Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
E. SURFACE TRANSIT
EXISTING CONDITIONS
LOCAL BUS SERVICE
The East Side of Manhattan, which includes some of the most heavily traveled bus corridors in
the United States, is well served by frequent and comprehensive bus transportation service. There
is at least one NYCT local bus route on every north-south avenue, except on Park Avenue north
of Grand Central Terminal. Portions of Fifth and Madison Avenues in East Midtown have as
many as six local bus routes. The eastern edge of East Midtown, the Upper East Side, and East
Harlem, on the other hand, are served by a limited number of bus routes, and its residents must
often walk more than 5 to 10 minutes to get to the nearest subway station. The M15 is the only
local bus route serving the densely populated First and Second Avenue corridors. Operating at
2-3 minute headways, its high volume ridership makes it the highest ridership bus route in North
America. Therefore, the First and Second Avenue corridors are a primary focus of this
MIS/DEIS.
The Lower East Side and Lower Manhattan are served by local bus routes on every major northsouth avenue. The Lower East Side represents another major focus of this MIS/DEIS. Its highdensity residential population typically requires buses to access subway stations, which are often
not located within convenient walking distances. Lower Manhattan, on the other hand, has a
highly developed subway network, and local bus use is less pronounced there.
The study area is also well served by crosstown bus service. Most of the major crosstown streets,
e.g., 34th, 79th, and 86th Streets, have at least one local bus route, providing transportation from
river to river. Figures 9E-1 through 9E-5 depict the bus routes in the study area.
An overview of the major bus corridors and other key routes is presented below:
Corridor
Key Routes
Fifth and Madison Avenues
Lexington and Third Avenues
First and Second Avenues
York Avenue
Avenues A, B, C, and D
East Broadway and Madison Street
(Lower East Side)
Allen Street (Lower East Side) and
Water Street (Lower Manhattan)
M1, M2, M3, M4, and, to a lesser degree, Q32
M98, M101, M102, and M103
M15
M31
M9, M14, and M21
M9 and M22
M15
There are a number of other routes serving major and minor crosstown streets throughout the
study area.
Frequency of bus service is generally high, with scheduled headways (the time between buses) on
some routes as low as 2 minutes during the peak periods (e.g., on the M15 in the AM peak). As
shown in Table 9E-1, hundreds of buses are in operation in the study area during peak hours.
Table 9E-2 presents the scheduled headways for the local bus routes by time period for most
north-south routes and key crosstown routes serving the study area. Almost 60 percent of the
local bus routes in the area provide service 24 hours a day, seven days per week.
9E-1
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
Table 9E-1
Scheduled Local Buses in the
AM Peak Hour
Zone
No. of Buses
Lower Manhattan
106
Lower East Side
171
East Midtown
334
Upper East Side
206
East Harlem
157
Note: Number of buses includes
north-south and east-west
routes.
Source: 1994 NYCT Route profiles.
Table 9E-2
NYCT Local Bus Routes: Bus Headways for Key Routes
Routes
Weekday Service
Saturday
AM Midday PM Evening
(min) (min) (min)
(min)
Midday
(min)
NORTH-SOUTH ROUTES
M1: Fifth/Madison Aves.
6
8
5
M2: Fifth/Madison Aves./Powell Blvd.
8
8
7
M3: Fifth/Madison Aves./St. Nicholas Ave.
7
9
9
M4: Fifth/Madison Aves./Broadway
3
8
4
M5: Fifth Ave./Ave. of the Americas/Riverside Dr.
5
10
7
M6: Seventh Ave./Broadway/Ave. of the Americas
10
10
9
M9: Ave. B/East Broadway
8
15
10
M15: First/Second Aves.
2
3
2
M31: 57th St./York Ave.
3
10
4
M98: Washington Hts-Midtown Ltd Third/Lexington Aves.
8
1 Trip
10
M101: Third/Lexington/Amsterdam Aves.
5
6
6
M102: Third/Lexington Aves./Malcolm X Blvd.
6
12
8
M103: Third/Lexington Aves.
12
12
12
B51: Fulton Mall-Lower Manhattan (Manhattan Bridge)
15
30
10
Q32: Penn Station-Jackson Hts, Madison/Fifth Aves.
8
11
8
EAST-WEST ROUTES
M8: 8th/9th Sts.
9
9
9
M14: 14th St./Ave. A
8
10
9
M14: 14th St./Aves. C/D
3
6
4
M16: 34th St.
9
12
12
M21: Houston St./Ave. C
15
20
15
M22: Madison/Chambers Sts.
8
15
10
B39: Williamsburg-Lower East Side/Delancey St.
12
15
12
Note: — Indicates that there is no service.
Source: 1994 NYCT Route Profiles updated by the NYCT Scheduling Department.
9E-2
11
15
10
15
11
12
30
3
9
1 Trip
10
12
15
30
10
10
10
10
8
10
9
30
4
12
—
9
9
12
—
10
12
10
5
20
15
15
20
20
10
6
12
20
12
12
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
NYCT EXPRESS BUS SERVICE
NYCT operates three express bus routes within Manhattan, the X25, the X90, and the X92, on
weekdays only. The X25, which begins opposite GCT, provides service primarily for MetroNorth Railroad customers traveling to and from the Wall Street area. It provides an alternate connection between these two nodes, other than the Lexington Avenue subway. Both the X90 and the
X92 provide bus service from the residential sections of the Upper East Side to the Lower
Manhattan Financial District. All three express bus routes operate southbound in the AM peak
period and northbound in the PM peak period, generally at 10- to 20-minute headways.
NYCT also operates three express bus routes from Brooklyn into Manhattan, four routes from
Queens, and 19 routes from Staten Island. These buses generally operate at headways ranging
from 5 to 30 minutes. These routes are oriented to the Lower Manhattan and Midtown Manhattan
commercial districts.
PRIVATE EXPRESS BUS SERVICE
NYCDOT has granted express bus franchises to various private companies to provide express
bus service from parts of the Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens into the Manhattan CBDs. Service is
provided either to the Midtown area or to the Wall Street area, although some bus routes provide
service to both destinations. Non-franchised commuter service from Staten Island generally
travels through New Jersey to Manhattan via the Holland Tunnel. These bus companies are not
franchised by NYCDOT but operate under licenses granted by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC).
Service to and from the Bronx is provided by two bus companies: Liberty Lines Express, Inc. and
New York Bus Service. Liberty Lines operates throughout the Bronx, but concentrates service on
the west side of the borough including the Riverdale section, with limited service from Yonkers.
New York Bus Service operates predominantly on the east side of the Bronx. Frequent service is
provided during the AM and PM peak periods.
The Command Bus Company, Inc. provides express bus service from the Bergen Beach,
Canarsie, Kingsbay, and Gerritsen Beach sections of Brooklyn into Lower Manhattan, the Lower
East Side, and East Midtown.
There is frequent service from Brooklyn in the AM peak period; some routes operate with headways as low as 10 minutes. During the PM peak period, scheduled headways of between 10 and
15 minutes are common.
Express bus service from Queens is provided by four bus companies: Green Lines, Jamaica
Buses, Inc., Queens Surface Corporation, and the Triboro Coach Corporation. Green Lines provides express service from almost a dozen neighborhoods including: Rockaway Park, Howard
Beach, Forest Hills, and Woodhaven. Rochdale Village is served by Jamaica Buses, Inc. Queens
Surface Corporation provides service to and from Fresh Meadows, Clearview, Jewel Avenue, and
Bayside, while the Triboro Coach Corporation serves the Rego Park, Jackson Heights, and Forest
Hills areas. Headways vary significantly route by route.
Express bus service is also provided into Manhattan from several areas outside of New York
City. The Bee-Line System provides service from White Plains and Tarrytown in Westchester
County, while Monsey Trails provides limited bus service to and from Rockland County. Three
bus companies provide service from Suffolk County: Sunrise Express, Hampton Express Inc.,
9E-3
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
and the Hampton Jitney. The Sunrise Express provides one round trip per day from Greenport on
the north fork of Long Island. Both Hampton Express Inc. and the Hampton Jitney provide service from Montauk and Southampton on the south fork.
BUS PREFERENTIAL TREATMENTS
The large volumes of autos, taxis, and trucks competing for street space with buses contribute to
congested traffic conditions and low bus travel speeds. NYCT has implemented "limited-stop" bus
service and, with NYCDOT, priority bus lane treatments, as two means of increasing travel
speeds and travel time reliability.
Bus routes operating with "limited-stop" service stop only at major cross streets and transfer
points, often traveling up to eight blocks between stops. Observations indicate that, between
stops, limited-stop service may operate in the third or even the fourth lane from the curb to avoid
conflicts with slower traffic and curb parkers. Passengers frequently prefer to let regular buses go
by and wait for a limited-stop bus, which operates at a higher speed and reduces overall travel
times.
Within the study area, NYCT provides limited-stop service on the M1, M2, M4, M5, M15, M98,
and M101. Limited-stop service is provided in the peak direction, i.e., southbound in the AM and
northbound in the PM, during rush hours on the M1 and M4 routes on selected trips. The M98
has limited-stop service in both directions during weekday peak periods. The M2 limited stop service has been expanded to operate on Saturdays in the southbound direction from 10 AM to 6 PM
and between 11 AM and 7 PM northbound between 110th and 8th Streets. The M3, M5, and
M101 routes provide limited-stop service in both directions from 7 AM to 7 PM on weekdays.
The most frequent limited-stop service is provided by the M15, which has limited-stop north- and
southbound service weekdays from 7 AM to 8 PM, and on weekends from 10 AM to 6 PM.
For more than 15 years, NYCT, in cooperation with NYCDOT, has created a system of priority
bus treatments in Manhattan. By assigning preference to buses, and in some cases occupied
taxicabs, more people can be moved per lane of moving traffic. The Hub Bound Travel Report
1991, prepared by the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, indicated that the Fifth
Avenue bus lane carried 4,340 passengers in a single lane during the AM peak hour. The remaining three mixed-use travel lanes carried 2,932 people in the same hour, or fewer than 1,000
people per lane.
Most of the avenues, and some of the major crosstown streets, currently have one or more lanes
exclusively for buses during certain hours of the day. As indicated in Table 9E-3, priority bus
treatments in Manhattan range from basic bus-only curb lanes, to a two-block contraflow bus
lane on Second Avenue, that serves the Queensboro Bridge, and to a "transitway" on 49th and
50th Streets between Third and Eighth Avenues. These priority bus treatments are depicted in
Figure 9E-6.
One of the most well-known bus priority treatments in Manhattan is the Madison Avenue dual
bus lanes. Implemented in the late 1970's, the Madison Avenue dual bus lane reserves the curb
lane and the immediately adjacent travel lane exclusively for buses, from 42nd Street to 59th
Street from 2-7 PM. (From 42nd Street to 46th Street, occupied taxicabs may use the dual bus
lanes to make right turns for access to GCT.) The dual bus lanes were designed to allow for a
moving bus to bypass a curb lane occupied by buses loading or unloading passengers. At the
9E-4
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
Table 9E-3
Manhattan Priority Bus Lanes
Location
Description
First Avenue
The priority bus lane operates between 34th and 96th Streets during the
hours of 4-7 PM.
Second Avenue
The priority bus lanes operate between 96th and 72nd Streets during the
hours of 7-10 AM and between 72nd and 14th Streets during the hours of
7-10 AM and 4-7 PM.
The contraflow bus lane operates between 57th Street and the Queensboro
Bridge during the hours of 4-7 PM.
Third Avenue
The priority bus lane operates between 36th and 58th Streets during the
hours of 7 AM-7 PM.
Lexington Avenue The priority bus lanes operate between 60th and 47th Streets during the
hours of 7 AM to 7 PM and between 47th and 30th Streets during the hours
of 7 AM to 1 PM.
Madison Avenue The priority bus lanes (i.e., dual bus lanes) operate between 42nd and 59th
Streets during the hours of 2-7 PM.
Fifth Avenue
The priority bus lane operates between 59th and 34th Streets from 7 AM7 PM.
Broadway
The priority bus lanes operate between Warren Street and Battery Place
from 4-7 PM.
42nd Street
Priority bus lanes operate between Third and Eighth Avenues in both the
east- and westbound directions from 7-10 AM and 4-7 PM.
49th Street
49th Street operates as a Transitway between Third and Eighth Avenues
during the hours of 8 AM-6 PM.
50th Street
50th Street operates as a Transitway between Eighth and Third Avenues
during the hours of 8 AM-6 PM.
57th Street
The eastbound priority bus lane operates between Sixth and Second
Avenues during the hours of 7-10 AM. From 4-7 PM, the eastbound priority
bus lane operates between Eighth and Second Avenues. The westbound
priority bus lane operates between Second and Eighth Avenues during the
hours of 7-10 AM and 4-7 PM.
Notes:
1. Priority bus lanes are generally reserved for only buses, except for right turns by autos that
may be permitted at specific intersections.
2. The contraflow lane is dedicated to buses and operates in a direction opposite to the flow of
traffic.
3. Transitways are dedicated to buses and taxis during specific hours of the day.
Source: "Street Congestion & New York City Transit Buses," NYCT, 1994.
9E-5
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
intersections of all cross streets with Madison Avenue, signs inform motorists which lanes they
may turn into and which lanes must be kept clear for buses. Only dual bus lanes have had any significant measure of success in increasing average bus speeds.
BUS TRAVEL TIMES AND SPEEDS
Bus speeds are negatively impacted by street congestion and the frequency of bus stops. Table
9E-4 presents average bus speeds by route, for both weekdays and Saturdays, at Noon. Bus
speeds are generally 10 to 20 percent lower than speeds for other vehicles. Buses providing regular service generally operate at speeds in the 5-7 mile per hour (mph) range while “limited-stop”
buses, which provide service to selected bus stops spaced about every 8 to 10 blocks, operate in
the 7-10 mph range. Only the dual bus lanes on Madison Avenue appear to have successfully
improved overall bus speeds, yielding an 80 percent increase in speeds during the PM, directly
after implementation of the bus lanes.
Table 9E-4
NYCT Local Bus Routes Average Bus Speeds for Key Routes
Midday
Routes
Weekday
Saturday
NORTH-SOUTH ROUTES
M1: Fifth/Madison Aves.
M2: Fifth/Madison Aves./Powell Blvd.
M3: Fifth/Madison Aves./St. Nicholas Ave.
M4: Fifth/Madison Aves./Broadway
M5: Fifth Ave./Ave. of the Americas/Riverside Dr.
M6: Seventh Ave./Broadway/Ave. of the Americas
M9: Ave. B/East Broadway
M15: First/Second Aves.
M31: 57th St./York Ave.
M98: Washington Heights-Midtown Ltd, Third/Lexington Aves.
M101/102/103*: Third/Lexington Aves.
B51: Brooklyn Fulton Mall-Lower Manhattan (Manhattan Bridge)
Q32: Penn Station-Jackson Heights, Madison/Fifth Aves.
5.8
5.9
6.1
6.6
6.5
5.2
7.0
6.9
5.4
9.6
6.8
8.9
6.2
8.9
6.9
7.0
7.2
7.4
6.3
7.2
8.2
6.6
—
6.5
—
6.9
EAST-WEST ROUTES
M8: 8th/9th Sts.
M14/AD: 14th St./Ave. A/Aves. C/D
M16/M34: 34th St.
M21: Houston St./Ave. C
M22: Madison/Chambers St.
M23: 23rd St.
B39: Williamsburg-Lower East Side/Delancey St.
5.7
5.7
5.0
6.8
5.7
5.1
8.4
6.3
5.8
5.2
7.5
6.9
6.1
9.8
Notes:
*
M101/M102 routes were redesignated as M101/M102/M103 routes in Fall 1995.
— Indicates that there is no service.
Source: 1994 NYCT Route Profiles.
9E-6
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
Travel time data for three bus routes operating with limited-stop service were compared to their
regular operations, and the following was noted:
! M2: AM peak period trips were 9 minutes faster (11 percent) with limited-stop service.
Northbound trips in the PM period were 15 minutes (15 percent) faster.
! M15: AM and PM peak period trips were 10 to 15 minutes (15 to 20 percent) faster with
limited-stop service.
! M101: AM southbound trips were 22 minutes (30 percent) faster for limited-stop buses,
while PM northbound trips were about 11 minutes (15 percent) faster.
Bus operations are beset by “bus bunching”, a condition where, after a long period of time when
no buses arrive at a specific bus stop, several buses arrive within minutes of each other, often simultaneously. There are several factors which contribute to bus bunching, including the high frequency of service provided, high passenger volumes using the buses which can cause long delays
at individual bus stops, and overall traffic congestion on the avenues that decreases bus speeds.
Sample bus bunching observations were performed on a single day on First and Fifth Avenues to
quantify the problem and how large of a service gap resulted. Buses were observed on First Avenue at 33rd Street from 3 to 5 PM, and on Fifth Avenue at 41st Street from 12 Noon to 2 PM. On
First Avenue, scheduled PM headways for the M15 are 2 minutes. However, the wait for an M15
"limited” bus was as much as 19 minutes. On Fifth Avenue, the scheduled headways during the
midday are 8 minutes for the M1, M2, M3, and M4. Scheduled headways for the M5 and Q32 are
10 minutes during the midday peak. There was, however, a wait of 15 minutes or more for a specific bus, at least once for every route. Riders waiting for the M1 and the M2 “limited” bus had
to wait as long as 29 minutes for their bus to arrive, while passengers waiting for the M4 bus had
a service gap of 34 minutes.
BUS RIDERSHIP TRENDS
Until recently, bus ridership was in decline. According to a report prepared by NYCT in 1994,
Faster than Walking, Street Congestion & New York City Transit Buses, there was a 48 percent
decline in bus ridership from 1963 to 1991. Local bus ridership declined more noticeably after
1985. However, preliminary 1995 data indicate that this trend has been reversed. Statistics
gathered by the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council indicate that the total number of
persons entering the "Hub" or CBD (area below 60th Street) by local buses had decreased to just
over 60,000 persons on a fall day in 1993. This represents a reduction in ridership of approximately 40 percent over a 10-year period, from a high of 100,000 passengers on a fall day in 1983.
The upper graph in Figure 9E-7 depicts historic local bus ridership trends. At the same time, as
shown in the lower graph in Figure 9E-7, an average of just over 3,000 local buses enter the
"Hub" on a fall day, a number that has remained fairly constant for the last 10 years. With the introduction of intermodal transfers in July 1997 and discounted pay-per-ride fare cards in January
1998, bus ridership has increased dramatically. Unlimited 7- and 30-day passes are expected to
increase ridership further.
Table 9E-5 presents the number of bus passengers who entered or exited the Hub over the 60th
Street screenline in either the AM or PM peak hour in the fall of 1993. More passengers rode on
buses in the Fifth Avenue/Madison Avenue corridor than all the other corridors combined. This
is due, in part, to the number of express buses traveling along the Fifth Avenue/Madison Avenue
corridor in addition to the local service.
9E-7
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
Table 9E-5
Number of Passengers Entering or
Exiting the Hub by Bus at the 60th Street
Screenline, AM and PM Peak Hours
Entering
AM
Street/Roadway
FDR Drive
0
York Avenue
503
First Avenue
—
Second Avenue
1,756
Third Avenue
—
Lexington Avenue
2,709
Madison Avenue
—
Fifth Avenue
3,531
Source: 1993 Hub Bound Travel Report.
Exiting
PM
56
167
1,364
—
1,718
—
5,028
—
Between 1984 and 1993, the total number of express bus passengers entering the Hub at either
the 60th Street, Brooklyn, or Queens screenlines has fallen from a high of 80,000 passengers to
just over 40,000 passengers, a drop in ridership of almost 50 percent, as seen in Figure 9E-8. The
total number of express buses entering the Hub has also declined, from approximately 2,500
vehicles to 1,800 vehicles, a decline of less than 30 percent in vehicular volume (see the lower
graph in Figure 9E-8).
BUS CAPACITY UTILIZATION
NYCT "Local Bus Schedule Guidelines" are designed to ensure that there are enough buses on a
given route to accommodate riders during a particular time period. Guidelines have been developed for both "feeder" routes, i.e., routes on which most of the passengers have a common
origin or destination, and "grid" routes, which are characterized by a series of significant on/off
activities. Most of the local bus routes in the study area are grid routes; their guidelines are discussed below.
The grid route schedule guidelines indicate that buses are expected to accommodate up to a
maximum of 60 people during the peak periods. (This is approximately 1.5 times the seated
capacity of a bus.) A bus loaded with more than 60 people would not have the floor space to permit passengers to comfortably maneuver through it for seating or exiting.
Consistent with these guidelines, three levels of loading standards have been developed for NYCT
buses: seated (less than 40 passengers on a bus); standing (between 41 and 60 passengers per bus,
or up to the service guideline of a maximum of 60 passengers per bus, as indicated earlier); and
overcrowded (more than 60 passengers per bus).
These loading standards were used as the benchmark for sample observations on bus crowding
conditions conducted on a single day in March 1995. Observers were stationed at critical crossstreet locations in the study area: at the Metro-North station on 125th Street, and then on selected
north-south avenues along 86th, 72nd, 42nd, 14th, and Houston Streets. In Midtown, bus routes
were observed between Third and Fifth Avenues. South of 14th Street, buses were observed on
the avenues between First Avenue and Broadway. Observations were conducted between 7 and
9E-8
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
9 AM, Noon to 2 PM, and from 4 to 6 PM. The observations were not continuous, but rather provide one-day "snapshots" of bus crowding conditions (10 to 20 minutes per avenue per time
period).
During the AM period, southbound buses were more crowded than northbound buses, as would
be expected. Standees were observed on approximately 10 to 15 percent of the buses while less
than 5 percent of the buses were considered overcrowded. In the midday period, the observations
indicated that bus crowding decreased. A small number of buses carried some standees; very few
overcrowded buses were noticed. In the PM period, bus crowding increased, but not to the same
levels that were observed in the AM period.
Overcrowded buses were noticed in the peak direction on the M98 and the M101/M102 routes
(M101/M102 routes now terminate service in the East Village; the new M103 route continues
downtown, replacing the previous M101/M102 Lower Manhattan route) and there were standees
in the off-peak direction, particularly on the Upper East Side. Overcrowding was observed to a
lesser extent on buses in the Midtown area. Below 14th Street, the buses observed on the M101/
M102 routes did not exhibit crowding problems.
Fifth Avenue buses experienced crowding conditions in both the AM and PM peaks, although
crowding was less severe than on Lexington Avenue bus routes. In the AM peak, about 15 percent of the buses observed on the Upper East Side contained standees. In Midtown, the number
of buses containing standees decreased to less than 5 percent of the buses observed. Below 14th
Street, no standees were observed on Broadway buses; buses have low passenger volumes and are
generally nearing the end of their runs. In the midday period buses remained crowded in the
Midtown and Upper East Side areas, possibly due to the number of shoppers using the buses and
the increased headway between buses. Limited overcrowding was observed.
In the PM period, a smaller number of buses carried standees in Lower Manhattan and Midtown.
Crowding conditions worsened on the Upper East Side. Many of the buses observed at 72nd
Street carried standees; by 86th Street, many passengers had exited. These observations show that
many passengers use the bus for short trips, indicating that seats on an individual bus are "sold"
to more than one passenger along a route.
Observations conducted on the Lower East Side and in Lower Manhattan did not reveal bus
crowding. This does not mean that there are no overcrowded buses on specific routes, but that,
overall, available passenger capacity does exist.
Ridership data obtained from the NYCT Route Profiles together with limited observations of bus
crowding conditions indicate that the major north-south routes, which are the primary focus of
this study, are characterized by high frequency of service, high ridership levels, and high load
levels (i.e., high service capacity ratings and utilization of seated capacity well over 100 percent,
actually nearing 150 percent).
Figure 9E-9 depicts average total ridership for local north-south bus routes for five time periods
at their maximum load points, the point where the number of passengers on each bus route is the
heaviest during a certain time period. As expected, ridership is greatest during the weekdays, with
approximately 30,000 riders counted at the maximum load points in the AM peak period (an
average of about 7,500 per hour for four hours), and 36,000 passengers (9,000 per hour for four
hours) in the PM peak period. Despite the operation of fewer buses in the midday period, rider-
9E-9
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
ship remains fairly high. Over 25,000 passengers were counted on the north-south buses at their
maximum load points between 10 AM and 3 PM on an average day (5,000 per hour for 5 hours).
Estimated scheduled passenger capacity for local bus routes in the AM peak hour is shown in
Table 9E-6. As expected, buses in East Midtown have the greatest passenger capacity; approximately 19,300 passengers can be carried in the peak hour based on the information presented
in the NYCT Route Profiles. Buses on the Upper East Side can accommodate over 12,000
passengers.
Table 9E-6
Scheduled Passenger Capacity
on Local Buses: AM Peak Hour
Study Area Zone
Lower Manhattan
Lower East Side
East Midtown
Upper East Side
East Harlem
Passenger
Capacity
6,100
9,900
19,300
12,100
9,000
Source: 1994 NYCT Route Profiles.
There are not as many buses operating in East Harlem and on the Lower East Side as there are
in the core areas of Midtown and the Upper East Side. The buses operating outside the core areas
can accommodate between 9,000 and 10,000 passengers in the AM peak hour. Lower Manhattan
is a compact area with a high concentration of subway lines and stations, so fewer buses are
needed to provide transportation. The buses in this area can accommodate approximately 6,100
passengers. The passenger capacity estimates are based on the information in the NYCT Route
Profiles and assumes that the capacity of a bus route does not change throughout the study area.
Tables 9E-7 and 9E-8 outline ridership and capacity utilization on local buses for the AM and
PM peak hours, respectively. For the AM and PM peaks, the schedule guidelines are at or near
60 passengers per trip, indicating that all the seats are occupied and there are as many as 20
standees on the bus. The service capacity rating indicates, on a percentage basis, how close bus
occupancy is to the guideline. The higher the percentage, the more crowded the bus. Most of the
AM peak hour north-south bus routes are operating with service capacity ratings in excess of 85
percent, generally between 95 and 98 percent. In the PM peak hour, service capacity ratings on
the busiest routes range from the mid 80's to the low 90's, only slightly below the AM peak hour
ratings. The ridership characteristics of two of the busiest routes are described below.
The M15 bus route provides local service on First and Second Avenues. As the M15 has the
highest number of passengers of any route, more trips are scheduled on the M15 bus (41 trips)
during the AM peak hour than on any other bus in the study area. With a per trip load guideline
of 60 passengers (the maximum allowable), the capacity rating for the M15 bus is 94 percent.
With an average of 56 riders per trip, standees would be expected on each bus. The service capacity rating in the PM peak hour is 81 percent. Sample crowding condition observations for
9E-10
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
Table 9E-7
NYCT Local Bus Routes AM Peak Hour
Ridership and Capacity Utilization
Routes
NORTH-SOUTH ROUTES
M1: Fifth/Madison Aves.
M2: Fifth/Madison Aves./Powell Blvd.
M3: Fifth/Madison Aves./St. Nicholas Ave.
M4: Fifth/Madison Aves./Broadway
M5: Fifth Ave./Ave. of the Americas/Riverside
Dr.
M6: Seventh Ave./Broadway/Ave. of the
Americas
M9: Ave. B/East Broadway
M15: First/Second Aves.
M31: 57th St./York Ave.
M98: Washington Heights-Midtown Ltd
Third/Lexington Aves.
M101/102/103*: Third/Lexington Aves.
B51: Brooklyn Fulton Mall-Lower Manhattan
(Manhattan Bridge)
Q32: Penn Station-Jackson Heights, Madison/Fifth Aves.
Scheduled
Trips
Scheduled
Passenger
Capacity
Riders
Per Trip
Total
Per
Load
Riders
Trip
Guidelines
Service
Capacity
Rating
(percent)
8
8
9
10
14
440
440
540
600
840
405
405
354
506
822
51
51
39
51
59
55
55
60
60
60
92%
92
66
84
98
6
300
253
42
50
84
6
41
25
8
300
2,460
1,500
440
345
2,310
1,445
403
58
56
58
50
50
60
60
55
115
94
96
92
31
4
1,860
160
1600
146
52
37
60
40
86
93
10
600
390
39
60
65
EAST-WEST ROUTES
M8: 8th/9th Sts.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
M14/AD: 14th St./Ave. A/Aves. C/D
29
1740
1768
61
60
102%
M16/M34: 34th St.
13
780
487
37
60
62%
M21: Houston St./Ave. C
M22: Madison/Chambers Sts.
M23: 23rd St.
4
10
12
160
600
720
192
509
621
48
51
52
40
60
60
120%
85%
86%
5
225
200
40
45
89%
B39: Williamsburg-Lower East Side/Delancey St.
Notes:
Per Trip Load Guidelines vary according to the scheduled frequency of service, the type of route, and the time of day.
Ridership demand is based on peak direction at maximum load point.
M101/M102 routes were redesignated as M101/M102/M103 routes in Fall 1995.
Source: 1994 NYCT Route Profiles.
9E-11
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
Table 9E-8
NYCT Local Bus Routes PM Peak Hour
Ridership and Capacity Utilization
Routes
NORTH-SOUTH ROUTES
M1: Fifth/Madison Aves.
M2: Fifth/Madison Aves./Powell Blvd.
M3: Fifth/Madison Aves./St. Nicholas Ave.
M4: Fifth/Madison Aves./Broadway
M5: Fifth Ave./Ave. of the Americas/Riverside
Dr.
M6: Seventh Ave./Broadway/Ave. of the
Americas
M9: Ave. B/East Broadway
M15: First/Second Aves.
M31: 57th St./York Ave.
M98: Washington Heights-Midtown Ltd
Third/Lexington Aves.
M101/102/103*: Third/Lexington Aves.
B51: Brooklyn Fulton Mall-Lower Manhattan
(Manhattan Bridge)
Q32: Penn Station-Jackson Height, Madison/Fifth Aves.
Scheduled
Scheduled Passenger
Trips
Capacity
Total
Riders
Riders
Per
Trip
Per Trip
Load
Guidelines
Service
Capacity
Rating
(percent)
12
9
10
10
10
720
540
600
600
600
629
471
524
524
495
52
52
52
52
50
60
60
60
60
60
87%
87
87
87
83
6
300
237
40
50
79
6
31
14
6
300
1,860
840
300
192
1,573
774
280
32
51
55
47
50
60
60
50
64
85
92
93
29
6
1,740
300
1,512
274
52
46
60
50
87
91
9
540
433
48
60
80
N/A
EAST-WEST ROUTES
M8: 8th/9th Sts.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
M14/AD: 14th St./Ave. A/Aves. C/D
27
1620
1215
45
60
76
M16/M34: 34th St.
12
720
465
39
60
65
M21: Houston St./Ave. C
M22: Madison/Chambers Sts.
M23: 23rd St.
4
8
12
160
440
720
116
254
553
29
32
46
40
55
60
73
58
77
5
225
261
52
45
116
B39: Williamsburg-Lower East Side/Delancey St.
Notes:
Per Trip Load Guidelines vary according to the scheduled frequency of service, the type of route, and the time of day.
Ridership demand is based on peak direction at maximum load point.
M101/M102 routes were redesignated as M101/M102/M103 routes in Fall 1995.
Source: 1994 NYCT Route Profiles.
the M15 route were conducted on the Lower East Side and in Lower Manhattan. They indicate
that crowding occurs on the M15 bus route on the Lower East Side and in Lower Manhattan,
with standees in both peak periods and overcrowded conditions experienced in the AM peak
period. This is evidence of the high volume of passengers that use the M15 bus and also reflects
the reduced service available on the M15 bus below Houston Street. No crowding condition observations were made for the M15 bus route in Midtown. Some northbound check-rides were
taken on M15 buses throughout the Lower East Side and Midtown areas; they indicate that the
M15 is crowded when entering Midtown, and becomes overcrowded as the bus continues north.
The M101/M102/M103 routes have the next highest number of riders in the AM peak hour, with
over 1,600 passengers. The M101/M102/M103 buses have a capacity rating of 86 percent in the
9E-12
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
AM peak hour, indicating that the buses are slightly less crowded than on the M15 route, and a
rating of 87 percent during the PM peak hour.
AM peak and PM peak bus loadings are approximately equal, with the heaviest routes operating
with considerable standees along much of their length in East Midtown and the Upper East Side.
The M1 and the M101/M102/M103 routes are prime examples of this. The M15 bus route is the
most crowded in the study area, despite the very short headways in effect during the AM, midday,
and PM peak periods. The M101/M102/M103 buses are almost as crowded as the M15 bus
route.
FUTURE CONDITIONS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES
The surface transit analyses of the alternatives conducted as part of this study included a set of
common assumptions, namely: 1) free transfers between subway and bus systems; 2) retention of
current bus service frequencies in the future analysis year; and 3) retention of all current bus
routes. It was assumed that bus ridership will increase by approximately 15 percent by the 2020
analysis year without implementation of the TSM Alternative or Build Alternatives 1 or 2.
The transit model developed for this study was used to project AM peak hour ridership by bus
route at a series of screenlines within the study area. This included screenlines at 96th Street,
72nd Street, 42nd Street, and a composite screenline across several streets on the Lower East
Side. The findings from the model were then used to assess ridership increases at these screenlines
and at selected peak load points for key routes. It should be remembered that, consistent with
NYCT guidelines, the three levels of loading standards are: 1) seated, i.e., less than 40 passengers
on a bus; 2) standing, i.e., between 41 and 60 passengers per bus (the NYCT service guideline is
a maximum of 60 passengers per bus); and 3) overcrowded, i.e., more than 60 passengers per
bus. The findings of these analyses are presented below.
PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE
With the No Build Alternative, the recent reversal of bus ridership decline is expected to continue.
Ridership is projected to increase by about 15 percent by the 2020 analysis year. There would be
no new routes and projected load levels per bus at peak load points would generally not generate
service additions or reductions. Ridership on the M15 route would increase to average per bus
load levels above standing capacity guidelines (i.e., “overcrowded”), but could be accommodated
within the standing capacity guidelines by increasing service on the M15 by three buses per hour
in peak periods. The M15 is already the busiest route in the system and is beset with difficulties
in maintaining headways due to traffic conditions on First and Second Avenues, which together
cause bus bunching. The addition of three more buses per hour would thus be expected to
exacerbate the bus bunching problem.
OVERVIEW OF THE TSM ALTERNATIVE AND BUILD ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2
The TSM Alternative and Build Alternatives 1 and 2 would have different effects on bus ridership. The TSM Alternative, with its implementation of one- and two-lane priority New York Bus
Lanes, would result in overall bus ridership increases as new riders are attracted to the M15 route
on First and Second Avenues due to increased service capacities and decreased travel times. Other
parallel routes would have some ridership reductions as some of their riders are attracted to the
9E-13
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
speedier and more reliable service on First and Second Avenues. The TSM Alternative and Build
Alternatives 1 and 2 each include a series of bus route extensions and modifications on the Lower
East Side that would also generate ridership shifts that are common to these alternatives.
Overall, Build Alternative 1 and Build Alternative 2 would generate bus ridership reductions in
areas where new subway and/or light rail services are proposed. This is because a percentage of
current bus riders would be attracted to subway/light rail service due to their improved travel
times and reliability vis-a-vis bus service.
As shown in Table 9E-9, the TSM Alternative would increase bus ridership by about 12 to 18
percent over No Build levels throughout the study area. Build Alternatives 1 and 2, on the other
hand, would significantly draw riders off of buses (14 to 19 percent) on the Upper East Side, and
to a lesser extent (5 percent or less) at 42nd Street since the subway component would no longer
be “outboard” at Second Avenue. That is, the subway alignment would have merged onto the N
and R tracks as it proceeds southward and westward toward 42nd Street/Times Square from its
connection via the 63rd Street tunnel on the Manhattan side. Build Alternative 2, with the LRT,
would significantly attract riders from Lower East Side buses. Diversions from buses approaching 60 percent areawide in the Lower East Side are projected.
Table 9E-9
Bus Ridership of the TSM and Build
Alternatives 1 and 2 Compared with
the No Build at Selected Screenlines
Screenline
96th Street
72nd Street
42nd Street
Lower East Side
TSM
Build 1
Build 2
+12.3%
+14.0%
+18.6%
+18.6%
-14.0%
-18.4%
-0.3%
+5.4%
-16.5%
-19.3%
-4.5%
-58.3%
Ridership projections and peak load levels per bus were analyzed for selected routes, and the
findings of the analyses are shown in Tables 9E-10 and 9E-11.
TSM ALTERNATIVE
The TSM Alternative consists of two bus elements—implementation of New York Bus Lanes between Houston and 96th Streets and creation of new bus routes or modifications of existing routes
on the Lower East Side. The objective of the New York Bus Lanes is to improve bus service and
increase bus use by reducing travel times and improving bus travel time reliability. Concurrent
with the implementation of the new bus lanes under the TSM Alternative, service capacity on the
M15 route would be increased by about 50 percent. The objective of the bus route extensions and
modifications on the Lower East Side are to increase transit accessibility for Lower East Side
residents to work destinations in Lower Manhattan and East Midtown (see Figure 9E-10).
As described in 2, the TSM Alternative would create one-lane New York Bus Lanes along First
and Second Avenues between Houston and 14th Streets, and two-lane New York Bus
9E-14
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
Table 9E-10
Projected Bus Ridership at Peak Load Points
Route-by-Route: AM Peak Hour
Route
Peak Load Point
Existing
No Build
TSM
Build 1
TOTAL
405
405
405
405
354
354
506
506
3340
466
466
466
466
407
407
582
582
3,842
497
450
497
450
434
393
621
562
3,904
554
386
554
386
484
337
692
482
3,875
527
382
527
382
461
334
659
478
3,750
LEXINGTON AVENUE
M98
Lexington Avenue/86th Street
M98
Lexington Avenue/124th Street
M101/102 Lexington Avenue/42nd Street
M101/102 Lexington Avenue/72nd Street
TOTAL
403
403
1600
1600
4006
463
463
1,840
1,840
4,606
381
343
1,696
1,512
3,932
231
358
1,814
916
3,319
217
323
1,739
863
3,142
SECOND AVENUE
M15
Second Avenue/57th Street
M15
Second Avenue/79th Street
TOTAL
2310
2310
4620
2,657
2,657
5,314
3,679
3,825
7,504
2,516
2,765
5,281
2,463
2,534
4,997
808
808
929
929
771
771
486
486
484
484
268
310
1,011
—
46
223
308
357
1,163
—
53
256
239
302
1,103
134
53
474
227
240
1,091
159
53
449
199
72
465
0
53
127
1,858
2,137
2,305
2,219
916
FIFTH AVENUE
M1
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M1
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
M2
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M2
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
M3
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M3
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
M4
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M4
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
YORK AVENUE
M31
York Avenue/70th Street
TOTAL
LOWER EAST SIDE
M8
WB: East 9th Street/Third Avenue
M9
WB: Avenue B/East 2nd Street
M14
WB: East 14th Street/Avenue A
M15
NB: East 14th Street/Avenue A
M21
WB: Avenue A/E. Houston Street
M22
W/B: Madison Street/Rutgers
Street
TOTAL
9E-15
Build 2
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
Table 9E-11
Projected Bus Occupancy Levels at
Peak Load Points: AM Peak Hour
Buses Per Hour
Route
Peak Load Point
Riders Per Bus
NB
TSM
B1
B2
NB
TSM
B1
B2
FIFTH AVENUE
M1
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M1
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
M2
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M2
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
M3
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M3
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
M4
Fifth Avenue/42nd Street
M4
Fifth Avenue/72nd Street
8
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
8
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
8
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
8
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
58
58
58
58
45
45
58
58
62
56
62
56
48
44
62
56
69
48
69
48
54
37
69
48
66
48
66
48
51
37
66
48
LEXINGTON AVENUE
M98
Lexington Avenue/86th Street
M98
Lexington Avenue/124th Street
M101/102 Lexington Avenue/42nd Street
M101/102 Lexington Avenue/72nd Street
8
8
31
31
8
8
31
31
8
8
31
31
8
8
31
31
58
58
59
59
48
43
55
49
29
45
59
30
27
40
56
28
SECOND AVENUE
M15
Second Avenue/57th Street
M15
Second Avenue/79th Street
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
65
65
90
93
61
67
60
62
YORK AVENUE
M31
York Avenue/70th Street
25
25
25
25
37
31
19
19
6
6
29
—
4
10
6
6
29
6
4
10
6
6
29
6
4
10
6
6
29
—
4
10
45
60
40
—
13
26
39
50
38
22
13
47
38
40
38
27
13
45
16
12
16
—
13
13
LOWER EAST SIDE
M8
WB: East 9th Street/Third Avenue
M9
WB: Avenue B/East 2nd Street
M14
WB: East 14th Street/Avenue A
M15
NB: East 14th Street/Avenue A
M21
WB: Avenue A/E. Houston Street
M22
W/B: Madison Street/Rutgers
Street
9E-16
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
Lanes between 14th and 96th Streets. Figure 9E-11 presents a concept-level plan for a typical
two-lane New York Bus Lane segment on First Avenue between 53rd and 62nd Streets. The objective of these priority bus lanes is to provide buses with a semi-exclusive right-of-way that
would increase their travel speeds and travel time reliability. Where there are bus stops, the sidewalk would be “built out” into the nearest travel lane in order to better define the bus stop, with
the remainder of the block without the built-out sidewalk available and designated for curbside deliveries and/or parking. In the two-lane bus lane sections, the next two travel lanes would be
designated for use by buses, vehicles pulling over the curb or away from the curb, and any vehicle
making a right turn at the corner. Although it would be preferable from a bus operations perspective to designate the two lanes for buses only, a preliminary analysis of the street capacity available to accommodate all other traffic showed that there would not be sufficient capacity to do so.
The complete prohibition of curbside dropoffs and deliveries would also have created too great an
impact on local businesses and residents. Furthermore, the volume of buses using First and
Second Avenues does not warrant full dedication of one or two exclusive bus lanes.
Under the TSM Alternative, First and Second Avenue buses would be provided with an improved
level of operations via the two-lane New York Bus Lane plan. It is projected that travel time
savings of about 10 percent could be realized in sections with the one-lane bus lane treatment, and
that savings of up to about 20 percent could be realized for sections with the two-lane treatment.
Table 9E-10 presents the findings of the bus ridership projections for north-south bus routes
operating on Fifth Avenue, Lexington Avenue, Second Avenue, and York Avenue within East
Midtown, the Upper East Side, and East Harlem, and for routes in the Lower East Side, in the
weekday AM peak.
For the Fifth Avenue bus routes, a negligible change in ridership is projected under the TSM
Alternative. For Lexington Avenue buses and the M31 route on York Avenue, a decrease of about
15 percent in ridership is projected; this is attributable to improved travel times on the M15 on
Second Avenue which could lure some current riders on Lexington Avenue buses and the M31 to
the M15 as well as induce some all-new bus trips on the M15. For the M15 route, the TSM Alternative is projected to increase ridership by about 40 percent compared to the No Build Alternative. This reflects the 10-20 percent travel time savings expected and the additional service capacity of 50 percent.
In general, Lower East Side bus ridership is projected to increase under the TSM Alternative, primarily the M22 route along Madison Street. This route would be extended northward from
Madison Street by essentially combining the existing M22 with the northern half of the M21. The
northeastbound M22 would turn left onto Jackson Street, left onto Grand Street, right onto Kazan
Street, left onto Williamsburg Bridge North, and then right onto Avenue C and follow the remainder of the current M21 route to 34th Street. It is projected that this linkage of the M22 to workplace destinations along First and Second Avenues in the 14th to 34th Street area (including the
hospital corridor encompassing Beth Israel Medical Center, Bellevue Hospital, and NYU Medical
Center) would result in a near-doubling of AM peak hour ridership on the M22.
Table 9E-11 presents the findings of the ridership projections on a per bus basis at each route’s
peak load point(s). These analyses were prepared to determine whether the magnitude of ridership
changes per bus route would affect bus load levels to the extent that their service frequencies
would need to be adjusted upward (to avoid overloading) or downward (to make their operation
more cost-effective). Table 9E-11 indicates that several significant increases or reductions in per
9E-17
Manhattan East Side Transit Alternatives MIS/DEIS
bus load levels are projected, none of which would necessarily produce a significant change in bus
service according to NYCT. Projections for the M15 indicate that it would be operating at the service guideline for an articulated bus of about 90 riders per bus (NYCT assumes it would operate
articulated buses on the M15 route in order to effect a 50 percent increase in capacity). The load
levels for the M1/M2 at their 42nd Street peak load point are just above standing capacity guidelines and could generally be accommodate within those guidelines by the addition of one bus in
peak periods.
BUILD ALTERNATIVE 1
With Build Alternative 1, overall ridership on Fifth Avenue buses would be essentially the same
as for the No Build Alternative (see Table 9E-10). As shown in Table 9E-11, there would be
variations by location on each route. Ridership reductions along Fifth Avenue at the 72nd Street
peak load point indicate some diversion of transit riders from buses to subway in the northern half
of the study area where the influence of the new East Side subway extension would be felt. Similarly, Lexington Avenue bus ridership would be reduced significantly (by about 15 percent overall) as many bus riders would now be better served by the new subway line with this alternative.
Lexington Avenue bus ridership reductions would be substantial north of 59th Street, as shown
in Table 9E-11 for the three peak load points north of 59th Street.
A modest reduction in ridership is projected for the M15 under Build Alternative 1, since longer
trips would normally be expected to divert to the new subway line. Ridership on the M31, on the
other hand, is projected to decrease by half since residents of the far East Side would be substantially better served by the new subway than they are by the M31 (the proposed subway alignment,
in fact, very closely follows the travel path of the M31, linking residents of the farthest reaches
of the Upper East Side with the Midtown core).
The same bus route modifications developed as part of the TSM Alternative for the Lower East
Side would also be implemented as part of Build Alternative 1. As shown in Table 9E-11, an
overall bus ridership increase is projected for the Lower East Side with Build Alternative 1, although not as great as is projected with the TSM Alternative, again due to the new attractiveness
of the proposed extension of the M22 route and the new branch of the M15.
Ridership changes in the overall study area would not, for the most part, precipitate service
changes on the part of NYCT, with two possible exceptions—Lexington Avenue bus service
above 59th Street and M31/York Avenue bus service could be reduced if actual ridership reductions would materialize at levels well below seated capacities as is projected.
BUILD ALTERNATIVE 2
With Build Alternative 2, overall ridership on the Fifth Avenue, Lexington Avenue, Second Avenue, and York Avenue buses would be generally comparable to ridership with Build Alternative
1, just 4 to 5 percent lower as there would be some additional diversion from buses to subway
with LRT service available at Union Square. Any potential bus service reductions identified for
these routes with Build Alternative 1 above would be similar with Build Alternative 2.
The LRT component of Build Alternative 2 is projected to effect significant bus ridership reductions of about 60 percent, however, in the Lower East Side, as shown in Table 9E-10, particularly
for the M8 (8th Street crosstown), M9 (East Broadway/Essex Street/Avenue B/14th Street route),
and M22 (Madison Street) services, as well as for the M14 crosstown route on 14th Street. As
9E-18
Chapter 9: Transportation (Surface Transit)
shown in Table 9E-11, with Build Alternative 2 each of these routes are projected to carry per
bus ridership levels substantially below seated capacity and would therefore be candidates for significant service cutbacks. This is logical for those bus routes would essentially have their services
replicated by the LRT operating along East Broadway, Columbia Street/Avenue D, and 14th
Street.
It is possible that Avenue D service on the M14 would be discontinued since the LRT provides
identical route service. It is also possible that crosstown bus service on 14th Street would not extend east of Union Square since such service would be provided east of Union Square by the
LRT, or some reduced amount of service could be retained for the full 14th Street corridor. If service were cut east of Union Square, crosstown riders would no longer enjoy a one-seat ride on
14th Street.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The TSM Alternative and Build Alternatives 1 and 2 would benefit transit users in the MESA
study area, and no significant adverse impacts on surface transit users are predicted. Therefore,
no mitigation is required.
v
9E-19