Interested Rider

On 2/25/2020 at 4:13 PM, Lawrence St said:

Um...

 

CULVER LINE SIGNAL MODERNIZATION Learn more about this project
Beginning March 20 through October 2020
Weekends* from Fri 9:45 PM to Mon 5 AM
Service between Church Av and Stillwell Av in Brooklyn is replaced by free shuttle buses

trains run between 179 St and Church Av.

SB Buses run between Church Av and Stillwell Av*, stopping at Ditmas Av, 18 Av, Avenue I, Bay Pkwy, Avenue N, Avenue P, Kings Hwy, Avenue U, Avenue X, Neptune Av and W 8 St.

Transfer between  trains and SB buses at Church Av.

For direct service between Coney Island and Manhattan/Downtown Brooklyn, take the  instead.

In Manhattan, transfer between the and at 34 St-Herald Sq.

In Brooklyn, transfer between the and SB at Stillwell Av or West 8 St. 

Show Shuttle Bus Stops 

*Except Apr 10 - 13 & Jul 3 - 6

Note: From 8 AM to 10 PM Saturday and Sunday, some buses will only run between Church Av and Kings Hwy.

the Bay News and the Marine Park/Mill Basin Courier has this information on its front page in the issue that was issued this past Friday 

The complete article is on page 14.

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Many people have heard of it, but that does not work for everyone. It comes with certain caveats.  There is no option for express bus riders that use a pass for starters, and I also don't like that it automatically refills. I refill my pass when I ready to because I want control over that.  If for some reason your card can't be refilled using the credit or debit card on file, it will block your Metrocard from being used, even if there's enough on the Metrocard to cover your fares, which is absurd. 

I am in agreement with you as I do not use a credit card to add money to my metro card as i prefer to pay in cash. My credit cards are for purchases of items that I want to purchase and where I can pay it off as soon as the bill arrives, not for a subway or bus ride.

Pardon me, but I am old fashioned when it comes using technology and with the exception of the Metro Card which produced a trememdous cost saving for me when I was working (the total cost of going from where I live to where I work was $1.75 each way. and I rode 5-6 different lines),I am one of the skeptics.

14 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

What I find truly fascinating is the obvious disconnect between the railfan community and the power that sits above the . The Governor is the boss, whether we like it or not. Don't like him then vote him out. Still won't matter to many New Yorkers not in the railfan community. Most people don't know or care whom the President of NYCT is. How many people can name more than one past President or who appointed those folks who've held the title. I bet most people can't name the Governors who have served since the agency was created. People liked Andy Byford, I liked David Gunn. Neither one could do a thing without the Governor's backing. IMO the only Governors worth mentioning, for good or bad, were Nelson Rockefeller and Prince Andrew. The only two hands on people. Think of the people who have served in that position and think of the people who have served as NYCT Presidents in that time frame. Perhaps if any of those folks had the power, the knowledge, and the backing of people like Rocky or the Prince the system would be in better shape today. This interim appointment doesn't seem to be a step forward but more of a placeholder until somebody else from the " old boy" transit network becomes available. We're just treading water now. Transit, like Social Security on the national level , is viewed as the third rail in politics. Everyone has an opinion on both but no one wants to touch it with a ten foot pole. Just my observation. Carry on.

Never has true words been written

I spent 12 years of my life working under Pataki's so called "Commissioner" and to say the least, i was one of those who felt that three terms were more than enough, let alone two terms.m

He was succeded by Eliot Spitzer and he appointed the best commissiner that I worked under during my entire tenure in the department. In one year, the department processes were bought up to date and our complaints were heard and resolved.The difference in the department was like night and day as he was a hands on administrator.

It is quite likely that if Andy Byford would have held the position under Spitzer not Cuomo, things would have been different,

On 2/24/2020 at 12:52 AM, SubwayFan3000 said:

Pataki was Better and Decent Man compare to Cuomo and Trump, also NY under Pataki he even proposed a High Speed Rail that runs from NYC to Montreal/Toronto, but i prefer a Progressive Democrats like Cynthia Nixon and AOC to become a Governor of NY, Stringer for NYC Mayor and Bernie for US President.

Andy Byford would have not taken the position at the MTA if Pataki was governor as if anyone thinks Cuomo is bad, Pataki was far worse

You could not say  anything without the approval of either Al D'Amato ro better yet Zenia Mucha and who cannot forget the picture of Al D'Amato taking ole George by the hand after George was nominated in 1994, It was either the Post or the News that had it on the front page. Everything had to be screened before it was issued and nothing went out without permission. The Albany Times- Union finally  was able to get an audience with the Commisisoner of Correctioanal Services and he could not say a word without looking first at the Pataki person as to what to say and therefore speak.(I have the complete citation somewhere and I remember it was from 2000).

Politicians like to control the flow of information to the public and even though there are laws that""protect" employees from management taking it out on them for making the information avaiable after going through the chain of command to have the problem resolved,the  laws very seldom if ever work..(New York State Civil Service Law 75 (b)(2) is the prime example). I feel for Mr. Byford as he had the courage for speaking out and I know how he felt the wrath of a Cuomo (or a  Pataki) who would do everything through their subordinates to get someone removed for speaking the truth. 

My opinion of Mr. Byford is of a person who is an honest individual and he  will do quite well where he willbe offered and accepts a position    

When this entire issue came up, you and I  discussed this issue and the sudden implementation. The time frame for response was too constrictive as there was less than a week involved between the announcement and the implementation.It was one week around the passover holidays that this change was announced and the time for community imput which was nothing. Since  we are on te other side of Nostrand Avenue which was not part of his district but the part that was in another councilman's district, we were told to go through our councilman which we did. Our councilman tried to speak to this individual raising the issues that we bought to the attention of our councilman such as how it will impact upon our large senior population especially in bad weather and, the location of the bus stop heading toward our area in a dark spot especially at night. 

To say the least, our councilman got nowhere with him even though we had a legitimate argument that no change be made at all. As far as his relationship with the NYCDOT is concerned,weI could not care less as obiviously, he cares more about his relationships with his govenment friends as compared with this community. We now have useless bike lanes on Avenues W & X and two way traffic on Avenue V west of Nostrand Avenue which has turned the street into a speedway. As far as where the B/36 stops going toward Avenue U,  we wonder how his friends in the NYCDOT  made the situation better especially with there are three bus routes at the stop and in many cases coming at the same time.thus tying up traffic on Avenue Z in both directions at East 15th Street. 

The last time there was a congressional primary in 2018, the number of actual voters that voted in this area was extremetly low or about 20 voters voting per district. If the councilman thinks he can win this part of the district especially with his track record concerning my community then I wish him well, On the other hand, why is he appealing to Republicans and Independents to change their party regisltations, so that they can vote for him especially with his record on transit in our community? 

3 hours ago, Brillant93 said:

"65 St. Stopping every other avenue as I proposed is exactly what the MTA is proposing for all its routes, so how am I losing down a bus route that dies t e en exist? What I am protesting is that their route probably will stop at every fourth avenue missing vital transfers and cause extra walking. The only reason I proposed every other avenue on this street only rather than every avenue is because the B9 is on 60 Street stopping every avenue, but they will change that to every other Avenue if they follow what they did in Queens."

If the whole point of a bus is to be faster than walking then why on earth should there be a bus stop every two blocks? I'm sure they're not going to miss transfer points. Queens isn't a good way to compare to BK because queens was unique out of all the boroughs, they had to redraw every bus route. BK will most likely be handled the same way the Bronx was. 

"B12. Yes the B12 on Empire is worse because everyone now going to the hospital using it will require a transfer. Under my proposal some B12 riders would require a transfer but just as many now requiring two buses will be able to make the trip with one bus."

But yet you want to get rid of it instead of keeping it. If its main purpose is to serve the hospital then it needs to stay, discontinuing it like you want isn't going to help. I don't get why you expect the MTA to have it go down empire while your own proposal is to have a very long bus route to replace it that doesn't even reflect the travel patterns of the customers who take the B12 or B16. 

"B36. Never said anything about the B36 not serving Coney Island Hospital. I was only proposing to return direct service to the station in one direction without a one block walk. Until several years ago, it had two directional access that everyone was happy with for forty years. The traffic congestion at the station was a myth created by DOT and I ave a video proving there was none during the height I felt the evening rush hour taken one week before they changed the route. Because of roadway reconstruction, it isn’t possible to restore westbound service to the station without ripping out the unneeded cement they put in."

Reading your proposal made it seem like you and your prediction to the MTA was it was going to replace the B4 which would avoid the hospital all together. 

"Bergen Beach. the B41 Branch is needed during rush hours."

There needs to be a branch for it at all times that provides connection to the 2 and 5 train, also that will serve the demographics of that area. Having the B9 serve that area is going to be a waste because no one needs the B9 on that end to go anywhere in midwood because there's other reliable options in the area. 

"B44 to Kingsborough. I already discussed this many times here and readers are already tired of me repeating myself with my reasons. They are clearly stated in my proposal. Having an L shaped B49 is not circuitous. It is a very direct route from East Flatbush which many residents would appreciate. I lived there for 25 years and wished many times that such a route existed. And I am not eliminating the Limited service which only runs in the AM peak anyway just to reroute the B44. I just said it would no longer be needed if the B44 proposal were accepted."

There's really no need for that. All what needs to happen is for that route to have better ways to connect people to KBCC. Rerouting the B44 isn't going to solve, its going to actually hurt people. 

"B83. Yes I proposed to straighten the B83 as I believe the MTA will propose along with a new route on Van Siclen to replace the existing B83 there and to fill a service gap north of that, but I don’t believe the MTA proposal will include that part because it is extra service."

But you wanted to replace the B20 with the B83 and put another 80ish bus to replace its service while it was straightened along penn avenue. 

"B84. Yes it is the same in this case."

My whole point is that you can't say the MTA has a worse idea if your ideas fall inline with there. The only major draw back you claim the MTA will do is cut service such as headways. Which is understandable, but if your routes are going to be the same or a little different by an avenue or two then its not fair to claim your ideas are less disastrous than the MTA. 

This is what I mean people on here don't care whats being done but who is delivering it. 

its funny that I I just had a discussion about this a couple of days with a member of the opposite political party. about how this change occurred.

We remember the b/36 change and how it was implemented at that time as it was put in place without any real discussion with us (the riders).

Everyone in the community knows who was involved and how this individual who has announced that he is running for congress wants their votes, (I cannot vote in their primary as I am a member of the opposite party). However, I will do everything that I can to remind the   voters and residents that ride the B/36 that this is the individual who changed the B/36 and refused to take responsibilityfcor his actions.

What I am afraid of with this clown is that just to get even with the B/36 riders on Nostrand Avenue that he will use his influence and have the B/36 route go down Nostrand Avenue and replace the B/4 to Knapp Street..

2 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

Lots of politicians demand "thorough audits" or "forensic audits" of the MTA, to the point where the MTA is the most audited agency in the whole state. Yet those same politicians don't focus on the results. Why? Because all those audits expose just how much money the MTA is forced to spend on audits.

You are right on the money on that one as it is the only way that the city and state comptoller's offices that can justify their existence. The purpose of the aduits are to grab headlines complaining about the agency and then we hear the agency's response and then the report gathers dust on the shelves until the next one is done sometime down the road,

We used to make the papers on regular basis as the bills were never paid on time and it took a complete change in commissioners to finally get the problem corrected or close to 30 years as the agency finally decided to centralize purchasing and payment

Pardon me for repeating myself, I posted on a thread here a couple of weeks ago that the mayor wants a complete audit of the MTA before he will release any more money to the agency.  This sent the penny pinchers into a panic which resulted in the blob that is called the Queens redesign. In my readings here and in oter places, I see that many of my colleagues have picked  up on this fact.  It is my opinion that the purpose of releasing the changes now was to provide cover for the local politicians who would garner press coverage and yet do nothing to claim after this garbage is implemented and they are re-elected to say that they tried but yet in reality did absolutedly nothing to help the MTA.

For those who are hoping that Republicans will come to the rescue, it reminds me of the announcement made by Chaim Deutsch that he was running for congress this past week. He is asking that republicans and Independents should register (or re-register) as members of the Democratic Party to help defeat the radicals. Most of the Republicans in this city are leaving or dying off and it is the same thing in other parts of the state. As the numbers decrease, it becomes harder and harder to get elected as not only it is the money issue, it is the support of  our media being the unabashed cheer leaders for the Democratic Party,  The problem is that the ones that vote in primaries  are the ones commited to these policies that got us into trouble in the first  place.. When 75 -80% or more of the registered party members do not vote in the primary, the candidates chosen will not reflect the views of the majority, unless the number of voters in a Democratic primary starts reaching a reasonable figure of 50-60% 

If a depot is to have any major changes done such as UP, does it not have to appear in the MTA minutes?

Had it appeared there, someone would have reported it here and we would have discussed it. I could be wrong but I do not remember reading about any UP depot changes here.

I forgot about the B/68 as it now runs from the Stillwell terminal, not West 5th Street. Shared facilities at the terminal.

Everyone is mentioning KCC but during the summer the B/1 had the extra Manhattan Beach runs from 25th Avenue. Could this be a reason (besides KCC) that artics are being placed on the line?

The B/9 had school runs running out of UP. This also could be a factor in the route possibly going to UP. 

I feel that the B/1 going artic will be a straight swap with the B/9 going back to Ulmer Park.

 As far gaoing to Flatbush, I am thinking that it could be possibly in the future but not now as if the garage is to be converted to artics, it will have to wait until the B/41 and B/49 are converted.  It will also have to wait until the Brooklyn routesare redesigned.

On 1/15/2020 at 2:26 PM, Interested Rider said:

The whole Queens redesign comes aross to me as a political hit to cover up something else. 

In this case it is the ferries which are far more wasteful than the existing system and by doing something as crazy as what we have here, the focus will be on the multitiude of changes and not on the issue that should be the focus. The New York Post had an article on the cost of ferry service and in my opinion the cost is far higher per passenger than for local and express bus service. When an agency takes a long time to respond to Freedom of Information Law requests on something like ferry service where the information was avaiable, it becomes clear since it did not fit the goals of the mayor's agenda, the responses were "conveniently delayed" as on purpose. The practice is usually commonplace when the information that the person requesting it will harm the political goals of the agency or the elected official.

The mayor has signaled to the agency and his appointees that he plans to cut funding to the MTA and MTA bus and the penny pinchers must have had a heart attack. This is the end result of something that should have been divided into at least two different parts with Union Turnpike being a line of separation done at two different times as based on such a lage number of changes, The orders went down to come up with something like this disaster. I am not saying that changes did not have to be made quite the opposite but that by not doing the enitre borough of Queens, at one shot, the changes that should be made could have been done.   

It is quite clear that those who came up with this "redesign" are counting on the public just plain accepting it. That is not getting together with others and using everything to stop these changes now. The MTA will still try to ram through these changes even with public opposition and I would be very wary of any proposal to implement these changes after November 2020.

It is that time when a bigger can of worms will open thanks to our elected officials in Albany and City Hall.

That may be fine for express and limited routes but for many local routes which carry  elderly riders like myself, it is totally wrong. 

You cannot use an arbitrary figure to determine whether a stop is needed or not as there are many stops that should remain close together especially with local routes are there are other factors that determine usage.

 

The Mayor today stated that he will not contribute one more penny until the MTA receives a complete audit. That is what I call "chutzpah!"

The MTA knew about this before this garbage appeared and it is my opinion that this is the reason that the Queens redesign was issued in this form. 

The MTA is not the only agency that is impacted as the leaks have started and the inability of the elected officials both here and Albany to reduce spending in certain areas  has come back to haunt them

The whole Queens redesign comes aross to me as a political hit to cover up something else. 

In this case it is the ferries which are far more wasteful than the existing system and by doing something as crazy as what we have here, the focus will be on the multitiude of changes and not on the issue that should be the focus. The New York Post had an article on the cost of ferry service and in my opinion the cost is far higher per passenger than for local and express bus service. When an agency takes a long time to respond to Freedom of Information Law requests on something like ferry service where the information was avaiable, it becomes clear since it did not fit the goals of the mayor's agenda, the responses were "conveniently delayed" as on purpose. The practice is usually commonplace when the information that the person requesting it will harm the political goals of the agency or the elected official.

The mayor has signaled to the agency and his appointees that he plans to cut funding to the MTA and MTA bus and the penny pinchers must have had a heart attack. This is the end result of something that should have been divided into at least two different parts with Union Turnpike being a line of separation done at two different times as based on such a lage number of changes, The orders went down to come up with something like this disaster. I am not saying that changes did not have to be made quite the opposite but that by not doing the enitre borough of Queens, at one shot, the changes that should be made could have been done.   

It is quite clear that those who came up with this "redesign" are counting on the public just plain accepting it. That is not getting together with others and using everything to stop these changes now. The MTA will still try to ram through these changes even with public opposition and I would be very wary of any proposal to implement these changes after November 2020.

It is that time when a bigger can of worms will open thanks to our elected officials in Albany and City Hall.

6 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

Stops being a mile a part is what made the N6 Limited awesome and make the BX12,  M60, B46, Q25/53, Q113 awesome as well. Stops get removed and ridership increases.

That may be fine for express and limited routes but for many local routes which carry  elderly riders like myself, it is totally wrong. 

You cannot use an arbitrary figure to determine whether a stop is needed or not as there are many stops that should remain close together especially with local routes are there are other factors that determine usage.

9 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I think you might have misunderstood what I was saying. I was not saying the MTA should advertise its services. I was saying they should get advertisers to advertise inside the buses. I don’t know if there ever was an advertising department. I always remember it being contracted out. 

I don’t know where you got the idea that all ideas originate from the top. The MTA had a very successful Suggestion Department whereby suggestions were evaluated anonymously, and employees who saved the MTA money received cash awards which sometimes were substantial like up to $30,000. 

Employees in the department where I worked complained to my boss that it took too long for suggestions to be evaluated and sometimes worthwhile ones were rejected, so he started his own suggestion program and I was the head of it. Suggestions were evaluated by a committee of five. We could only give $100 rewards, but still received many suggestions. When I retired, the program ended because no one wanted to continue it. I understand that the NYCT Program also ended which made no sense because it was a good program but never received the prominence it deserved. It should have been headed by a Vice President. Instead the person in charge was not even a manager and had no power to see suggestions were fairly evaluated. There was an appeals procedure to the Executive Vice President, but nothing was really re-evaluated, and appealed suggestions got a rubber stamp rejection.

What I learned from this was how easy it was for the MTA to save money. Changing one simple procedure how something was done had the potential of saving $100,000 annually. It made sense to give the employee a $10,000 reward to encourage other worthwhile suggestions. Just think how many procedures could be improved. The amount of money potentially saved is limitless. 

So without the program, maybe you are correct that now all suggestions have to come from the top. Without the Suggestion Program, when someone had a good idea, the bosses usually stole it anyway claiming it was their own and getting credit for it, leaving a bunch of disgruntled employees. 

It is quite possible that I may have misinterpreted your previous statements based on the fact that we worked in two different agencies where suggestions had different ways of being evaluated. It is great to hear that the MTA had a unit that read the suggestions and evaluated them to see if it would work.  I had the opposite problem and it was the reason that employees were reluctant to submit anything that would imporve services. I found this to be true when it comes to those agencies that are under the direct control of either the governor or the mayor.  Unless the program is strongly supported by management in the way you describe and not just with posters as it was where I worked, it will not be effective.

The vast maority of agencies in government are run by people that have loyalty to the executive that appointed them. During my time working in government, I noticed a marked shift in management thinking and style when it came to employee suggestions. When I started in 1979, it was "don't send me problems, send me solutions" to one where it became don't bother wiith suggestions as we know everything. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that this has become the standard today in government

On 1/9/2020 at 7:58 PM, BrooklynBus said:

The plan to end the Q53 will be scrapped and there will be some changes in Jackson Heights because of all the opposition there. They will also probably be forced to return some of the proposed bus stops slated for removal. But in the end they will still remove far too many bus stops than necessary, and will also cancel some of the good parts of the plan that people like, with the excuse that they can’t keep them because of the additions they are putting back because they have arbitrarily decided the plan has to be cost neutral.

Also, I believe some of the cuts to MTA Bus Co routes have been forced upon the MTA by NYCDOT to reduce the subsidy the city has to pay the MTA so the city can use that money to expand ferry service. 

I would not be surprised that the Mayor is behind the cuts as he is more interested in ferry service that serves the communities that voted for him. I know the mayor is not running for re-election but his goal now is to maximize the damage done to the city before he gets a job with one of those think tanks that come up with many of these "ideas". As far as NYCDOT is concerned, it is more important to put up useless bike lanes in communities that do not want them or need them (May I ask who uses them on Avenues W and X in Sheepshead  Bay?)

What I am afraid of is this year's and next year's gloom and doom budgets that have started toappear on the state and city 's  horizon. I think that we are seeing here is the opening shot with the proposed cuts in Queens.

On 1/7/2020 at 1:44 PM, BrooklynBus said:

 

There are other ways to be more efficient without doing it on the backs of bus riders.

Example through more efficient scheduling. Why do buses operate halfway across the borough not in service? 

Why after 15 years have they not been able to merge NYCT and MTA BusCo depots. Think of all the wasted money by just by having the B100 operating out of Spring Creek Depot for 15 years as opposed to Flatbush Depot that it runs right past. 

Why has interior bus advertisement space been empty for the past 40 years? It's because the terms and conditions are not conducive to local businesses. The MTA claims no one wants to advertise on the inside of buses. Maybe that's true for the chains. But if the price was right, local businesses would advertise. Look at all the extra money they would have over 40 years if each ad space had been filled at a cost of $10 per month? Assuming 50 spaces per bus, that's $500 per bus per month x 4,000 buses is $2,000,000 per month x 12 months is $24 million per year x 40 years is  $960 million. 

There is something wrong with the current terms. Either the terms are too long, you have to advertise on too many buses where you have no potential customers or the cost is too much. If you could only advertise on buses in one depot, for a reasonable term at a reasonable charge, you would get customers. Hasn't the MTA heard of supply and demand? The problem is they just contracted out the advertising and probably haven't reviewed the terms of the contract in years and left everything to the vendor to decide. Anything they would charge is better than no revenue at all. 

 

Pardon my sarcasm but "what is revenue?" I thought all of the agency's money comes from the taxpayers of the city and the state when the two  governmental entities voted on a budget each year..

By the same token "why should we advertise?" I thought we have a captive audience and we do not need to advertise our services to them.

With the bunch that is running (ruining) the system even if there was an advertising department, the penny pinching gang would find a way to get rid of it  the moment one of the political candidates runs against one of their patrons and of course,, the department would disappear in a New York minute..

Yes! I too remember the ads on the inside of buses and it bought in revenue for the agency but was a time when ideas went up the chain of command and were discussed and implemented. Today, if the idea does not come from the mountain top, it will never see the light of day and how many employees would take a chance at upsetting someone who will find a way to abolish their item without batting an eyelash. For the record, someone tried to do it to me and they were unsuccessful. Many of us that are part of that generation were not afraid to stick our neck out for something that were believed in to be right and did suffer the consequences for it. 

It is a different world out there as compared when we started in the 1970's and my heart goes out to those who are first coming into goverment today. 

On 12/21/2019 at 8:20 AM, Lawrence St said:

Do none of the eastbound M34 riders read the destination sign to know if it's going to Waterside or FDR Drive? I swear at least 19 people come up to to the driver everyday at 2nd Av asking if they're going to Waterside or not.

I have had the same problem with the southbound b/44 sbs  as  there are three terminals (U,X and Knapp) and my eyes have to be very fast to catch which one is the bus going to where at that time. For the record there is no pole listing when which bus is coming at the stop that I board (Avenue L)

The problem is that the sign says "select bus" three times before a mention of the route and then finally the bus destination. At which time the sequence reverts back to the" select bus" and if your eyes are not that good as many in age bracket will attest, you land up asking the driver the question. The sign itself is very hard to see as both the bus itself and its destination sign are blue although different shades and the letters are in yellow. When the sign just says one terminal, there is no problem  

A large percentage of the b/44 sbs riders know it is an SBS even from a distance so that there is no need to repeat SBS three times. What is needed is for the bus destination to be repeated more than once before the system rotates the signs again.

The Q train has had work being done at night all this week with service between Barclays Center and Kings Highway replaced by shuttle buses.

This morning there was a switch problem at Prospect Park that delayed B and Q trains.

On 11/7/2019 at 4:19 PM, B35 via Church said:

...and to those people (that don't know any better), I would revert back to the original, general stance of the B74 not needing any extension at all.
(there wouldn't be any carrying of air to worry about)

If there's to be a B4 that doesn't serve Sheepshead Bay subway, you may as well terminate the route at the hospital - Which is exactly what was done with the 2010 cuts (of course, the MTA later reverted Sheepshead service sometime in early 2013)..... From points east of the subway, there isn't all that much through riding being done on that route.....

I know about the the cutting of the B/4 route in 2010 at the hospital. The point that I was making however is that there seems to be a move to straighten out bus routes so that there should be no deviation from the straight route and that was the reason that I referred to Ocean Avenue as a terminal point. I have taken the B/4 from the hospital to the Sheepshead Bay station during the early afternoon and it was a typical B/4 run as it was not crowded (and for the record neither is the rest of the line) and this can be seen in the 20 -30 minute headways at that itme. As long as I can remember even when the B/4 terminated at Harway Avenue up and until November 1978, the headways on the line were close to 20 minutes during the day so the B/ 4  ihas always been a poor performer compared to routes that parallel the route even on the west end.

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

Yeh, the B4 definiitely needs be terminated either at CIH and or Sheepshead Bay Road . Anything further than that doesn’t make sense since that particular portion of Sheepshead Bay is car centric and somewhat dependent of the B36. There is no need for the B4 to be at Knapp Street. 

The neighborhood may be car centric but there is a large amount of persons who are elderly who live on the route who do not drive and rely on it. If the B/4 is  cut at the hospital, then  the link to Sheepshead Bay Station from Knapp Street will be cut for many of them.and that means no access to shopping and the post office. When the route was cut at the hospital in 2010, there was a vast outcry from the community organizations, political leaders and the Community Board for the route to be restored. If this change is proposed, the community will fight tooth and nail to stop it. 

As far as the B/36 is concerned there are only three streets that allow for a crossing of thr Belt Parkway from the B/36; Ocean Avenue, Bedford Avenue and Nostrand Avenue so if a rider lives (for example) between these streets or east of Nostrand Avenue on Emmons Avenue, I sincerely doubt that someone will take the B/36 but will tkae a cab instead. of relying on the b/36 or walking. In my many years of taking the B/36, I have not seem anyone who would take the B/36 to Nostrand Avenue and Avenue Z and then cross over to take B/44 to Knapp Street

Let me add my two cents worth as I rode both the B/4, B/36 and the B/21 before the 1978 changes so I can speak about how these routes actually served the area at that time. I spoke at the meeting in July 1978 at the church in Gravesend on this subject. 

Many of you know me as a critic of Brooklyn Bus but the way he reconfigured the routes in that part of  Brooklyn was the best thing that happened to the community and should remain as is. When I read or hear about the ideas to make the B/4 a straight route on Neptune and Emmons, I say forget it as it the Sheepshead Bay  Station that generates the additional passengers for the B/4 and without it, you might as well terminate the route at Ocean Avenue. By taking away the routing to the station, you have just made the many cabs that wait at the station a lot richer as B/4 pasengers headed east cannot take the B/36 as for there is a barrier that prevents access from Avenue Z and it called the Belt Parkway,

Yes! The B/36 has problems as there are many locations on the route where people forget about the traffic rules and thus the route runs into problems which is the reason that the route does not run very well. I have taken the same bus at the same time on different days and the traffic levels and the passengers could vary considerably. Avenue  Z has truck traffic and since they cannot park some of them would rather do their deliveries from the street thus blocking the one lane available for traffic and of course, it has the double parked school buses at East 27th Street or the parents waiting to pick up their kids at East 19th Street. All you need is something to happen on Ocean Parkway at the Belt Parkway amd the route is DOA. In my opinion what would benefit the B/36 service is regular coverage of this portion of the route by the ticketrons.

I do not remember how many times  I have posted on this forum  that the B/4 route should  not be extended up  Knapp Street  over the years as it would carry air as there is virtually nothing there. What is really bothering me here is two things with first the push to straighten out the routes and the second is the 902 feet between stops. As i stated with the B/4, keep it the way it is for the reasons that I have listed. It is the push to eliminate stops that concerns me more as I am worried that instead of having intermediate stops between the Avenues such as between Ocean and Bedford and Nostrand Avenues, buses will stop at the Avenues only based on the 902 feet standard. 

The problem with the B/1 is not the hospital, it is both the Brighton Beach Avenue and the 86th Street Elevated Structures. Coney Island Hospital is a major traffic generator and the bus could be on time for most of the route but once it goes under the elevated structures especially along 86th Street, the schedule goes out the window. 

On 9/19/2019 at 12:55 PM, MHV9218 said:

You should see the SI buses Manhattanville has inherited. Bodies are the worst I've seen in 20 years. Made worse by the fact that Yukon never painted replacement panels (they went under a wrap) so you've got grey primer all over the exterior.

Anything that has been transferred from Staten Island to another garage is always in bad shape. Over the years, I remember buses being transferred to the island to replace equipment and when it was transferred back off the island, it was not the same. RTS 9382-9416, 9418-9429 were good buses in Flatbush, then spent a year out at Yukon and  needed a lot of work when they were transferred to Ulmer Park. 

I am trying to remember if there were buses transferred from Staten Island to Manhattanville over the many years that I were on the island but I am drawing blanks. Most of the buses that were transferred from Staten Island went to either Brooklyn or Queens. If there were buses from Manhattanville transferred to Staten Island, they stayed there.

On 8/30/2019 at 1:13 PM, NewFlyer 230 said:

It’s not uncommon for other depots to help repair buses that are not theirs. Queens Village repaired Orion V’s that came from Staten Island back in 2012/2013. I also believe at one point CP fixed RTS’s and they only use CNG buses for their local/limited service.

I just find it hilarious that when a decent amount of buses are being transferred from Staten Island and the Bronx, they usually have to be fixed up. I wouldn’t be surprised if those 2013 XD60’s that CS just received from The Bronx are in the shop right now getting repaired. 

Staten Island was always known for having poor maintenance and when buses were transferred to other depots they had to be repaired. Going back years like to December 2007, i had come back to work after three weeks off and it seems that Staten Island had a group of RTS from various garages working the local routes. Right after that Flatbush sent 9382-9416, 9418-9429 to Yukon to replace other RTS. Those lasted a year and were then sent to Ulmer Park where work had to be done on them to be placed in service. 

The last time that I can remember Staten Island buses having good maintenance was prior to the Mid 1970's when they had the Macks and later the old looks. The reason that maintenance went down hill after that was they were adding routes and did not have the garage space to maintain them, After all it took 20+ years for Charleston to finally open for buses.

Quote

 

I sincerely doubt if Adrew Cuomo will take responsibility for anything. After all, it is his people that were in charge and signed the contracts. He therefore was involved one way or another since he was elected in 2010

If Andrew took responsbility for something then how about his failure to help NYCHA when he was HUD Secretary under Clinton. That was the time to do it as if he (and his partner, the mayor), would have done something for the tenants at that time, the developments would not be in the bad shape that they are in now.

The political establishment will do whatever it wants as they know that  the likeliehood of being voted out of office are slim and none.