stylestationspacing, transitsignalpriority,off-boardfarepayment,andbuslanesandbusways—receivedmostlypositive feedback. The most common positive commentsraisedacrossalltheworkshopsincluded:
• FrequentService:participantsconsistentlyidentifiedthisastheirmostpopularfeature.Participantsexpressedadesireforbusesthatarrivedevery5to10minutes.
• Off-BoardFarePayment:participantsstatedthatall-doorboardingwouldspeeduptheboarding
processandreducelines.Also,busdriverswouldnothavetocollectfares,whichwouldincreasetheirsafety.Themostcommonconcernsraisedacrossalltheworkshopsincluded:concernsaboutthepotentialforfareevasionandaboutpotentialproblemscausedbybrokenmachinesandconfusedcustomers.
• BusLanesandBusways:participantsfellintotwogeneralgroups:(1)thosewhowereprimarilycon-cernedthatthebuslaneoptionswouldnotbeeffec-tiveduetoenforcementproblems,and(2)thosewhowereprimarilyconcernedoverthetraffic,parking,andsafetyimpactsofallthreetreatments.
Participant feedback on bRT featuresTheBRTfeaturesgameboardexercise,describedinsectionI,wasdesignedtoeducateparticipantsaboutthefeaturesthatmakeupBRTandtosolicitparticipantfeedbackonthosefeatures.Participantfeedbackwascapturedinthreeways:questionnaireresponses,stickervotesonthegameboards,andcommentsrecordedbythenote-takers.
22
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
CoMfoRT and ConVenIenCe feaTURes TheBRTfeaturesgameboardexercise,describedinsectionI,wasdesignedtoeducateparticipantsaboutthefeaturesthatmakeupBRTandtosolicitparticipantfeedbackonthosefeatures.Participantfeedbackwascapturedinthreeways:questionnaireresponses,stickervotesonthegameboards,andcommentsrecordedbythenote-takers.
feature feedback Comments
Realtimebusarrivalinformation Mostpopular Thiswasoverwhelminglythemostpopularfeatureamongparticipants.
BRTvehicles Secondmostpopular Participantsexpressedsupportforlow-floorvehiclesandnear-levelboarding.
Enhancedstations Generallynotimportant Mostparticipantsindicatedthiswaslessimportantandthatfundsshouldbetargetedelsewhere.
• Real-timebusarrival informationwasbyfarthemostpopularfeatureamongallworkshopparticipants.Par-ticipantsfeltthisfeaturewouldhelpbusriderstobetterplantheirtrip.Itwouldalsogiveriderstheflexibilitytochooseadifferentmode,suchasthesubwayorwalk-ing,ifthenextbuswasseveralminutesaway.
• BRTvehicleswerealsopopular,andanumberofpar-ticipants stated that low-floor buses and near-levelboardingwouldbothspeedbusesandaidtheelderlyanddisabledriders.
• Enhanced stations were a distant third; many par-ticipants felt that fundsavailable for improvingbusservicewould be better spent on other features ormoreservice.
Participant feedback on bus lane and busway designsThe bus lanes and busways exercise, described in section I, was designed to educate participants about differentBRTrunningwaysdesignoptionsandtosolicitparticipantfeedbackonthoseoptions.Participantswerepresentedwiththreeoptions:
(1)asamplecurbsidelanedesign;(2) asampleoffsetbuslanedesign,and (3) asamplebusway.Participantfeedbackwascapturedinthreeways:questionnaireresponses,stickervotesonthephoto-basedrenderingsofthethreebuslaneandbuswayoptions,andcommentsrecordedbythenote-takers.
23
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
oVeRall CoMMenTs• Participantsvoicedsupportfortheimplementationof
buslanesandbuswayswhenbroadlydefined.Manyparticipantsstatedthatbuslanesandbuswayswouldspeedupbusservicebyhelpingbusestoavoidtraf-fic.Whenitcametospecifictreatments,however,anumberofparticipantsraisedconcerns.
• Notreatmentwastheclearfavoriteamongpartici-pants,althoughcurbsidelanesweremostoftentheleastpopulartreatment.ParticipantsattheManhattanworkshopweremorelikelythanparticipantsattheotherworkshopstosupportbusways.
• Participantsraisedanumberofconcernsregardingallthreeconfigurations,includingimpactsontrafficandparkingavailability,effectivenessofbuslaneswithoutconsistentenforcement,andpedestriananddriversafety.
• Giventhecomplexityofthedesignsandtheshorttimeperiodavailableforthisexercise,somepartici-pantshaddifficultygraspinghoweachofthetreat-mentswouldwork.SomeofthedesignswereseenasunfamiliarandpotentiallyconfusingintheNewYorkenvironment.
Row approach feedback Comments
CurbsideLane Roughlyequalnumberofposi-tiveandnegativeresponses
• Familiartomostpeople• Concernsoverimpactsontrucksanddeliveries• Concernsoverlossofparkingspacesandimpactsonretailers• Concernsthatvehicleswouldblockthelaneandthat
thedesignisdifficulttoenforce• Rightturnconflicts
Off-SetLane Positiveonbalance,butwithasignificantnumberofnegativeresponses
• Retainsparkingspacesanddeliveryaccessfortrucks• Reducesroadcapacity• Difficulttoenforce• Parallelparkingconflicts• Pedestriansafetyconcerns• Rightturnconflicts
Busway Positiveonbalance,butwithasignificantnumberofnegativere-sponses;Manhattanparticipantsweremorelikelytofavor
• Easiertoenforce• Willmovebusesthefastest• Parkinganddeliveryimpacts• Pedestriansafety• Unsafe/confusing• Dislikeofone-wayconversionoption
24
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT
answer Responses Percentage
SupportBRTexpansion 185 74%
DonotsupportBRTexpansion 5 2%
SupportBRTexpansionwithConcerns 59 24%
overall Reaction to bRT and the workshopssUPPoRT foR bRTAttheendoftheworkshop,participantswereaskedinthequestionnairewhetherornottheywouldsupportadditionalBRTroutesacrossNewYorkCity.ParticipantsexpressedoverwhelmingsupportforexpandingBRT.
feedbaCk on The woRkshoPsResponsetotheworkshopfromparticipantswasverypos-itive,withmany indicating“nothing”under the“whatdidyounotlike?”question.Participantslikedthevisualmateri-als,theinteractivenatureoftheworkshops,
andtheopportunitytohavetheirvoicesheard.Afewpar-ticipants expressed concern that there was insufficienttime allotted to cover a complex subject and that someparticipantstendedtomonopolizethediscussion.
25
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II: PUBLIc INPUT cHAPTER 2 | WoRkSHoP fINDINgS
26
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
III. ResUlT of The onlIne bRT sURVeY
backgroundFrom June to July 2009, theNewYorkCity Departmentof Transportation (DOT) and MTA New York City Transit(NYCT)conductedanonlinesurvey for theBRTPhase IIproject.Thesurvey, implementedusingSurveyMonkey,acommercialprovider,wasaself-selectedsampleandsimi-larinstructureandcontenttothecity-wideBRTPhaseIIworkshops(conductedinMayandJuneof2009).AlinktothesurveywasprovidedonNYCDOT’swebsite.AsofJuly15,2009,652usershadcompleted thesurvey.Thesur-veybeganwithquestionsonboroughofresidence,mostfrequentlyusedmodeoftransportation,andweeklynum-berofbusrides.BRTspecificquestionswereaskedaboutcomfort,speed,andreliabilityfeatures,preferredbuslane
configurations,andtherankingsofpotentialBRTcorridorsineachborough.Opportunity foropen-endedcommentswasprovidedperiodicallythroughoutthesurvey.
ResPondenT ChaRaCTeRIsTICs While the questions about borough and neighborhoodwereoptional, about95%of respondentsnamedoneofthefiveboroughsastheirplaceofresidence.Inaddition,89%ofrespondentsvoluntarilyprovidedtheirzipcode,al-lowingresponseratestobepartiallytrackedbygeographicarea.(seemapatleft)
The survey asked respondents which mode they usedmostfrequentlyfortravelwithintheirboroughofresidence.Incontrasttotheworkshops,themostcommonresponsewasthesubway.Amongsurveyrespondents,Bronxresi-dentsweremostlikelytogetaroundbylocalbus,Brooklynresidentsbybicycle,Manhattanresidentsbysubway,andQueensandStatenIslandresidentsbycar.Giventheavail-abledataonmodeshareinNewYorkCity,itislikelythatbusridersandcyclistswereover-representedintheBRTSurvey,whiledriverswereunder-represented.
SurveyRespondentsbyzipcode.
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
27
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgScHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
Primary Mode for Intra-boro Trips
Intra-boro transportation bicycle Car express bus local bus subway walking other
Bronx 7% 13% 13% 32% 23% 13% 0%
Brooklyn 29% 7% 2% 15% 27% 20% 0%
Manhattan 13% 0% 1% 18% 55% 13% 1%
Queens 10% 24% 5% 23% 22% 16% 0%
StatenIsland 0% 56% 6% 31% 0% 6% 0%
Overall 17% 9% 3% 18% 37% 16% 1%
survey Response Rates by borough
boroughs % of survey Respondants
Bronx 5%
Brooklyn 32%
Manhattan 40%
Queens 16%
StatenIs. 2%
Total 95%
28
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
bus Usage Trips by borough
borough <1 day per week 1-3 days per week 4-7 days per week
Bronx 32% 16% 52%
Brooklyn 57% 29% 15%
Manhattan 38% 35% 27%
Queens 44% 21% 35%
StatenIs. 25% 19% 56%
Total 44% 30% 26%
bUs Usage Respondentswerethenaskedhowfrequentlytheyridethebus.Overallbusridershiptrendsbyboroughtendedtore-flectthemodalsplitsinthepriorquestion.BronxandStatenIslandrespondentsrodethebusthemostfrequently,withoverhalfofrespondentsfromtheseboroughsridingfourtosevendaysperweek.Allotherboroughswereweightedtowardsthelowendoftherange,with57%ofBrooklynrespondentsridingthebuslessthanonceperweek.
29
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
bRT features
borough speed & reliability feature: Most Popular
Convenience feature: Preferred option
bus lane configuration: Most Popular
Bronx TSP Realtimebusarrivalinformation Off-setbuslane
Brooklyn Frequentservice Realtimebusarrivalinformation Busway
Manhattan Frequentservice Realtimebusarrivalinformation Off-setbuslane
Queens Frequentservice/busways Realtimebusarrivalinformation Off-setbuslane
StatenIsland Frequentservice Realtimebusarrivalinformation Off-setbuslane/Busway(Tie)
Overall Frequentservice Realtimebusarrivalinformation Off-setbuslane
bRT features
TheBRTfeaturessectionaskedrespondentsquestionsaboutthreecategoriesofBRTfeatures:speedandreliability,com-fortandconvenience,andbuslaneconfiguration.Methodologiesvariedslightlyforeachsection,withrespondentsaskedtochoose“like,”“dislike,”or“notimportant”forthespeedandreliabilityfeatures,tochoosetheir“mostimportant”comfortandconveniencefeature,andtorespondwitheither“like”or“dislike”andopenendedcommentstoeachofthreepossiblebuslaneconfigurations.
30
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
sPeed and RelabIlITYInthe“SpeedandReliability”section,“frequentservice”had themost positive responses (95%approval),while“subway-like spacing” had themost negative response(14%ofrespondentsdisapproved).
CoMfoRT and ConVenIenCe Inthe“ComfortandConvenience”section,respondentsoverwhelmingly preferred real-time bus information(59%), to BRT vehicles (27%) and enhanced stations(14%).Thisorderofpreferencewasmaintainedthrough-outallboroughs.
bUs lanes and bUswaY Curbsidebuslanesreceivedpositivemarksfortheirap-parenteaseof implementationandpedestriansafety (inthatpassengersdon’thavetocrossthestreet toboardthebus).Theoverwhelmingmajorityofcomments,how-ever,expressedconcernsthata lackofproperenforce-ment or physical separation of the laneswould lead tofrequent violations bymoving and idling vehicles. As aresult,many respondents were skeptical that the laneswoulddemonstratesignificantgainsinspeedorservice.Many comments also demonstrated concern over thecompetition between cyclists and buses for space un-der this configuration.Others expressed concerns overthe lackofadequatespace forparkingordeliveries,orcited safety concernsovermoving vehicles adjacent tocrowded pedestrian areas. The curbside configurationreceivedthemoststronglynegativeresponse,with40%ofrespondentsrespondingagainstit.Amongpedestriansandcyclists, thenumberof negative responses rose toabove50%.
Theoffsetbuslanefaredbetterthanthecurbsidearrange-ment,withmanypositivecommentspraisingthemainte-nance of curbside parking/delivery area.Many also feltthatthisarrangementwouldbesaferforpedestriansthancurbside lanes. Respondents were again skeptical thatthe lanewould remainclearofdoubleparkedcars anddeliveryvehicleswithoutadequateenforcement,andthatcarsgetting intoandoutof theadjacent spaceswouldblock the lane or risk being “clipped” by an oncomingbus.Again,duetothehighproportionofcycliststakingthesurvey,concernsforencroachmentonbikelanesandgeneralcyclingsafetywerevoiced.
The busway option received themost strongly positivecomments.Manycommentsreferredtothisas“thebestoption,” evoking comparisons to systems in Curitiba,Melbourne,Boston,andBerlin.Cyclingsafetycomplaintsdropped off, although there were several complaintsabout the absence of a bike lane in the photo simula-tion. Comments about parking or delivery enforcementalsodroppeddramatically.Thenegativecommentsweredominated by dislike for having to cross the street tocatch the bus, and the safety concerns when jaywalk-ingorrunningtocatchthebus.SomerespondentsalsoexpressedskepticismattheabilityforthisconfigurationtobewidelyimplementedinNewYork,especiallyinMan-hattanandStatenIsland.
31
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
The bronx
The bronx Transit service needs
bronx Ranking by allRespondents
Ranking byborough Residents
A.WebsterAve./ThirdAve.Corridor:underservedarea 1 1
B.SoundviewCorridor:underservedarea 2 2
C.BrucknerExpresswayCorridor:highvolumeexpressbuscorridor 4 4
D.MajorDeeganExpresswayCorridor:highvolumeexpressbuscorridor 3 3
In the Bronx, the Webster Avenue/Third Avenue Corridor received the highest score, followed by the SoundviewCorridor.TheGrandConcoursecameupfrequentlyasanalternativecorridorinthecomments.Severalrespondentsalsounderscoredtheneedforgreaterinter-boroughconnectivity.
service needsIn evaluating the service needs corridor section, choic-es ranked first by respondentswere given three points,choices ranked second were awarded two points, andchoicesrankedthirdwereawardedonepoint.Resultsbyborough are presented in the following pages. In some
cases, relative rankings of corridors changed amongthose respondents residing in a given borough versuscitywide response rates. In these cases, deviations arenoted. Respondents were also given space to providecommentsorproposeadditionalcorridorsnotconsideredinthesurvey.
32
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
Bx12 SBS
B
A
CD
Underserved Area
Service Need
Phase I BRT Route
bronx service needs
33
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
brooklyn
brooklyn Transit service needs
brooklyn Ranking by allRespondents
Ranking byborough Residents
A.UticaAvenueCorridor/EasternBrooklynNorth-SouthCorridor:underservedarea
1 1
B.SouthernBrooklynEast-WestCorridor:difficulttrip 5 5
C.CentralBrooklynEast-WestCorridor:difficulttrip 2 2
D.BushwicktoDowntownBrooklynCorridor:difficulttrip 4 4
E.WilliamsburgEastRiverWaterfrontCorridor:growtharea 6 6
F.GowanusExpresswayCorridor:highvolumeexpressbuscorridor 2 3
In Brooklyn, the Utica Avenue Corridor/Eastern Brooklyn North-South Corridor ranked the highest, with theCentral Brooklyn East-West Corridor and the Gowanus Expressway Corridor tied for second. Among Brook-lyn residents, theCentral Brooklyn East-West Corridorwas preferred to theGowanus ExpresswayCorridor. Com-ments emphasized the need for inter-borough connections. Alternative routes and neighborhoods that fre-quentlyappeared included:FlatbushAvenue,service toRedHook,andconnectingWilliamsburg tootherBrooklynneighborhoods.Specifically,therewereanumberofcommentsthatfocusedeitheronconnectingWilliamsburgtoParkSlope,orstatedthatthewaterfrontcorridorwouldbemoreusefulif itconnectedtoeitherLongIslandCityorotherpartsofBrooklyn.
34
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
B44 SBS
C
E
D
B
F
Underserved Area
Service Need
Phase I BRT Route
A
brooklyn service needs
35
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
Manhattan
Manhattan Transit service needs
Manhattan Ranking by allRespondents
Ranking byborough Residents
A.125thStreetCrosstownCorridor:difficulttrip 3 3
B.UpperWestSide/UpperEastSideCrosstownCorridor:difficulttrip 2 1
C.14thStreetCrosstownCorridor:difficulttrip 1 2
D.WestSideCorridor:subwaycrowding 4 4
In Manhattan, the 14th Street Crosstown Corridor was ranked the highest among all respondents, followed by theUpper West Side/Upper East Side Crosstown corridor. Manhattan residents, however, preferred the Upper WestSide/Upper East Side route to the 14th Street route. Many comments focused on developing a Midtown cross-town route, such as 57th, 42nd, or 34th Street. An additional group focused on other crosstown corridors—frequently23rdStreetorHoustonStreet.Alargeportionofthecommentssuggestedcorridorsalreadyunderconsiderationordevelopment forBRTPhase I, suchas theFirstAvenue/SecondAvenuecorridor, theFifth/MadisonCorridor,andthe34thStreetTransitway.Therewasanadditionaltrendtowardsrequestingvarious“diagonal”routesthroughoutManhattanaswell,suchasLowerEastSidetotheWestVillage,theUpperEastSidetotheWestVillage,andWashingtonHeightsorInwoodtotheUpperEastSide.Alargenumberofrespondentsagainstatedadesiretoseemoreinter-boroughBRTroutes.
36
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
Bx12 SBS
A
B
C
4
M34 SBS
Service Need
Phase I BRT Route
M15 SBS
D
Manhattan service needs
37
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
Queens
Queens Transit service needs
Queens Ranking by allRespondents
Ranking byborough Residents
A.LaGuardiaAirport/EastElmhurstCorridor:underservedarea 1 3
B.MiddleVillageCorridor:underservedarea 8 5
C.UtopiaParkway/FreshMeadowsCorridor:underservedarea 6 7
D.JamaicaAvenues/HillsideAvenueCorridor:underservedarea 5 8
E.SoutheastQueensCorridor:underservedarea 6 6
F.JamaicatoFlushingCorridor:difficulttrip 3 4
G.Queens-ManhattanConnectionsCorridor:subwaycrowding 4 1
H.LongIslandExpresswayCorridor:highvolumeexpressbuscorridor
2 1
I.LongIslandCityEastRiverWaterfrontCorridor:growtharea 9 9
Overall responses for theQueenscorridors rankedtheLaGuardiaAirport/EastElmhurstCorridorfirst, followedbytheLong Island Expressway corridor. Among residents, however, theQueens-ManhattanConnectionsCorridorwas tiedforfirstwith theLong IslandExpresswayCorridor, followedby theLaGuardiacorridor.Comments largely focusedonconnectionstoLaGuardiaandJFKairports,connectionstoManhattanandotherboroughs,andBRTonQueensBoule-vardandNorthernBoulevard.
38
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
B D
E
F
G
H
I
C
Underserved Area
Service Need
Study Area
JamaicaStudy
A
Queens service needs
39
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
staten Island
staten Island Transit service needs
staten Island Ranking by allRespondents
Ranking byborough Residents
A.NorthShoreCorridor:growtharea 2 2
B.WestShoreCorridor:growtharea 3 3
C.TheStatenIslandExpresswayCorridor:highvolumeexpressbuscorridor
1 1
InStatenIsland,theStatenIslandExpresswayCorridorrankedfirst, followedbytheNorthShoreCorridor.Commentsfor Staten Island were limited to a few areas: connections to New Jersey and Brooklyn, and the use of VictoryBoulevardasapotentialBRTcorridor.
40
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
S79SBS
A
B
C
Underserved Area
Service Need
Phase I BRT Route
staten Island service needs
41
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II cHAPTER 3 | oNLINE BRT SURvEy fINDINgS
overall support Overall,supportforexpandingBRTinnewYorkCitywasstrong: 97% of respondents expressed some level ofsupport for additionalBRT routes. 74%of respondentssupported additional BRT routes without qualification,while 23% of respondents supportedmore BRT routesbut had some concerns. Of the respondents that sup-portedBRTwithreservations,therewereseveralpatternsthatemerged.Thelargestconcerndealtwithasegmentof thesurveyedpopulationthatstrongly felt thatBRT isinferiortolightrailandthatinvestmentshouldberead-justedaccordingly.OtherssupportBRT,butonly ifbus-waysor“strongBRT” is implementedratherthan“BRT-lite.”OthersdoubtedthatthesystemwouldbeeffectivewithoutsteppingupNYPDenforcementofbuslaneviola-tors.Manyexpressedconcernforothermodes,eitherforparkingandtrafficissues,orforbicyclelanesandpedes-triansafety.AsmallergroupofrespondentsworriedthatBRTwouldcomeattheexpenseoflocalservice.
additional CommentsAdditional comments largely echoed the concernsvoiced earlier in the survey, including a preference forlight rail or subway expansion, a concern for bicyclesafetyandinfrastructure,andadesiretosee“trueBRT”rather than small changes branded as BRT. The larg-est single group of commentators—about one third ofall comments made—expressed their support for BRTexpansion.Asmallsubsetof theseexpressedthebeliefthatevensomeofthe improvements intheoverallBRT/SBS package would make a major difference on bustransitinNewYorkCity.
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II
appendix a: list of organizations & elected officials Represented at the workshops
eleCTed offICIals RePResenTed OfficeofStateAssemblymanJonathanBingOfficeofStateAssemblymanMatthewTitoneOfficeofStateAssemblymanMicahKellnerOfficeofStateAssemblymanMichaelBenedettoOfficeofStateAssemblymanSheldonSilverOfficeofStateAssemblywomanHelenWeinsteinOfficeofStateAssemblywomanJaneleHyer-SpencerOfficeofCongressmanMichaelMcMahonOfficeofCityCouncilmemberDanielGarodnickOfficeofCityCouncilmanJamesOddoOfficeofCityCouncilmanKennethMitchellOfficeofCityCouncilmemberElizabethCrowleyOfficeofCityCouncilmemberJamesVaccaOfficeofManhattanBoroughPresidentScottStringerOfficeofStateSenatorDianeSavinoOfficeofStateSenatorHiramMonserrateOfficeofStateSenatorJeffKleinOfficeofStateSenatorJoséSerranoOfficeofStateSenatorShirleyHuntleyOfficeofStateSenatorJohnSampsonOfficeofStateSenatorLizKruegerOfficeoftheBronxBoroughPresidentRubenDiazJr.OfficeoftheQueensBoroughPresidentHelenC.MarshallOfficeoftheStatenIslandBoroughPresidentJamesP.Molinaro
CoMMUnITY boaRds RePResenTed BronxCommunityBoard1BronxCommunityBoard7BrooklynCommunityBoard17ManhattanCommunityBoard4ManhattanCommunityBoard6ManhattanCommunityBoard8QueensCommunityBoard3QueensCommunityBoard5QueensCommunityBoard8QueensCommunityBoard12QueensCommunityBoard13StatenIslandCommunityBoard3TransportationCommittee
CoMMUnITY, adVoCaCY, and laboR oRganIzaTIons RePResenTed BailOutthePeopleMovementCatholicCharitiesCentroHispanoCuzcaltánCOMMUTECoalitionDC37/Local1359DisabledRidersCoalitionEast79thStreetNeighborhoodAssociationFundforPublicHealthHudsonGuildJacksonHeightsBeautificationGroupKewGardensHillsCivicAssociation
42
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II APPENDIx A: LIST of oRgANIZATIoNS & ELEcTED offIcIALS REPRESENTED AT THE WoRkSHoPS
43
MetropolitanCouncilofLowVisionIndividualsNewYorkCityTransitRidersCouncilNewYorkPublicInterestResearchGroupNosQuedamosParkSlopeCivicCouncilPermanentCitizensAdvisoryCommitteetotheMTAPrattCenterforCommunityDevelopmentQueensCommunityHouseQueensVillageRepublicanClubStraphangersCampaignSustainableSouthBronxTheInstituteforTransportationandDevelopmentPolicyThePointCDCTransitWorkersUnionTransportationAlternativesTri-StateTransportationCampaignWestHarlemMorningsideHeightsSanitationCoalitionYouthMinistriesforPeace&Justice
bUsIness gRoUPs RePResenTed34thStreetPartnershipDowntownAllianceDowntownBrooklynPartnershipNostrandAvenueMerchantsAssociationSunnysideChamberofCommerce
goVeRnMenT agenCIes RePResenTed NYCDepartmentofCityPlanningTransportationDivisionNYCDepartmentofEducationNewYorkStateDepartmentofTransportationPortAuthorityofNewYorkandNewJerseyStatenIslandEconomicDevelopmentCorporation
news oRganIzaTIons In aTTendanCe BrooklynPaperManhattanMediaQueensChronicleTheIndependent
oTheR GreenMapSystemHRAIS364LaGuardiaCommunityCollege
45
INTRoDUcTIoN To BUS RAPID TRANSIT PHASE II APPENDIx B: WoRkSHoP mATERIALS