Home Buses
Category:

Buses

Buses

MTA set to order 328 buses from Nova

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 25, 2011

The MTA has entered into a non-competitive deal with Nova Bus LFS to purchase 328 low-floor articulated clean diesel buses for just over $700,000 per bus. The summary, found on page 79 of today’s MTA Board books, notes that this price is $14,000 lower per bus than Nova had originally proposed. This latest order comes on the heels of a 90-bus trial from 2010, and the MTA says the results of the pilot were “very favorable.”

According to the board documents, these new articulated buses will be delivered from August 2011 through April 2013, and some bus routes may see less service as a result. The document explains:

The majority of these buses will be used to replace high floor articulated buses which have reached the end of their 12 year useful life and been in service since 1998 (20 buses) and 2000 (260 buses); the remaining 48 will be used to expand ariculated bus service throughout the 5 boroughs. Converting a route to articulated bus operation has an immediate impact on operating costs because 4 standard buses are replaced with 3 articulated buses resulting in a reduction in operator-related costs, fewer miles being driven and a need for fewer buses to meet peak service requirements.

The project has a local component as well as all of the buses will be manufactured upstate in Plattsburgh, New York. Finally, the MTA says it will soon open a competitive bidding process for an even larger order of articulated buses. New Flyer is currently testing its own low floor articulated clean disel bus, and once those vehicles pass their structural integrity tests, Transit will order a 90-bus pilot. If those buses are successful on the city streets, it will open the RFP process for even more new buses.

58 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BusesMTA Absurdity

Report: New buses too short, low on legroom

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 16, 2011

One of the bigger comfort issues with New York City subway rolling stock prior to the R142 series concerned the bucket seats. Introduced in the mid-1980s, these seats were designed by people far skinnier than the average American, and straphangers would either squish themselves in or sacrifice potential seating space. When bench seats returned, so did a certain level of comfort. Unfortunately, the city’s bus fleet is a different story all together.

Currently, the buses still enjoy bucket seats not wide for anyone who weighs much more than 110 pounds, and on the newer model, legroom is nearly non-existent. If I’m riding the B63 or B67, I try to find side-facing seats so that my knees don’t hit the back of the seat in front of me, and I’m of average height. I can’t imagine how anyone larger than I am feels.

With new buses hitting the streets, the MTA had a chance to address these problems, but according to a report in The Post, they have not done so yet. Heather Haddon writes:

The MTA’s newest buses have New Yorkers scratching their heads at the numskull design, where riders 5-foot-2 or taller can easily hit their noggins on the low roofs. The Nova Diesel Standards are 61.5 inches high at their lowest point along the rear windows, as compared to 69 inches in the Nova RTS buses dating from the late 1990s. The older models don’t have interior steps leading to the back section in the rear…

A group of eight seats in the back are also dramatically short on legroom, with 15 inches of space total. Passengers sit facing each other in these intimate quarters, leaving 7.5 inches of space per person. The old RTS buses gave 10 inches of space for riders. The strange setup forces the long-legged to sprawl themselves into the aisle, The Post observed during a recent ride…

MTA spokeswoman Deirdre Parker said that the reduced headroom is necessary to accommodate power and suspension systems. The buses are lower to the ground, making boarding quicker and eliminating the temperamental wheelchair lifts used in the older buses, she said.

The MTA hasn’t committed to ordering a full slate of new buses yet, but even if 90 arrive on the city streets with these legroom issues, that’s too many. Passenger comfort and convenience, often overlooked by the MTA, is apparently again being forgotten in the rush to purchase new equipment.

18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BusesSubway Maps

Building a better bus map

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 13, 2011

Over the past few years, I’ve often examined the debate surrounding the New York City subway map. The map is far from perfect, and functionality and form often fight it out with design and readability emerging as the losers. While recent redesigns have pared down the extraneous information, the subway map is an incomplete glimpse at the subway system as it runs during certain hours of the day. For all of that, the bus maps are even worse.

Most notably is a lack of a comprehensive bus map. There is no publicly available map that unites bus service in all five boroughs. Instead, the maps focus on individual boroughs with some interborough express bus service highlighted as well. Even still, they are borderline illegible. Take a look, for instance, at the inset of Downtown Brooklyn available on the latest version of the borough-based bus:

It’s no wonder New Yorkers often find the bus system so hard to untangle when the visual representations do nothing to help. It’s almost easier to say what’s right about this map than what’s wrong. The New York City grid is very easy to follow here. Otherwise, colors, lines, shapes, arrows and numbers all bleed together to create something often harder to unpack that even the world’s toughest maze.

These days, it seems as though the MTA has given up on the bus map. The notes on the back are as tough to follow as the schematic on the front, and those in the city who rely on the buses learn their routes through either trial and error or the the strip maps on the bus poles. Admittedly, it’s tough to represent the bus system graphically, but with no rhyme or reason to the map’s colors, the current iteration fails.

Enter Anthony Denaro. The third-generation New Yorker has redesigned the Brooklyn bus map to show how one might better illustrate the system. Noting that the current map “lacks visual and operational organization strategy” and “underplays transfers with subway stations,” he introduces a map simplified by hub. The hubs are centered around Williamsburg, Ridgewood, East New York, Downtown, Bay Ridge, and Coney Island, and buses are grouped by color. “Riders,” he writes, “can make an approximation that a line will travel towards their neighborhood and ‘localizes’ those routes to their neighborhoods.”

Here’s the same Downtown Brooklyn inset:

What this move loses in geographical accuracy it more than makes up for in terms of readability. Overall, it’s much easier to trace the path of a bus and get a general sense of where the route will take a potential rider. Furthermore, instead of a confusing mass of information on the back, Denaro’s map offers neighborhood insets too. Here’s Williamsburg with subway transfers shown:

Right now, it’s clearly a work in progress, but it highlights a problem often ignored. If people can’t understand the bus system, they’re apt simply to ignore it. By presenting a map that makes more sense — one that is organized and color-coded — the MTA could indirectly encourage potential riders to hop on the bus. After all, knowing where you’re going is half the battle.

28 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

MTA Board votes to terminate LI Bus contract

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on April 28, 2011

Nassau County has not invested in its own bus system. (Graph via TSTC)

Following months of political maneuvering between Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano and the MTA over Nassau County bus service, which included a last-minute reprieve earlier this month, the authority’s board has voted to terminate its agreement with the county at the end of the year. Barring any unforeseen circumstances, the MTA will, after 40 years, cease operating the county’s bus service following a bitter dispute over payments.

Board members, according to numerous reports over the past few months, are incensed at the county — one of the richest in the state — for its failure to fund transit, and those who spoke with reporters did not mince their words. “To take care of the riders of Nassau County, the MTA has provided $140 million, which has not been provided to the riders of Suffolk County, Westchester County, Dutchess County, Rockland County, Orange County, Putnam County and the City of New York for the bus systems that we took over,” Mitchell Pally, an MTA board member and Suffolk County resident said. “I think it’s clear to say that the only people who have been protecting the riders for the last 10 years in Nassau County is this board, not Nassau County.”

This vote comes after months of public wrangling between Mangano and the MTA, and it has not been a good experience for Long Island Bus riders. When the MTA first asked Nassau County to contribute to bus service, Mangano essentially called for Jay Walder’s resignation. The county, it seems, wanted its bus service without paying for it. After the MTA voted to terminate service this month, state representatives pushed through a plan in Albany to siphon some state capital funds to cover operating costs for the remainder of the year. Now the deal will be dead come December 31.

Mangano, of course, tried his typical appeal to the “bloated bureaucracy.” It might ring true with partisan voters, but it’s an empty threat considering the state of Long Island Bus funding. “It’s a sad day in America when a government agency such as the MTA chooses to maintain its bloated bureaucracy over the services it is charged to provide its residents,” he said. “Because the MTA has failed taxpayers time and time again, Nassau County will move forward with a public-private partnership that maintains bus service without demanding an additional $26 million from taxpayers. The MTA’s monopoly over transportation in Nassau County ends now.”

Of course, one might argue that it is a sad day in America with government officials want other county’s taxpayers to foot the bill for $26 million worth of bus service for someone else’s residents. One could say it is a sad day when zeroing out Nassau County’s financial reserves on the backs of bus riders becomes a political game. Nassau County, remember, contributed just $9.1 million toward the $140 million it costs to operate the county’s bus system, and the remainder has to come out of someone else’s pocket.

With the vote today, the MTA is being more than generous with Nassau County. The contract requires just 60 days’ notice of termination, but the board is giving the county an extra eight months to finalize privatization plans. Nassau County has been working toward a private solution since early fall, but no concrete proposals have materialized. County officials still maintain they can find a carrier to provide the same comprehensive bus service at lower costs than the MTA does, but my gut feeling is that the private solution will lead to numerous cuts of unprofitable routes or more pressure on Nassau County to pony up for transit service.

While I hate to draw too many sweeping conclusions from this saga, it’s hard not to see Nassau County’s maneuverings as indicative of transit policy throughout New York. Politicians want more and better service on the one hand, and they want to contribute fewer and fewer dollars to the operating costs on the other. The people who end up suffering the most are the riders who can least afford it.

21 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

Video of the Day: Trike vs. M42 bus

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on April 6, 2011

Here’s a silly little stunt that makes a fairly obvious point: Mark Malkoff, a Queens filmmaker, raced an M42 bus from 10th Ave. to Madison Ave. and won. That’s not so much of an accomplishment until you realize that he did so on a child’s Big Wheel tricycle.

The Daily News has more on the race:

The 5-foot-7, 131-pound Malkoff set out at 1:18 p.m on Feb. 17 to test his pedal power against the MTA behemoth. Riding a Razor Rip Rider 360 he ordered off Amazon for $80, Malkoff waited for his unsuspecting opponent at the traffic light at 10th Ave. and 42nd St. “Once the green light went, the bus was destroying me,” Malkoff said. “Then we were neck and neck for a while, and suddenly I was able to propel myself faster.”

Wearing a bicycle helmet, he made sure to obey all traffic signals as he rode in the street. “I was nervous about what the police would think, but … they just kind of smiled,” he said.

He mounted a flip-camera to the handlebars and had a team of camera operators following him as he reached speeds of 4.7 mph. Malkoff made it to Madison Ave. in 12 minutes and 42 seconds. The bus took 15 minutes and 20 seconds to cover the same distance at an average of 3.9 mph.

Those who watch the buses for a living weren’t surprised. “It’s a fact of New York life, but it’s awful,” Gene Ruissianoff said. “That bus is actually slower than a running chicken.” In fact, the Straphangers Campaign had given the M42 its Pokey Award in 2010. Between the surface congestion and the dwell times as stations as passengers dip their MetroCards, the M42 is a bus fit for a snail.

10 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

Recommended Reading: What future NYC BRT?

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on April 5, 2011

This great idea remains alive only on paper. (Image via NYC DOT)

In the wake of the death of the 34th St. Transitway, transit advocates have been down on the state of citywide bus improvements. Everyone in New York admits that buses are too slow, but an ambitious plan to bring physically separated bus lanes with dedicated rights-of-way to Midtown has been replaced by another half-hearted proposal to paint some stripes on the street and call it a bus lane.

With the demise of the Transitway, none of the Mayor’s plans to slowly bring bus improvements to the five boroughs will include a “best practices” approach to BRT. While pre-boarding fare payment plans will speed up bus dwell times, the vehicles won’t enjoy the benefits of a dedicate ROW. To improve bus service then will require stringent bus lane enforcement efforts and true signal prioritization efforts.

Over at Streetsblog, Noah Kazis took a few minutes to wonder about the future of BRT. He writes, in part:

It seems likely that without physical separation on 34th Street, there won’t be physical separation on any bus lanes implemented before the end of the Bloomberg Administration. The remaining routes in the city’s first phase of BRT rollout — on the Nostrand Avenue corridor in Brooklyn and Hylan Boulevard in Staten Island — are scheduled to debut in the next two years and do not include physically separated lanes…

“A number of the environmental and transportation groups are starting to recognize that the next administration after Bloomberg is going to have to answer to us on where they stand on these issues that have been wildly popular for New Yorkers,” said Kate Slevin of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

Though a new physically separated busway is unlikely to be constructed in the next three years, said Joan Byron of the Pratt Center for Community Development, “Planning can happen and dialogue with stakeholders can happen that make it a lot more likely that the next phase is gets built and has those features.” Byron said she hopes that the BRT team at DOT can assemble a coalition along its next routes that can politically lock in full-featured bus improvements. “There are workers and residents and employers in the outer boroughs who would love to have this problem of a Select Bus route running by their door,” she said.

To get dedicated busways, the city will have to change its outreach approach. It’s going to have engage folks like Joan Byron of the Pratt Center and work with Community Boards to explain why dedicated lanes are necessary. It’s not enough to propose these improvements by fiat, but rather, DOT must educate New Yorkers who aren’t familiar with the rationale behind transitway improvements.

For now, the 34th St. changes are a set-back, but their ramifications echo into the future. It’s not too late to bring dedicated bus lanes to the city, but it will require stronger and more inclusive leadership than what we have seen so far. To improve the buses, we’ll need it.

15 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

For Long Island Bus, a temporary reprieve

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on April 4, 2011

Nassau County has not invested in its own bus system. (Graph via TSTC)

Thanks to last-minute action by the New York State Senate, Nassau County bus riders will be spared a slate of cuts that would have decimated Long Island Bus service. On Friday, the MTA, Nassau County and Senator Republicans led by Charles Fuschillo (R, Merrick) and Jack Martins (R-C-I, Mineola) announced an $8.6 million compromise that will see the MTA receive half of the money it wanted in exchange for a commitment to keep service alive through December 31. It’s a start but only that.

“We have heard from many of our constituents that depend on Long Island Bus services to get to work, school or go shopping,” Senate Majority Leader Dean G. Skelos said in a statement. “They are very concerned that if these cuts go through, they will have no other way to get around. Fortunately, we were able to reach an agreement to avert the cuts and prevent any disruption in service. I want to thank Senator Fuschillo and Senator Martins for their leadership in responding to this issue.”

Essentially, the Senate has made $8.6 million in capital money available to the MTA for LI Bus operations. This will be added to the $52.4 million appropriate by the 2011-2012 budget for the service, and the 27 route cuts will be off the table. Nassau County though says it will still seek to remove the MTA as the service’s operator by the end of the year.

“I applaud the efforts of our Nassau County State Senators for working with me to come together in support of our residents that rely on Long Island Bus for their transportation needs,” Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano, who has called for MTA CEO and Chairman Jay Walder’s resignation over the conflict, said. “Their assistance ensures that all current bus routes will remain intact. I remain committed to fostering communication and working with the MTA to ensure a smooth transition as we enter a public-private partnership starting January 2012. This public-private partnership will enable us to provide comparable bus routes at a much more affordable rate to Nassau County taxpayers.”

Transit advocates though were less than thrilled with the news simply because Mangano’s insistence on attempting to privatize the service seems to be utterly failing. “Over the coming months, Nassau County will have to show the same type of leadership,” the Tri-State Transportation Campaign said in a statement. “The deal gives Nassau County Executive Mangano more time to come up with a workable proposal for a local transit system. None of the privatization schemes released by the county so far appear to qualify. Affordable transit that maintains access to jobs, education, and social services is critical to the county’s economy and quality of life.”

It’s tough to see where this debacle goes from here. As Jim O’Grady at Transportation Nation noted this weekend, “Nassau County is one of the richest counties in the nation, but has, over the years, run its finances into the ground.”

The county is going to have to figure out a way to either work with the MTA or find a better solution. Privatization, in the model Mangano envisions, isn’t feasible. The County will likely have to pay more for transit under a privatized solution, and it can’t continue to expect the state to bail it out when its executive starts behaving like a spoiled child who doesn’t understand his constituents’ needs or demands. For now, the bus service has been saved, and while politicians are slapping themselves on the back, this is hardly a great cause for celebration.

15 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BusesTWU

Quick Hits: Trash trains, TWU negotiations, LI Bus

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on March 28, 2011

I’ve been pretty busy lately with less time than I’d like to devote to the site. I haven’t had much time to do much long-form reporting over the last few wees, but there are still a series of newsworthy happenings. Let’s run them down.

Profiling the train that collects the trash

After much hand-wringing over the cleanliness of eating on the subway, Pete Donohue took a ride on the garbage collection train for his Daily News column this week. Deep in Brooklyn, Donohue hopped the Southern, one of eight garbage trains currently in use and rode one of the 9:30 p.m.-to-5 a.m. shifts. Transit crews, he reports, pick up 90 tons of garbage per day, and perhaps that’s why rodents are so numerous underground.

Rife: Keeping an eye on the looming labor negotiations

Up in the Hudson Valley, Judy Rife of the Times Herald-Record has her eye on the looming negotiations between the MTA and the TWU. MTA CEO Jay Walder has vowed to maintain a “net zero” increase in the cost of labor spending as the union contracts come due, and Rife wants to hold Walder to his promise. “There can’t be any increase in the value of the contract, but raises are still possible if they’re counter-balanced by other savings,” MTA spokesman Aaron Donovan said to her. This is clearly a story I’ll be following this year.

Inside the Long Island Bus battle

In the Our Towns section in The Times today, Peter Applebome profiles the LI Bus debate. The fight between Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano and the MTA is well-trodden territory for SAS readers, but essentially, the county wants the MTA to foot the operations costs for Long Island Bus despite agreeing to fund the bill itself. The MTA has proposed cutting more than half of the bus routes, and Mangano keeps making noises about privatization despite extreme skepticism.

Politicians and activists are watching this fight to see how it’s resolved. “Simply put, County Executive Mangano is dreaming,” Kate Slevin, head of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, said last week. “Let me make this clear — no other system in the country does what Mangano wants to do. Most county governments with private systems provide much more in the way of government funding, not less.”

15 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

Musings on a successful Group Ride Program

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on March 23, 2011

The TLC's Group Ride Vehicle Program didn't have to fail. (Photo via flickr user AllWaysNY)

Across the street from the my apartment is a former bus stop. The B71 used to run down Union St., but nearly nine months ago, it was the victim of the MTA’s budget cuts. At some point, a Group Ride Program stop sign popped up at the shelter, but the Taxi & Limousine Commission’s attempt at privatizing transit died an inglorious death. I never once laid eyes on a van making the Union St. run.

These past weekend, the dollar vans made the news again. In a brief item in The Post, two writers explore how commuter vans are picking up passengers. While the story seems to get one fact slightly wrong — the B doesn’t run on the weekends — its point remains the same. With the Q out of service from Coney Island to Midtown, commuter vans have picked up the slack.

Particularly at Aves. H and M, which are undergoing renovation and see no Manhattan-bound service, customers are grateful for the vans. “I don’t know what I would do without the dollar van. Sometimes they drive too fast, but the MTA bus goes too slow and stops too much,” one rider said.

So how did the T&LC get its program so wrong while private operators seemingly make it work? And can a quasi-organized dollar van program be successful in the city? Those are questions that still need answering.

A few months ago, I tried to gain some insight into the commuter van phenomenon. Cap’n Transit and I ventured to the Port Authority and hopped the vans across the river. For a few bucks, these vehicles run as local buses via the Lincoln Tunnel to Union City, West New York and points north. We rode up Bergenline Ave. and came back on JFK Boulevard. The rides are a bit sluggish, but it worked.

In particular, it worked because it adds service to areas that need it. These avenues that run parallel to Manhattan in the eastern urban areas in New Jersey are major commercial destinations, and driving is either too expensive or too much of a pain. New Jersey Transit buses serve the area, but the commuter vans provide lower-cost and more frequent options. They leave New York when they’re full and run often back into the city.

Most vital to the success of these vans though is the nature of the routes. They run what are termed feeder routes. They duplicate bus services in areas that need it and provide other connections that do not enjoy adequate mass transit access. Unlike the T&LC’s pilot program, demand is key. The B71 was eliminated because its ridership was so low. Private service introduced months later won’t solve that basic problem, but commuter vans between Chinatowns in New York City work perfectly well.

Of course, not everything is rosy for these vans. As an article in December noted, 60 percent of the commuter vans failed surprise safety inspections. The program there is loosely regulated, but riders get what they pay for.

In the city, then, the problem was one of focus. Private transit cannot replace mass transit lines eliminated due to high operating costs and low service. Rather, private transit can fill in the gaps. If the Taxi and Limousine Commission can figure out how to license a program that fills in the gaps — or if it can figure out what the gaps are first — the commuter vans can play a role in New York. Otherwise, they’ll simply show that perhaps the MTA had good reason to cut a bunch of bus routes.

9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

Amidst NIMBYs, a new look for 34th Street

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on March 15, 2011

The latest plan for 34th Street isn't nearly as ambitious as the Transitway was.

The Department of Transportation unveiled another new new look for 34th Street on Monday, and despite my earlier doom and gloom, the proposed design isn’t all bad. Despite giving more space over to cars and parking while removing many of the benefits for pedestrians, it seemingly prioritizes buses and does give more sidewalk space to those who most need it.

Per the latest DOT presentation, 34th Street’s new look will feature dedicated — but not physically separated — bus lanes as well as bus bulbs and more curbside space. Traffic will be confined to one late in each direction, and from 9th Ave. to 3rd Ave., only one side of the street will enjoy precious curbside access. Plus, the MTA will institute pre-boarding fare payment procedures this year, thus speeding up the bus in the process.

During the presentation last night, DOT officials spoke about their goals for 34th Street. As it stands right now, the street plays host to 33,000 bus riders per day, but the vehicles average only 4.5 miles per hour. It also features some of the most tourist-laden sidewalks in the city and, as the Far West Side emerges as a residential and commercial hub, will play host to future growth.

Meanwhile, with input from the community, DOT tried to incorporate a variety of aspects into the new plan. While the old Transitway reserved most space for pedestrians and buses, the new proposal called for shared road space. DOT tried to “improve curbside access wherever possible” while also maintaining two-way traffic. Despite the focus on cars, though, the department also wanted to make sure that pedestrian improvements were key. Thus, the new plan includes 18000 square feet of new pedestrian space while increasing daytime loading spots from 55 to 355. As compromises goes, this one, while far from ideal, isn’t awful.

The future for 34th Street, though, is still hazy. Nearly four years after the Transitway was first presented to the public, DOT still has another year to go on this new plan. It will conduct open houses on March 30th and 31st before presenting a traffic analysis in the fall and an environmental assessment report by early 2012. We’d be lucky to see these badly needed street improvements before the next presidential election. That’s a timeline far too elongated by rampant NIMBYism.

And that brings me to this interesting article in The Times’ Week in Review. Noting the small but loud minority of folks who hate the Prospect Park bike lane, Elisabeth Rosenthal accuses liberals in particular of espousing green development — except for when it impacts their lives. She writes:

Nimbyism is nothing new. It’s even logical sometimes, perhaps not always deserving of opprobrium. After all, it is one thing to be a passionate proponent of recycling, and another to welcome a particular recycling plant — with the attendant garbage-truck traffic — on your street. General environmental principles may be at odds with convenience or even local environmental consequences.

But policymakers in the United States have been repeatedly frustrated by constituents who profess to worry about the climate and count themselves as environmentalists, but prove unwilling to adjust their lifestyles or change their behavior in any significant way. In Europe, bike lanes crisscross cities, wind turbines appear in counties with high-priced country homes and plants that make green energy from waste are situated in even the wealthiest neighborhoods. So what is going on here?

Robert B. Cialdini, an emeritus professor at Arizona State University who studies environmental behaviors, points to two phenomena: Humans hew to the “normative” behaviors of their community. In places where bike lanes or wind turbines or B.R.T. systems are seen as an integral part of society, people tend not protest a new one; if they are not the norm, they will. Second, whatever feelings people have about abstract issues like the environment, in practice they react more passionately to immediate rewards and punishments (like a ready parking space) than distant consequences (like the threat of warming).

It’s something to chew on at least as we’ve seen an ambitious plan for 34th street pared down to some relatively minor bus improvements. Of course, NIMBYism is a curse and a blessing for any democracy, but at some point, those of us who espouse pedestrian- and transit-oriented development have to win those folks over to our side. Along 34th Street, we didn’t, and the future plans are worst off for it.

19 comments
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts