Armandito

2 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

https://1drv.ms/b/s!AmiYAcY6ebQngUDLhOC-BonmAg19

I also started a Facebook group for the Brooklyn Bus Network Redesign. If you use Facebook, you are welcome to join. The goal is to formulate a plan that has wide support that can be presented to the MTA as a response when they release their draft plan, which I am sure will be inferior to what others will come up with, since they are focused on eliminating service because of their preoccupation with operating costs rather than improving the network to improve accessibility.

That link is:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/632231551145285 

Just joined the Facebook group. Thanks

2 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

Version 3.5 from over a year ago was my latest. I am assuming that is what you are referring to.  

I'd like to see a link to Version 3.5 for future reference.

4 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

Did you ever see my proposals? I proposed extending only the B35s starting at McDonald Ave to JFK and giving it a different route number. That way the route doesn't become too long.

I did see your proposals a few times in the past. IIRC your old B19 proposal is more or less similar to my B80 proposal, albeit with some differences. While my B80 is proposed as a limited-stop route operating 24/7 between Newkirk Plaza and JFK (with 30 minute headways overnight), your B19 is a local route operating 15-20 minute headways during the day with no overnight service. Your B19 also takes a more indirect route to and from The Junction though I get that other buses are being rerouted in your proposals, too.

10 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

This is literally my idea of the extended B35 to Belt Pkwy.

What a coincidence. But I wouldn't be so sure about extending the B35 beyond Brownsville as that route is already long enough.

21 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

It looks good, though I do have some reservations about having the B81 operate along Flatlands Avenue alongside the B6 and B82. I was thinking why that route was routed along Avenue H and Flatlands Avenue between Utica Avenue and East 105th Street rather than along Foster Avenue, which currently sees no bus service, is mostly a considerable distance from other east-west bus corridors, and has seen some new development in recent years. Particularly, the opening of Canarsie Plaza right by Brooklyn Terminal Market. Both are serviced by one north-south bus route and no east-west bus route. It would do wonders to have an east-west bus route to serve the areas.

The route could make 11 stops between, and including Utica Avenue and East 105th Street, such as East 53rd Street, East 57th Street, Ralph Avenue, East 83rd Street, East 87th Street, Remsen Avenue, East 93rd Street, Rockaway Pkwy, and East 101st Street, and it can attract some new riders as well.

My proposed routings for the B80 LTD (purple) and B81 LTD (orange): 

Note that the following two stops have been added to the B81 LTD route:

• On Av D at E 39/40 Sts to serve Albany Av
• On Av D at E 56/57 Sts to serve Nazareth Regional High School

The following cross streets/subway stations are served by both routes:

• Newkirk Plaza
• Flatbush/Bedford Avs
• Rockaway Pkwy
• E 105 St

52 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

It looks good, though I do have some reservations about having the B81 operate along Flatlands Avenue alongside the B6 and B82. I was thinking why that route was routed along Avenue H and Flatlands Avenue between Utica Avenue and East 105th Street rather than along Foster Avenue, which currently sees no bus service, is mostly a considerable distance from other east-west bus corridors, and has seen some new development in recent years. Particularly, the opening of Canarsie Plaza right by Brooklyn Terminal Market. Both are serviced by one north-south bus route and no east-west bus route. It would do wonders to have an east-west bus route to serve the areas.

The route could make 11 stops between, and including Utica Avenue and East 105th Street, such as East 53rd Street, East 57th Street, Ralph Avenue, East 83rd Street, East 87th Street, Remsen Avenue, East 93rd Street, Rockaway Pkwy, and East 101st Street, and it can attract some new riders as well.

I routed it along Flatlands and Av H so it could directly serve the Canarsie hub at the terminal and also because Flatlands already has a bus lane--something Foster Av is currently lacking. While I do agree with your proposal there, it would mean a more indirect route to the terminal in exchange.

On 1/14/2022 at 5:38 PM, JeremiahC99 said:

As someone who has commuted through the area, I will agree that the area as a whole is congested. However, I'm not convinced on the routing you proposed, since it bypasses the college and Midwood High, which sees a considerable number of people using the B6, including students. If anything, I recommend that bus lanes be added on Flatbush Avenue through the area (from Farragut Road to Avenue I), and have the B6 and B11 routes use those bus lanes from Glenwood Road to Avenue H, where the B6 would continue on Avenue H to the normal route. This could benefit other bus lines as well, such as the B41 and B103.

Going back to this, here's what I revised: https://imgur.com/a/xWriL1i

I also made an alternative proposal that keeps the current B15 routing along Marcus Garvey Blvd/Lewis Av but with a proposed southbound bus lane along the former: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1kVmJwPSonO4VgTW6LKJ-fwUDamqOBXl7&ll=40.644603496581034%2C-73.91131499999999&z=11

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The only differences between the two brands is the idea of paying before you board, having all door boarding and TSP (Transit Signal Priority). All of those things won't be unique features once OMNY replaces the Metrocard and the  finally proceeds with all-door boarding and expands TSP Citywide.

SBS did serve its purpose during a time when the technology for OMNY wasn't widespread enough to enable tap-and-go boarding. There has been talk about retiring the MetroCard as far back as 2007 when this technology pioneered on the Lexington Av Line in a partnership with Citibank, but for a variety of reasons its evolution into a systemwide medium of fare payment has been very slow to progress. I suppose one of the reasons could be the palatial size and complexity of NYC's public transportation system.

8 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

As someone who has commuted through the area, I will agree that the area as a whole is congested. However, I'm not convinced on the routing you proposed, since it bypasses the college and Midwood High, which sees a considerable number of people using the B6, including students. If anything, I recommend that bus lanes be added on Flatbush Avenue through the area (from Farragut Road to Avenue I), and have the B6 and B11 routes use those bus lanes from Glenwood Road to Avenue H, where the B6 would continue on Avenue H to the normal route. This could benefit other bus lines as well, such as the B41 and B103.

I'll make the edits to my map soon.

39 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

There is no reason to have any new SBS routes with OMNI coming on line. The fare machines would be a waste of money.

So that means the proposed SBS routes on my map would have to remain as Limiteds. On the other hand, I'm not sure whether the existing SBS routes would be rebranded back to LTD or retain their existing branding once OMNY comes along.

49 minutes ago, Lex said:

That would only provide ammunition to those calling for it to be split.

If you feel a split is better, I'd have one segment operate between The Junction and Bath Beach and another between Avenue J/Coney Island Avenue and Gateway Mall. You could also extend the B82 to that shopping center during daytime hours.

2 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I do have a concern. Why are you taking the B6 off Glenwood Road and Bedford Avenue? The current routing serves Brooklyn College and Midwood High School well.

The area around Glenwood Road near "The Junction" is a bottleneck and I wanted to eliminate turns around that segment of the B6 route to enable more direct service.

58 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Anyone else think the B6 should be split? That route is way to long.

I don't think it should be split. It should get its own SBS variant like the B82, but bus lanes would be relegated only to Bay Parkway and Flatlands Avenue where there are two lanes in each direction as opposed to one. That route is already among the busiest in NYC and it's odd that it doesn't have SBS. Even the B35 which is also within the top ranks is already starting to get SBS treatment.

A map I made of the B6 SBS along with other revisions I proposed can be seen here (the older link I posted a few months ago doesn't work anymore): https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1rr0X07pPQeV5P7YUk1WxRyLPKkhpzn5F

3 minutes ago, mrsman said:

I agree.  The length of the line is not what causes problems and delays, for the most part.  The merges are far worse at propagating delays.

The and lines, despite sharing trunk lines with other routes, do not share any of their own trackage with their respective express counterparts which is why they can run as frequently and as reliably as they could. But keep in mind that overcrowding is a key contributing factor to delays and erratic scheduling if merging doesn't play a role.

8 hours ago, Vulturious said:

Extending the  to Gateway is definitely something the MTA should at least consider, you've already pointed out about the housing development so there isn't much else to really talk about.

Why this has been overlooked by transit officials is quite puzzling. With Livonia Yard the infrastructure is right there, you just need to make some modifications and you're all set. There was once a plan to extend the as far as Flatlands Av back when the Program for Action came along in 1968, but it never materialized.

9 hours ago, Vulturious said:

I personally don't have an issue relocating a portion of the  to run along the LIRR Bay Ridge branch, but unfortunately freight service runs through there. It would be very unlikely to have that branch converted for Subway use. If this were to happen, might as well extend the line further if possible maybe up until 62 St-New Utrecht Av. This would allow for another Brooklyn crosstown service, but running through 3/4 subway services that runs to Coney Island.

The B6 route, part of which runs more or less parallel to the Bay Ridge Branch ROW, is already one of the busiest bus routes in NYC so if a subway isn't feasible your best bet is reconfiguring the segment between Flatbush Av and Ralph Av to accommodate bus lanes and SBS; I even did my own attempt at mapping a potential routing for it here on Google Maps (https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1rr0X07pPQeV5P7YUk1WxRyLPKkhpzn5F&ll=40.642556834464244%2C-73.889335&z=11). While SBS may have its own flaws it's still a decent alternative to shelling out astronomical funds to build ADA-accessible stations and new rolling stock for another subway through the heart of Brooklyn.

Read about the B15 possibly becoming an SBS route from this thread and decided to map it in this proposal of my own. It includes a revision to the existing B6 service pattern along with two new bus routes called the B80 SBS (Newkirk Plaza-JFK) and B81 Local (Newkirk Plaza-Spring Creek). I also proposed making the Av H/Glenwood Rd corridor an east/west pair to allow for the potential installment of bus lanes as these two roads are too narrow to accommodate them both ways: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1USzOfLBs20oQ0mo7L0Uo1EKVBT185vIh&ll=40.644249046777595%2C-73.889335&z=11

17 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The dosent need a full time yard. Look at the , there's no yard anywhere along its route and yet it's still one of the best preforming lines in the system.

If the really needs a yard, just convert 36th St yard into a storage yard.

The may be one of the more reliable lines at this time, but this not so in the past when the route ranked at the bottom for regularity of service and breakdowns. Needless to say, some of the stations along the line are in subpar condition, and you don't need to look further than the 21 St-Van Alst and Broadway stations to find out.

7 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

No one says it, but in a way this pandemic has been a blessing of sorts. Our subway system was overtaxed. Overcrowded on some lines and quite frankly, we need to be considering alternatives until more capacity can be added. Ferries, buses... Whatever can help.

Right on.

44 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

But by doing that, you'll create a merging bottleneck at 36th Street. When the  operated to Bay Pkwy, it merged with the  at 36th (as well as the  and the /  before it). There would always be delays at 36th. Why bring that back?

If there is a demonstrated preference of West End Line riders for Grand Street and 6th Ave, I wouldn't want to stand in the way of that. I mean, before Vanschnookenraggen posted that plan on his blog, my favored option was to have the  run via the Sea Beach Line, while leaving the  and  in Brooklyn as is. But that would either require the  to stay on QBL (and deal with its million merges and continue to be unreliable) or build connecting yard lead tracks from the 4th Ave local tracks to connect to them to the 38th Street Yard, so that the  can be based in Brooklyn. But this option would likely require the work trains based there to be dispersed to yards around the system (is that really a bad thing?).

The 36th St Yard will very likely be converted for regular maintenance service once the SAS is finished in its entirety (if it ever happens). But nothing is known about what routes would be assigned to that facility.

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

This service pattern has been in place for years and it makes a lot of sense. The  covers that area just fine.

There's a rumor I've been reading about regarding the fate of the  express buses if the Rockaway Beach Branch ever gets reactivated for subway service, and it's not a good rumor. There's been some speculation that ridership on those routes will fall off a cliff once the subway reaches the QBL from the Rockaway Peninsula, though we can't be really sure what kind of impact it would have till we actually experience it.

9 hours ago, Vulturious said:

Oh you know I completely forgot about that idea I'm not going to lie.

Don't West End riders prefer Grand St over Canal St? Back in 2004 when the Manhattan Bridge reopened, this was the reason why the was chosen to be the full time West End route over the , which in the end got downgraded to a weekday only route to Whitehall St. If any extension is suggested, it would operate rush hours only to Bay Pkwy in a manner similar to the trains in the Bronx; when trains are running the would operate express in the peak direction along West End between 9 Av and Bay Pkwy.

There's been talks about reactivating the defunct Rockaway Beach Branch by extending the train from Rego Park to Beach 116 St but I disagree with that plan: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/07/14/mta-hiked-costs-of-long-sought-eastern-queens-subway-expansion-report/

In my perspective, the is already too circuitous of a route to warrant an extension to the Rockaways; I'd just leave it at Howard Beach for connections to the train for continuing service as well as the AirTrain to JFK.

1 hour ago, ActiveCity said:

Speaking of the Rockaway Beach Branch, Andrew Yang actually supports the Queensway plan which is a slap in the face for central Queens residents. A train will always be better than no train at all. Check his recent instagram post.

You're right...Yang is indeed one big encyclopedic ignorance. Ask him how long he's been living in NYC and he'll stare at you with a blank face.

3 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Any tunnel to Brooklyn from Water St is going to be sloping at that point. There's a reason no cross-river tunnel has stations that close to the shore.

Which is why none of the East River tunnels connecting Queens and Manhattan have stations east of Third/Lexington Avenues.

14 hours ago, Vulturious said:

I don't see a big problem with this at all. Service coming from QBL would just terminate at Hanover Square, there isn't a need for it to keep it running into Brooklyn at all, just transfer to the  for service towards Brooklyn, problem solved. It's like you said about the , there is no need to really extend it. Although, personally I'd like it to have some sort of connection to other lines like 4th Av line and Brighton if possible. I do not know how doable it is, but it would allow for reroutes.

AFAIK the proposed design for Hanover Sq calls for the station to be a single island platform with just one X-switch; there's nothing in the blueprints that mention a third track for relaying trains that would terminate there despite a provision for a Brooklyn extension being on the books. (It would be helpful if someone could draw a track map depicting a possible track layout for Hanover Sq in a way that allows it to be used as both a terminal and a through station.)

10 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

I like the idea of connecting to the Rockaways considering it will mostly be used for Queens-Manhattan travel but I might prefer a direct North-South Queens line.

Same, but I also think a new subway line to Queens College and Fresh Meadows is also needed, given that Eastern Queens is very much a transit desert. In my proposal here (https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=18jFWx4hiotMYgqkD5i3yJtylRH_0EBa3), I planned on rerouting trains to the bypass at all times with express service along the existing QBL express tracks being served by trains and a new Queens-Manhattan SAS service; the latter would operate to Jamaica (179 St) on weekdays and to Fresh Meadows during other times ( trains would serve Fresh Meadows instead of Forest Hills on weekdays).

While I do support extending the to Brooklyn via the LIRR Atlantic Branch, one drawback with this plan is that we don't know if Hanover Sq could still serve as a terminal station for SAS trains coming from the QBL. Making Queens-Manhattan SAS trains run into Brooklyn would mean a longer, less reliable route--and this is a big reason why we shouldn't extend trains beyond World Trade Center (especially since it's a very busy and congested route).