ݺߣ

ݺߣShare a Scribd company logo

UF Policy Recommendation

•Download as DOC, PDF•
•
B
Brendan Latimer

The document proposes upgrading the Select Bus Service (SBS) on the Bx6 route in New York City to bus rapid transit (BRT). BRT would improve operations by reducing travel times, attracting more investment to surrounding neighborhoods, and better serving low-income communities along the route. Specifically, BRT could decrease the 56-minute commute on the Bx6 to 39 minutes by using dedicated bus lanes and other features. This upgraded service would provide economic opportunities for residents in Hunts Point and Morrisania, two of the lowest income areas in the city that are underserved by transit.

1 of 6
Download to read offline
Brendan Latimer To: Polly Trottenberg, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Transportation From: Brendan Latimer Re: Transportation Inequality in New York City Summary In response to your request for innovative solutions to address transportation inequality in New York City, this proposal recommends upgraded Select Bus Service (SBS) on the Bx6 route spanning northern Manhattan to the South Bronx due to the following conclusions: (I) Bus rapid transit (BRT) improves SBS operations, attracts investment to the surrounding corridor, and maintains financial cost effectiveness relative to alternatives. (II) BRT implementation can transform low-income neighborhoods underserved by the transit system. (III) Future reports should investigate financing mechanisms such as tax increment financing. Problem Statement Two-thirds of all New York City residents commuting an hour or more to work both ways earn less than $35,000 per year (Center for an Urban Future 3). Transit-starved communities correlate strongly with lower incomes, illustrating the importance of mobility to economic opportunity (NYU 6) SBS has made strides in speeding up the bus network and linking populations to jobs, raising travel times by up to 20% (DOT 9). This success presents an opportunity for the MTA to continue improving access for low-income workers by committing to the superior operations and development capabilities of BRT. Leverage BRT in NYC BRT Operations Yield Faster Bus Times. Appendix A illustrates the operational differences of BRT and SBS. BRT center-median alignments insulate routes from congestion, allow platform-level boarding and, on advanced BRT routes, enable turnstile payment systems (ITDP 14-23). These added features further reduce dwell times and accommodate large capacities without compromising average bus speed. Cleveland’s fully-operational BRT, known as the Healthline, averages speeds of 12.5 miles per hour, compared to 7.4 miles per hour for SBS, and less than 5 miles per hour for local buses (Pratt 16). BRT Attracts Investment While Maintaining Cost Effectiveness Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway cost $3 billion per mile over nearly a decade of planning and construction (Pratt 16). In comparison, Cleveland’s entire 5-mile BRT was built in less than
Brendan Latimer two years and cost under $200 million dollars ($30 million per mile) (16). While SBS averages a lower capital cost of $10 million, BRT attracts private investment along its route by virtue of its perceived permanence (ITDP “Transit Dollar” Case Studies). Since its inception in 2008, the Healthline catalyzed $4.3 billion in development, generating $29 for every dollar invested and completely transforming its blighted industrial core (RTA). Implement BRT on the local Bx6 Equity Hunts Point and Morrisania are among the least-mobile neighborhoods on the NYU access-to- job scale as well as the lowest-income, earning $25,676 and $23,452 per year respectively (NYU 23). Both generate nearly 25,000 riders daily for the local Bx6 (MTA 3)—more than double the typical American BRT ridership of 12,000 (ITDP-“Transit Dollar” 20). Residents currently face cross town commutes of 56 minutes on the local Bx6 (see Appendix B) (MTA 6). The most comparable proposed BRT-- LaGuardia/Woodhaven/Rockaway-- is projected to decrease travel time by 30% (from 65 minutes to 45) (Pratt 21). For the Bx6 this translates to a BRT cross-town commute of 39 minutes. Transformative Potential BRT on the Bx6 would provide a high-speed link for 22,482 workers from Morrisania, Melrose, and Lower Concourse to Hunts Point Produce Market’s 24,481 labor force (Pratt 39). BRT’s 17 minute time savings grants Morrisania commuters tri-state access to 107,000, 185,000, and 137,000 more jobs in Hospitality, Health Care, and Retail respectively (RPA)—three of the fastest growing sectors in the Bronx (NYS Comptroller 2). Fast, frequent service increases commercial foot traffic and access to landmarks such as Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx Borough Courthouse, and Yankee Stadium. Moreover, easy transfers to the only walkable Metro North station in the Morrisania area would “[constitute] a tremendous step towards intermodal connectivity” (54, 56), mitigating difficult reverse commutes to Connecticut suburbs. Physical Feasibility Using the 2014 BRT Standard Scorecard, as well as consulting with MTA planners working on the Bx6 SBS evaluation, this report scored the Bx6 a Bronze-standard BRT candidate. Specifically, center-median bus lanes and stations are feasible at each one of its busiest checkpoints-- Hunts Point, Yankee Stadium and Grand Concourse, and Washington Heights. Funding and Future Implementation MTA and DOT should commission a study to determine the viability of tax increment financing (TIF) on the Bx6 corridor as part of a detailed future implementation plan. TIF taxes a portion of anticipated increase in property value derived from transit projects and reinvests into the transit line, managing gentrification, while providing a self-sustaining revenue stream (O’Sullivan 10). Works Cited
Brendan Latimer Giles, David. "Behind the Curb." Center for an Urban Future (2011): 3. "Select Bus Service." NYC Department of Transportation (2013): 9. "Mobility and Equity for New York's Transit-Starved Neighborhoods: The Case for Full- Featured Bus Rapid Transit." Pratt Center for Community Development (2013): 16+. "The BRT Standard." Institute for Transportation and Development Policy(2014): 14+. "RTA Healthline Fact Sheet." Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority(n.d.): n. pag. Web Dec. 2015. Hook, Walter, Stephanie Lotshaw, and Annie Weinstock. "More Development for Your Transit Dollar: An Analysis of 21 North American Transit Corridors." Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (2013): 20. "Sustainable Communities in the Bronx: Leveraging Rail for Access, Growth and Opportunity." Bronx Department of City Planning (2014): 54-56. "Bx6 South Bronx Crosstown Select Bus Service." MTA & NYCDOT (2015): 4-6. Kabak, Benjamin. "Second Ave. Sagas." Second Avenue Sagas RSS. N.p., 13 Nov. 2013. O'Sullivan, Katie. "Land Value Capture for Mass Transit Finance." University at Albany- SUNY (2014): 10. Kabak, Benjamin. "Second Ave. Sagas." Second Ave Sagas RSS. N.p., 13 Nov. 2009. "An Economic Snapshot of the Bronx." NYS Office of the Comptroller (2013): 2. "Fragile Success: Taking Stock of the New York Metropolitan Region (Interactive Map)." Regional Plan Association (2014): n. pag. Web. APPENDIX A (Source: ITDP; secondavenuesagas.com
Brendan Latimer BRT SBS Appendix B
Brendan Latimer (Source: MTA)
Brendan Latimer (Source: MTA)

More Related Content

UF Policy Recommendation

  • 1. Brendan Latimer To: Polly Trottenberg, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Transportation From: Brendan Latimer Re: Transportation Inequality in New York City Summary In response to your request for innovative solutions to address transportation inequality in New York City, this proposal recommends upgraded Select Bus Service (SBS) on the Bx6 route spanning northern Manhattan to the South Bronx due to the following conclusions: (I) Bus rapid transit (BRT) improves SBS operations, attracts investment to the surrounding corridor, and maintains financial cost effectiveness relative to alternatives. (II) BRT implementation can transform low-income neighborhoods underserved by the transit system. (III) Future reports should investigate financing mechanisms such as tax increment financing. Problem Statement Two-thirds of all New York City residents commuting an hour or more to work both ways earn less than $35,000 per year (Center for an Urban Future 3). Transit-starved communities correlate strongly with lower incomes, illustrating the importance of mobility to economic opportunity (NYU 6) SBS has made strides in speeding up the bus network and linking populations to jobs, raising travel times by up to 20% (DOT 9). This success presents an opportunity for the MTA to continue improving access for low-income workers by committing to the superior operations and development capabilities of BRT. Leverage BRT in NYC BRT Operations Yield Faster Bus Times. Appendix A illustrates the operational differences of BRT and SBS. BRT center-median alignments insulate routes from congestion, allow platform-level boarding and, on advanced BRT routes, enable turnstile payment systems (ITDP 14-23). These added features further reduce dwell times and accommodate large capacities without compromising average bus speed. Cleveland’s fully-operational BRT, known as the Healthline, averages speeds of 12.5 miles per hour, compared to 7.4 miles per hour for SBS, and less than 5 miles per hour for local buses (Pratt 16). BRT Attracts Investment While Maintaining Cost Effectiveness Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway cost $3 billion per mile over nearly a decade of planning and construction (Pratt 16). In comparison, Cleveland’s entire 5-mile BRT was built in less than
  • 2. Brendan Latimer two years and cost under $200 million dollars ($30 million per mile) (16). While SBS averages a lower capital cost of $10 million, BRT attracts private investment along its route by virtue of its perceived permanence (ITDP “Transit Dollar” Case Studies). Since its inception in 2008, the Healthline catalyzed $4.3 billion in development, generating $29 for every dollar invested and completely transforming its blighted industrial core (RTA). Implement BRT on the local Bx6 Equity Hunts Point and Morrisania are among the least-mobile neighborhoods on the NYU access-to- job scale as well as the lowest-income, earning $25,676 and $23,452 per year respectively (NYU 23). Both generate nearly 25,000 riders daily for the local Bx6 (MTA 3)—more than double the typical American BRT ridership of 12,000 (ITDP-“Transit Dollar” 20). Residents currently face cross town commutes of 56 minutes on the local Bx6 (see Appendix B) (MTA 6). The most comparable proposed BRT-- LaGuardia/Woodhaven/Rockaway-- is projected to decrease travel time by 30% (from 65 minutes to 45) (Pratt 21). For the Bx6 this translates to a BRT cross-town commute of 39 minutes. Transformative Potential BRT on the Bx6 would provide a high-speed link for 22,482 workers from Morrisania, Melrose, and Lower Concourse to Hunts Point Produce Market’s 24,481 labor force (Pratt 39). BRT’s 17 minute time savings grants Morrisania commuters tri-state access to 107,000, 185,000, and 137,000 more jobs in Hospitality, Health Care, and Retail respectively (RPA)—three of the fastest growing sectors in the Bronx (NYS Comptroller 2). Fast, frequent service increases commercial foot traffic and access to landmarks such as Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx Borough Courthouse, and Yankee Stadium. Moreover, easy transfers to the only walkable Metro North station in the Morrisania area would “[constitute] a tremendous step towards intermodal connectivity” (54, 56), mitigating difficult reverse commutes to Connecticut suburbs. Physical Feasibility Using the 2014 BRT Standard Scorecard, as well as consulting with MTA planners working on the Bx6 SBS evaluation, this report scored the Bx6 a Bronze-standard BRT candidate. Specifically, center-median bus lanes and stations are feasible at each one of its busiest checkpoints-- Hunts Point, Yankee Stadium and Grand Concourse, and Washington Heights. Funding and Future Implementation MTA and DOT should commission a study to determine the viability of tax increment financing (TIF) on the Bx6 corridor as part of a detailed future implementation plan. TIF taxes a portion of anticipated increase in property value derived from transit projects and reinvests into the transit line, managing gentrification, while providing a self-sustaining revenue stream (O’Sullivan 10). Works Cited
  • 3. Brendan Latimer Giles, David. "Behind the Curb." Center for an Urban Future (2011): 3. "Select Bus Service." NYC Department of Transportation (2013): 9. "Mobility and Equity for New York's Transit-Starved Neighborhoods: The Case for Full- Featured Bus Rapid Transit." Pratt Center for Community Development (2013): 16+. "The BRT Standard." Institute for Transportation and Development Policy(2014): 14+. "RTA Healthline Fact Sheet." Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority(n.d.): n. pag. Web Dec. 2015. Hook, Walter, Stephanie Lotshaw, and Annie Weinstock. "More Development for Your Transit Dollar: An Analysis of 21 North American Transit Corridors." Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (2013): 20. "Sustainable Communities in the Bronx: Leveraging Rail for Access, Growth and Opportunity." Bronx Department of City Planning (2014): 54-56. "Bx6 South Bronx Crosstown Select Bus Service." MTA & NYCDOT (2015): 4-6. Kabak, Benjamin. "Second Ave. Sagas." Second Avenue Sagas RSS. N.p., 13 Nov. 2013. O'Sullivan, Katie. "Land Value Capture for Mass Transit Finance." University at Albany- SUNY (2014): 10. Kabak, Benjamin. "Second Ave. Sagas." Second Ave Sagas RSS. N.p., 13 Nov. 2009. "An Economic Snapshot of the Bronx." NYS Office of the Comptroller (2013): 2. "Fragile Success: Taking Stock of the New York Metropolitan Region (Interactive Map)." Regional Plan Association (2014): n. pag. Web. APPENDIX A (Source: ITDP; secondavenuesagas.com