I almost never take the bus because it doing so is so painfully slow. (I recently had to use a wheelchair for a month, which forced me out of the subway and onto the bus, and, while the bus drivers were unfailingly helpful, patient, and polite, the experience was otherwise a nightmare.) I do sometimes take the bus to go cross-town, and I live right near a cross-town line that recently became SBS. This is a HUGE and welcome improvement and I would strongly support expansion to as many lines as possible. It makes an enormous difference, since it solves three problems: (a) people getting on having to wait for people to exist through the front door, (b) having only one door to enter through, and (c) having to pay onboard, one at a time. Things would be faster yet if the buses had wider doors, but the buses are what they are.
That said, I would never take SBS instead of the subway.
That's a good question. I am enthusiastic about SBS primarily because it offers a significantly improved rider experience. My guess is that it makes a contribution to reducing congestion because (a) SBS buses spend less time sitting still at bus stops, which clogs traffic a bit and (b) the improved service will draw some additional riders. But (a) is minor because for the most part buses at stops are not in traffic lanes and they still have to pull out into traffic. I suspect (b) is also pretty minor because the increase will be small and some (most? almost all?) of those new riders will be drawn from the subway or from walking or from just staying at home, not from other modes of surface transportation.
FWIW, I feel similarly about a lot of the bicycling improvements, including Citibike. That is, I am enthusiastically supportive, because they are valuable amenities. I ride more as a result. But I am riding instead of walking or taking the subway, and therefore my getting on a bicycle is doing nothing to reduce congestion. Maybe the occasional bicyclist would otherwise be taking a cab; it is surely extraordinarily rare for a NYC driver to leave the car at home and ride a bike.
I am in general agreement with the pro-bicycle, pro-bike lane comments others have made. However, for the most part they do not address the key question for purposes of this site, which is whether improving bike options reduces congestion. For example, I am a member of Citibike and use it for little trips during the day. But I am not getting out of a car, or a cab, to take those trips by bike. If I were not on the Citibike, I would be walking or in the subway (or not taking the trip at all). So my use of Citibike does nothing to reduce traffic congestion. I suspect the same is true of many others. This doesn't mean Citibike is a bad thing; to the contrary, it is a really good thing. But it seems like an amenity--something that makes life more pleasant--rather than a congestion-reduction tool.
Related: Transportation Alternatives used to have t-shirts for bikers to wear that read "One Less Car." I've never been sure that was true. "One Less Pedestrian" or "One Less Straphanger" seems more likely.
This is an empirical question. I could be completely wrong. The blurb to the left makes it sound like the jury is still out. Is there any reliable study on this?
I almost never take the bus because it doing so is so painfully slow. (I recently had to use a wheelchair for a month, which forced me out of the subway and onto the bus, and, while the bus drivers were unfailingly helpful, patient, and polite, the experience was otherwise a nightmare.) I do sometimes take the bus to go cross-town, and I live right near a cross-town line that recently became SBS. This is a HUGE and welcome improvement and I would strongly support expansion to as many lines as possible. It makes an enormous difference, since it solves three problems: (a) people getting on having to wait for people to exist through the front door, (b) having only one door to enter through, and (c) having to pay onboard, one at a time. Things would be faster yet if the buses had wider doors, but the buses are what they are.
That said, I would never take SBS instead of the subway.
View this comment in the discussion thread
That's a good question. I am enthusiastic about SBS primarily because it offers a significantly improved rider experience. My guess is that it makes a contribution to reducing congestion because (a) SBS buses spend less time sitting still at bus stops, which clogs traffic a bit and (b) the improved service will draw some additional riders. But (a) is minor because for the most part buses at stops are not in traffic lanes and they still have to pull out into traffic. I suspect (b) is also pretty minor because the increase will be small and some (most? almost all?) of those new riders will be drawn from the subway or from walking or from just staying at home, not from other modes of surface transportation.
FWIW, I feel similarly about a lot of the bicycling improvements, including Citibike. That is, I am enthusiastically supportive, because they are valuable amenities. I ride more as a result. But I am riding instead of walking or taking the subway, and therefore my getting on a bicycle is doing nothing to reduce congestion. Maybe the occasional bicyclist would otherwise be taking a cab; it is surely extraordinarily rare for a NYC driver to leave the car at home and ride a bike.
View this comment in the discussion thread
I am in general agreement with the pro-bicycle, pro-bike lane comments others have made. However, for the most part they do not address the key question for purposes of this site, which is whether improving bike options reduces congestion. For example, I am a member of Citibike and use it for little trips during the day. But I am not getting out of a car, or a cab, to take those trips by bike. If I were not on the Citibike, I would be walking or in the subway (or not taking the trip at all). So my use of Citibike does nothing to reduce traffic congestion. I suspect the same is true of many others. This doesn't mean Citibike is a bad thing; to the contrary, it is a really good thing. But it seems like an amenity--something that makes life more pleasant--rather than a congestion-reduction tool.
Related: Transportation Alternatives used to have t-shirts for bikers to wear that read "One Less Car." I've never been sure that was true. "One Less Pedestrian" or "One Less Straphanger" seems more likely.
This is an empirical question. I could be completely wrong. The blurb to the left makes it sound like the jury is still out. Is there any reliable study on this?
View this comment in the discussion thread