|
|
| Re: Q 58 Limited,extension to Main St/Roosevelt Av? (196297) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > BusChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Q 58 Limited,extension to Main St/Roosevelt Av? |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Sun May 23 19:30:16 2010, in response to Re: Q 58 Limited,extension to Main St/Roosevelt Av?, posted by ClearAspect on Sun May 23 19:05:13 2010. [T]hey need one in Jamaica as well.But it is not as critical in Jamaica. There, six subway stations at or east of Sutphin Blvd allow the buses to be dispersed so that no single intersection bears the brunt of all the traffic. Furthermore, to the extent that a bus terminal reduces the number of bus stands on city streets the 165 Street terminal (and to a lesser extent, the loop south of Archer Av and east of 150 St) accomplishes that goal, even in the absence of a direct connection to any subway station. On the other hand, there is only a single subway station in Flushing, and so everybody is trying to get to Main St & Roosevelt Av. Using 39 Av as a stand for some routes, and keeping Q58 south of the LIRR helps with the traffic flow a bit, but in an ideal transit world all the buses terminating in Flushing would serve Main St & Roosevelt Av through an off-street terminal (I am less enthusiastic about routing through buses into a terminal). It's a pity the MTA won't invest in this. Well structurally, it should probably be the City. The MTA is merely the operator of most all transit service within the City, and it is the City that is supposed to coordinate the provision of the City's transit service among the MTA operations and the other providers of transit. Indeed, most all of the subway infrastructure remains the property of the City, not the MTA. This makes sense politically since the City is accountable to the City's taxpayers, but the MTA is not. As such, the City should be the one responsible for land use determinations, including where bus terminals should be sited. The problem is that the City lacks the competence. At one time the City did have, within its transportation department, a bureau for transit operations that could have (and should have) taken on this role. But with the acquisition of the private bus companies the bureau was largely disbanded; today the only regular oversight of MTA by the City is through its bean-counters, and there really is no overall transit planning by the City. In essence, the Mayor points his finger at MTA for transit issues in order to avoid accountability. |
|
|
|