So that DeKalb Ave power outage thing...

[Deucey]

...led me to look at a Manhattan bus map just cuz.

 

And I find that - excluding express buses, the B39 is the only Brooklyn bus that goes to Manhattan.

 

Granted most trips are made by subway because the BMT and IRT built the system with extensive trackage to Manhattan, but the lack of interborough bus service both exacerbates subway crowding and leads to meltdowns like today's.

 

So why hasn't done more?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

...led me to look at a Manhattan bus map just cuz.

 

And I find that - excluding express buses, the B39 is the only Brooklyn bus that goes to Manhattan.

 

Granted most trips are made by subway because the BMT and IRT built the system with extensive trackage to Manhattan, but the lack of interborough bus service both exacerbates subway crowding and leads to meltdowns like today's.

 

So why hasn't done more?

Because they don't want to.  They've even gone out of their way to cut express bus service in Brooklyn in areas without subways or that aren't ADA accessible, so that should tell you something.  The B51 was another local bus route that went to Manhattan and was axed and it wasn't restored. The B39 runs so infrequently that it's almost not worth running it.  I've been saying that our subways don't have infinite capacity, but it's like talking to a wall.  There are some that can't get past the idea of the subways being the be all end all, and any other alternative is supposedly too expensive and not worth it because it doesn't carry "X" amount of people, so this is what we have... A crumbling subway system that is an overburdened money pit.

[MHV9218]

...led me to look at a Manhattan bus map just cuz.

 

And I find that - excluding express buses, the B39 is the only Brooklyn bus that goes to Manhattan.

 

Granted most trips are made by subway because the BMT and IRT built the system with extensive trackage to Manhattan, but the lack of interborough bus service both exacerbates subway crowding and leads to meltdowns like today's.

 

So why hasn't done more?

 

Well, beyond that ^^ post ^^, I believe the modern issues are the fact that there are weight restrictions on the Brooklyn Bridge that make frequent bus service down there impossible, along with the fact that interborough travel has long been an issue for competing unions, and finally the fairly lousy ridership of buses that have done it. VG8 is right about that: the B39 and the B51 got incredibly few riders, but that was partially because the MTA all but condemned the lines to that given the paltry frequency. The B39 made it back, but only just, and there are no plans for the B51 that I know about.

 

We'll sure all be talking a lot about this come the shutdown though!

[Deucey]

But weight issues though? Didn't streetcars run across the bridges? Surely PCCs don't weigh more than a LFS Artic.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

But weight issues though? Didn't streetcars run across the bridges? Surely PCCs don't weigh more than a LFS Artic.

There are weight restrictions on certain bridges.  I believe the Brooklyn Bridge is definitely one of them and perhaps the Willliamsburg Bridge as well.

[Around the Horn]

But weight issues though? Didn't streetcars run across the bridges? Surely PCCs don't weigh more than a LFS Artic.

 

You have to remember that 1. the bridge is older and 2. that running heavyweight Peter Witt streetcars (PCCs very rarely ran on the bridge until near the end) and el trains probably had a negative effect on the bridge's structural integrity.

[NY1635]

There are weight restrictions on certain bridges.  I believe the Brooklyn Bridge is definitely one of them and perhaps the Willliamsburg Bridge as well.

 

What's stopping the MTA from running Brooklyn-Manhattan bus service via the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What's stopping the MTA from running Brooklyn-Manhattan bus service via the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel?

The is looking to CUT bus service in Brooklyn, not add service.  It's that simple.  For example, weekend service on the X27 and X28 were brought back in part due to threats of lawsuits due to subway stations not being ADA accessible.  Very few of the bus lines there are seeing increases (be it local or express).  

[MHV9218]

But weight issues though? Didn't streetcars run across the bridges? Surely PCCs don't weigh more than a LFS Artic.

 

Yeah, I don't fully buy it myself. The NYPD has also run buses over the Brooklyn Bridge when they were busy arresting half the city for Occupy years back, so it's not like the thing just collapses. My guess is that given the age of the bridge frequent heavyweight vehicles would be a source of stress. 

[bobtehpanda]

The issue has always been that at the end of the day, there is limited road capacity going across the bridges, and the powers that be would rather have all that space go to cars. Any bus route running over the bridges or tunnels would have severe reliability issues unless given lanes of their own, which is not happening regardless of your opinions on the matter.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The issue has always been that at the end of the day, there is limited road capacity going across the bridges, and the powers that be would rather have all that space go to cars. Any bus route running over the bridges or tunnels would have severe reliability issues unless given lanes of their own, which is not happening regardless of your opinions on the matter.

That already exists though with the express buses going into Manhattan.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I believe we do need some more local bus service between Brooklyn and Manhattan. Of course, there's a limit to where the buses can actually go to. This is just a thought, so I don't know if it can work, but here's something that could be tried:

 

Either have the B37, B38, or B54 run up the Manhattan Bridge, via the Bowery & 4 Avenue towards Union Square, making limited stops at Bowery & Hester Street, Delancey Street, Houston Street, 4 Avenue/ 9 Street, and Broadway/14 Street.

 

From Broadway & 13 Street, the route would run via Broadway and the Bowery, making stops at Broadway/ Waverly Place, Bowery/ Houston Street, Kenmare Street, Grand Street, and then into Brooklyn.

[checkmatechamp13]

Granted most trips are made by subway because the BMT and IRT built the system with extensive trackage to Manhattan, but the lack of interborough bus service both exacerbates subway crowding and leads to meltdowns like today's.

 

The question is, how much would it have really helped? The old B51 ran every 15-20 minutes rush hour and 30 minutes off-peak. That's not going to handle the crowds coming off various subway trains every few minutes. You would need to run it almost continuously to handle those crowds, which means there would be a lot of wasted capacity most of the time when the subway is running normally.

[bobtehpanda]

That already exists though with the express buses going into Manhattan.

 

Isn't it basically just the Battery? You have bus lanes going to the QMT but not actually in it (where it would matter most).

 

One lane is enough for a lot of buses, but we don't even have the will for that. To put this in perspective, the Lincoln XBL moves 60,000 people per hour. There also is the question of where exactly to put the buses once they get off the lanes; XBL is only at capacity because PABT is full.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Isn't it basically just the Battery? You have bus lanes going to the QMT but not actually in it (where it would matter most).

 

One lane is enough for a lot of buses, but we don't even have the will for that. To put this in perspective, the Lincoln XBL moves 60,000 people per hour. There also is the question of where exactly to put the buses once they get off the lanes; XBL is only at capacity because PABT is full.

There's a bus lane for the express buses on the Gowanus leading up to the Battery Tunnel. That was worked on for years for Staten Island express buses, and Brooklyn express buses benefit from it as well.

[Fresh Pond]

But weight issues though? Didn't streetcars run across the bridges? Surely PCCs don't weigh more than a LFS Artic.

8,000 lbs weight limit on the bridge, an LFSA is somewhere in the 50,000 lbs range

[Around the Horn]

I believe we do need some more local bus service between Brooklyn and Manhattan. Of course, there's a limit to where the buses can actually go to. This is just a thought, so I don't know if it can work, but here's something that could be tried:

 

Either have the B37, B38, or B54 run up the Manhattan Bridge, via the Bowery & 4 Avenue towards Union Square, making limited stops at Bowery & Hester Street, Delancey Street, Houston Street, 4 Avenue/ 9 Street, and Broadway/14 Street.

 

From Broadway & 13 Street, the route would run via Broadway and the Bowery, making stops at Broadway/ Waverly Place, Bowery/ Houston Street, Kenmare Street, Grand Street, and then into Brooklyn.

 

I had kind of a similar idea for the existing B39, which would go past Delancey and Allen crosstown through SoHo to 6 Avenue in Greenwich Village (with increased frequency of course) 

 

If the B37 were to go to Union Square, it would need much, much more increased frequency.

 

Then of course, there's the B71 to Lower Manhattan that never got off the drawing board.

[HenryB]

 

 

If the B37 were to go to Union Square, it would need much, much more increased frequency.

 

 

 

IMO it also needs to be a SBS since the route is quite long. Otherwise it won't help much

[checkmatechamp13]

I believe we do need some more local bus service between Brooklyn and Manhattan. Of course, there's a limit to where the buses can actually go to. This is just a thought, so I don't know if it can work, but here's something that could be tried:

 

Either have the B37, B38, or B54 run up the Manhattan Bridge, via the Bowery & 4 Avenue towards Union Square, making limited stops at Bowery & Hester Street, Delancey Street, Houston Street, 4 Avenue/ 9 Street, and Broadway/14 Street.

 

From Broadway & 13 Street, the route would run via Broadway and the Bowery, making stops at Broadway/ Waverly Place, Bowery/ Houston Street, Kenmare Street, Grand Street, and then into Brooklyn.

 

You'd kill reliability on all those routes running them over the bridge like that. The B37 specifically ends where it does because the MTA wanted it to avoid traffic in Downtown Brooklyn, and the B38 & B54, while I do get why you chose those routes (for a one-seat ride since the train doesn't go to Manhattan), you'd be causing more problems than you solve.

 

If a route were to run over the Manhattan Bridge, it would have to be some version of the B51, a short route that exists solely for that purpose.

 

Honestly, I think the only Brooklyn-Manhattan local route should be some restored version of the B71. Even the B39 running every 30 minutes....if the MTA could put in an elevator at Essex Street, you could provide the same access for disabled people that the B39 does (plus you'd serve riders going to points besides just Marcy Avenue).

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I had kind of a similar idea for the existing B39, which would go past Delancey and Allen crosstown through SoHo to 6 Avenue in Greenwich Village (with increased frequency of course) 

 

If the B37 were to go to Union Square, it would need much, much more increased frequency.

 

Then of course, there's the B71 to Lower Manhattan that never got off the drawing board.

Of course, the B37 needs better frequencies to be attractive, and relieve the subway (for inter-borough travel), the B63 (to an extent), and help out with the M103 (also to an extent). in that scenario, I would have 10-12 minute headways during the rush hour, 15 minute headways during weekday middays and early evenings, 20-30 minutes during late evenings, 15 minute headways during the daytime on Saturdays, and 20 minute headways during the daytime on Sundays.

 

A B37 to Union Square would obviously reinstate service over the bridge, although the B37 would not serve Downtown Brooklyn directly (and skip Downtown Manhattan). Most transfers can be made from connecting buses at Atlantic Terminal or up Flatbush Avenue instead of Downtown

 

The thing with the B71 to Lower Manhattan is that I feel that depending on where in Lower Manhattan it gets sent, ridership would exist during the rush hour. Downtown Manhattan, besides being a financial area, is mainly a tourist area. I wouldn't expect see many riders using it during weekends, because Downtown Manhattan is not like Midtown Manhattan where almost everyone (natives, non-natives living in NYC, etc.) goes to. Especially since many of those areas the B71 passed through experienced some form of gentrification, the bus would have to connect areas in Manhattan where these people would likely go to (besides Midtown & Whatnot) areas in The Village, SoHo, and the nearby areas do have a fair share of transplant and "trendy businesses". There are more native residents in those areas compared to Downtown Manhattan during the weekend. 

 

As for a crosstown B39, if it doesn't run like the M21 (in terms of frequency and reliability), then perhaps it can work. However, the B39 is unreliable as it is, despite it being a short route (that's the MTA's fault though, for not adjusting schedules). However, the proximity to Houston Street may be an issue too. Additionally, you could have the B39 run on Houston with the M21 in an effort to boost ridership along Houston Street. You would have to do something on the Brooklyn side too though. Perhaps run the route to Union Avenue & Metropolitan Avenue or Grand Street . 

 

You'd kill reliability on all those routes running them over the bridge like that. The B37 specifically ends where it does because the MTA wanted it to avoid traffic in Downtown Brooklyn, and the B38 & B54, while I do get why you chose those routes (for a one-seat ride since the train doesn't go to Manhattan), you'd be causing more problems than you solve.

 

If a route were to run over the Manhattan Bridge, it would have to be some version of the B51, a short route that exists solely for that purpose.

 

Honestly, I think the only Brooklyn-Manhattan local route should be some restored version of the B71. Even the B39 running every 30 minutes....if the MTA could put in an elevator at Essex Street, you could provide the same access for disabled people that the B39 does (plus you'd serve riders going to points besides just Marcy Avenue).

Regarding to the B71, see part of my post above

 

I can see the reliability issue with routes such as the B38 and B54, and it is a legitimate concern. Now, would the same apply for the B37 (like I mentioned above, the B37 would not serve Downtown Brooklyn, and would go on the Bridge and run up to Union Square)? The reason besides suggesting the three routes because of the cumbersome task of the subway alternative (the B37 would avoid Downtown Brooklyn & Downtown Manhattan, and would head straight to Chinatown and The Village unlike the ), is due to the demographics of the areas on some portions of the line. I mentioned non-native NY'ers who mainly take the subway, but perhaps if there were more direct options, more people would opt to take the bus over the train. 

 

As far east as Bed-Stuy (I've been seeing hipster-like people as far as ENY, like past Broadway Junction too) on the B38 and B54, and as far south as 20 Street on the B37, are areas where you can get these groups of people switch from the subway to bus. The B38 and B54 have the frequencies for the most part, but yeah, sending it over the bridge might/will be a nightmare. 

 

My only issue with starting the bus from Downtown Brooklyn over the Manny-B is that many will end up transferring from other routes onto said route. Giving a one seat ride will be more attractive in an effort to get riders off the subway. 

[checkmatechamp13]

riders who want a more direct ride to Greenwich Village and Midtown can get off at Pacific Street for the or .

 

I don't see what having people take the bus instead of the subway to Manhattan (from areas with lots of options) would accomplish. It wouldn't save them any time (even if it was a one-seat ride), and you'd basically have to run a continuous stream of buses to make a dent in subway ridership.

[B35 via Church]

My only issue with starting the bus from Downtown Brooklyn over the Manny-B is that many will end up transferring from other routes onto said route. Giving a one seat ride will be more attractive in an effort to get riders off the subway. 

The irony of this is that you just described the (old ridership habits of the) B51.... Most that route's usage came from the Downtown-Ridgewood routes & the B65.....

 

To send one of those Downtown-Ridgewood routes over the bridge would be suicide.... Every single one of those routes' runtime is longer than what it should be.... Especially the B54; that route spends an eternity (time-wise) along Myrtle.... God help anyone that has to rely on it.....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

riders who want a more direct ride to Greenwich Village and Midtown can get off at Pacific Street for the or .

 

I don't see what having people take the bus instead of the subway to Manhattan (from areas with lots of options) would accomplish. It wouldn't save them any time (even if it was a one-seat ride), and you'd basically have to run a continuous stream of buses to make a dent in subway ridership.

And this is precisely the kind of thinking that is killing bus service and overburdening the subways... Some people take the bus because.... Gasp... It's more convenient, and they don't care about it being slower than the subway.  The is discouraging those types of riders from using the service by literally forcing the subway down their throats.  God forbid if someone wants to use the local bus to avoid the gazillion stairs, rats, nut jobs and everything else you find in the subways, so now every time the subway lines turn into a mess, we see exactly what the has created.  Perfect example was this morning.   line was a disaster due to signal problems and trains having to be short turned... Buses were packed... Lots of people were walking in some cases since there weren't enough buses to accommodate those who were stranded with the subway fiasco.  

 

You'd kill reliability on all those routes running them over the bridge like that. The B37 specifically ends where it does because the MTA wanted it to avoid traffic in Downtown Brooklyn, and the B38 & B54, while I do get why you chose those routes (for a one-seat ride since the train doesn't go to Manhattan), you'd be causing more problems than you solve.

Yeah, that's the excuse the gave.  Ending it Barclays does just what the want... It deters ridership from the northern part of the route so that they don't get pressured into extending the B37 back to where it ran previously and then they can turn around and do just what they did recently... Reduce service on the B37... A lot of people wanted it to run where it did previously, and the refused outright to do so as if there are no other buses running in that vicinity that deal with traffic.  

[peacemak3r]

The "bus lane" on the Gowanus is not technically a bus lane but a HOV lane, because I have driven on that lane numerous times without any problems. And in terms of the Battery, I don't think there is a dedicated lane for bus as well because there were many times where I'm driving and there's an express bus behind me, unless thinks have changed over the past few weeks or so; or unless this is in terms of rush hour (for the tunnel only).

 

Anyways, I'm all up for buses into Manhattan from Brooklyn...if I lived in the area at least, say Dumbo, it would definitely be a tad bit more convenient. But for anyone outside those areas, the convenience is nullified, obviously.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The "bus lane" on the Gowanus is not technically a bus lane but a HOV lane, because I have driven on that lane numerous times without any problems. And in terms of the Battery, I don't think there is a dedicated lane for bus as well because there were many times where I'm driving and there's an express bus behind me, unless thinks have changed over the past few weeks or so; or unless this is in terms of rush hour (for the tunnel only).

 

Anyways, I'm all up for buses into Manhattan from Brooklyn...if I lived in the area at least, say Dumbo, it would definitely be a tad bit more convenient. But for anyone outside those areas, the convenience is nullified, obviously.

Cars are only supposed to be in that lane if they have a certain amount of people in their vehicules, and since that is rarely the case, for the most part, the lane is used primarily by express buses.  I hope you were in that lane for the aforementioned reasons... 

 

It is technically a bus lane though:

 

 

Permanent Gowanus Bus Lane Through Battery Created

 Read the latest news on this issue.

Thanks to the aggressive encouragement of the NYCDOT and the State Department of Transportation, the MTA upgraded the High Occupancy Vehicle Lane on the Gowanus Expressway in April to require three passengers instead of two (HOV-3). Effectively, this means a new bus lane which can carry more people faster from Staten Island and Brooklyn to Lower Manhattan. Demand for express bus service to downtown has been soaring for the last five years, and has really accelerated since 9/11. Speeds on the Gowanus HOV lane have fallen below 20 mph on some days, but are expected to climb back to 45 mph. Praise is due to NYCDOT Commissioner Iris Weinshall for pushing the bus lane, and NYSDOT Region 11 Director Doug Currey for making it happen.

Source: http://www.transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/magazine/022Spring/16gowanusbus.html