aemoreira81

For many years, the final 5 trip to Harrison was a short turn 13 that ended in White Plains, actually arriving changing its sign to Route 5. Until the 12 was truncated, the finally Route 5 trip to Yonkers actually began as a Route 12 trip and then operate via 333 Westchester, changing to Route 5. The 13 and 19 may still be interlined. As for one or both to HPN, I would suggest the 3 being there 7 days a week…but not going to the Bronx on weekends, with alternating trips only between HPN and the Transcenter on weekends. How poor service is to HPN is criminal.

My reactions: 1. Should continue to operate to the city line 1C (being discontinued): I wonder why this wasn't thought of earlier, especially with the redesign to the 5 (see below). 1T (to be the 109): I would extend the route to Phelps Memorial Hospital. 1W (being discontinued): I wonder why this wasn't thought of earlier, especially since the ideal route between White Plains and Yonkers is the 6 (or the proposed 3) 1X (to become 112): agree with this 2: I never understood the extension to Executive Boulevard. Revert it to Tudor Woods as proposed. 3: Trading the section to Purchase for all-day express service between Yonkers and White Plains makes perfect sense. However, I would make the 3 the primary route to the airport as well on weekdays, operating express via Lake Street. (The route is proposed to run weekdays only but all day.) 4. Remains roughly the same. More service planned on all days. 5. Given that I don't know of too many from Hastings or along Ardsley Road who need the Westchester CC area, this is perfect. (The section to Harrison becomes the 108, addressed later.) 6. Honestly not surprised, given that the 19 is proposed to take this over to White Plains. I would, however, make this the weekend route to the airport, via what I suggest for the 3. Significantly more Sunday and slightly more Saturday service is planned...only alternate 6 trips would continue onto the airport. 7. Remains roughly the same. More weekday service is planned. 8. Remains roughly the same. More weekend service planned. I wish that this route could run (closed door) to 231 Street though, even if it means trading a few trips for the more direct service. 9. Agree with this as it eliminates duplicate service. 10 (being discontinued): I wouldn't discontinue it but also not keep it as is. Instead, the route should operate to the Katonah RR station on the Harlem Line, which would be much shorter. 11 (being discontinued): not surprised either. The 10 was basically a continuation of the 11. 12 (being discontinued): for the airport, I would suggest the 3 (weekdays) and the 6 (weekends). For the colleges, this is where an E450-based cutaway or a 35-foot bus would make sense only servicing Manhattanville College and SUNY Purchase full-time. Additional service can serve the office parks in Manhattanville (i.e., MasterCard, PepsiCo, IBM, Reckson) during peak hours only, but the trunk route would be just to Manhattanville College and SUNY Purchase. 13: agree with this change and split. Also significant weekday service increases are planned. 14: This is the hardest one as the plan cuts off north county from White Plains completely, but trades that for more Saturday service. Also, Montrose and Verplanck would lose transit service. I would extend this to White Plains via the quickest route from SUNY WCC: Virginia Road. However, service via Route 6 should be maintained to Mohegan Lake. If Virginia Road is restricted, then Legion Drive and via the 19 can be done. 15: I would re-structure this route to operate between Montrose and Mount Kisco, as a cutaway route or with 35-foot buses. The western end of the route would be Montrose VA Hospital, and the eastern end would be Mount Kisco RR station. The route would operate Kings Ferry Road, Broadway, Peekskill RR Station, the current route to Yorktown Heights, and then the former 12 route (Seven Bridges and Millwood Roads, to end at Mount Kisco RR station. Customers who would have boarded in Pleasantville can board in Mount Kisco. 16: discontinuing this route is a mistake, even if ridership is low. It should be maintained as a route with 35-foot buses to Jefferson Valley Mall only. 17. I am not surprised here. Customers can use Metro North and the 15 should be re-structured to connect in Mount Kisco. 18. This could be replaced with my proposed Route 15. 19. Proposed for new Sunday service to White Plains, replacing the 6 to White Plains. But is this route ready for Sunday service, which would be new for the area? (It also restores a link to Northern Westchester Hospital from White Plains.) 20. Rerouting to serve Montefiore/North Bronx Central, and to an ADA-compliant station? I am open to that but I didn't see that coming (it would share the Bx41 SBS terminus). I don't agree with cutting the last 1-2 hours of service though. (The 21 would continue to run to Bedford Park.) 21: No changes proposed 25: This route change should be canned. People want to get to the from Yonkers, not the . 26: I am not sure about discontinuing this route. While the 25 runs parallel to the 26 (25 on Kimball, 26 on Bronx River Road), between Wakefield Avenue (serving as an extension of East 241 Street) and the Cross County Parkway, only four streets flow between them. 30: I am not sure this route is ready for Sunday service. 31: This route averaged 2 riders each daypart. The source for ridership was Indian Point, but that plant closed for good in mid-2021 and is being decommissioned. No replacement planned. 32. A tough one as it has around 50 percent load factor on 40-foot buses...and bidirectional service is not possible because of low bridges on the Saw Mill Parkway. This complicates service along Rumsey Road, which may be the reason for keeping the route. 34/38/39: this is why Bee Line retiring cutaways about a decade ago without replacement was a mistake; all would be candidates for cutaway service, but instead use 40-foot buses. The 38 should definitely be discontinued. The 34 and 39 should be replaced with E450-based cutaway buses or 35-foot buses. 40/41: not really sure, since I also believe that the 103 route makes no real sense. 42: why wasn't this done years ago? 43: this seems similar to the plan with the 112 (1X)...segregate Grasslands riders. 45: about time, honestly. This finally creates a connection between White Plains and Bronxville that makes sense. It should have been done years ago. I doubt Q trips will be missed. 52: No changes proposed. 53: I would just make it a bidirectional circulator, changing directions in downtown Mount Vernon. 54 (to be discontinued): I honestly don't get the reason for this route; it was close to the 52. 55 (to be discontinued): I see this as a major mistake; I would leave the 55 as is. 60: rerouting along Boston Road into Mamaroneck would indeed be better. Unlike the situation between the 25 and 26, there are more streets connecting between Boston Road and Palmer Avenue. However, I do not agree with placing the 60 on Richbell Road, as that short street is not really designed for buses, especially articulated buses. Instead, I would keep the 60 on Boston Road to Mamaroneck Avenue, and have the part-time 61 be the sole Palmer Avenue route. (The 61 is proposed to go to daily service.) 61: Generally agree with this plan. 62: unsure about this 63 (to be discontinued): this seems interesting. (The 66 is proposed for daily service, but I see only Saturday service as warranted additionally.) 64: basically duplicates the 66. 65: would be better served with cutaway bus service if anything. I suspect existing customers will drive instead. 66: basically admits that no one rides the route to and from Mercy College. Proposed for daily service, but Monday-Saturday would suffice, as a cutaway route or with 35-foot buses. 70/71: honestly surprised that they still exist. 77: given that service is to park-ride areas, I believe those people could just drive to Metro-North stations instead. 78: badly needed, since right now, one can only approach Stew Leonard Drive from the west. This allows an approach from the east. All of the Shuttle Loops: ridership cratered as a result of WFH and never returned. BxM4C: even though it carries, it is basically peak direction only now. 101: this could just have been called the 24. It also makes the 107 superfluous, even though that's a new route proposed. 103/104: I honestly would take the 103's eastern portion and the 104's western portion...and assign the 104's eastern portion to the 14 (if Virginia Road is restricted). 105: I don't get this at all. The 78 would be sufficient to reach Stew Leonard's and Costco that way. 106: on paper, it may look good. But the street network makes it not. I would keep the 26 as is. 107: duplicates the 101 (24) and 42 too much. 108: basically a replacement for the eastern portion of the 5, with no change in route. 109: See 1T. 110: basically a replacement for the eastern portion of the 66. 111: basically a replacement for the Broadway portion of the 13. I would supplement it with the 109 to Phelps. 112: see 1X. As for microtransit zones, I'm generally not a fan of them except for the one east of Route 19.

A part of me says that he would not have tried this on the R though, as that's all R160. Apparently this was between stations that it happened.

I see that the MTA got the message about the Q52/3. The Woodhaven/X-Bay SBS was proposed to be cut back to Queens Center, as the Q104 would not have been sufficient to serve Elmhurst Hospital since many would then have to transfer buses again. But turning around buses at 74/Roosevelt with adequate layover will be difficult.

Is there a reason why 399 only goes out in the PM rush, typically doing one round trip on the 4 and then one on the 25?

Curious: how many first-generation O7s are left on the NYCTA side?

9872 in service at Kingsbridge. What changes to the order have happened, given that MHV was initially slated to receive a brand new fleet in one shot?

9866 is at Kingsbridge and ran yesterday on the Bx10. Is it possible that 9640-9664 go to Manhattanville?

Its first service was, of all routes, the M60 SBS (while the rest of the route was all artics).

Curious: while the Prevost order has begun to resume deliveries, why are LFS deliveries paused indefinitely?

When will the X3-45s at LGA hit service? (As for 1532, I have seen it reported in service once and not again since.)

I have to wonder if, with social distancing permanent between the driver and passengers, it may be worth it to relocate the farebox to where the first row of seats are, and to widen the leg room to reduce these buses to 53 seats since that first row won't ever be used again. Unlike previous buses, which saw the USB ports retrofitted and placed in the ceiling (not unlike how the MCIs were retrofitted), there is electric wiring in most of these seats (for the USB ports) and so the seats can't just be adjusted easily---wiring must also be adjusted. I do wonder why there wasn't ceiling USB installed.

Why was the Bx39 ever taken out of Gun Hill in the first place? In all iterations, it just makes sense. For Gun Hill Road cut-ins, deadhead on Gun Hill Road. For 241 run-ons and run-offs, deadhead via Baychester Avenue.

On that issue, is there any space in the Bloomfield area where a new depot could be sited, or maybe where Meredith could be expanded to be a full-fledged depot? That is, is the north side opposite West Shore Plaza accounted for in terms of development, or could the MTA plan for that spot to be a depot? Or could a deal be made with Island Auto Group to purchase part of the lot they use for vehicle storage to expand Meredith Depot to give it a full-fledged maintenance building with 9-10 bays? Also, regarding traffic to Matrix Park, where does that traffic originate between the ferry and Bloomfield? Could a different route be done, such as an S62 SBS, running via the S62 line to Travis Avenue, but then serving The Teleport and Matrix Park?

There are places on the line where it may be difficult to fit tandem buses. Remember that pre-pandemic, bus 6031 was sent out to test where there could be tight clearances for tandem buses...although it may be better to send out an LFS articulated bus from KB or FLA instead to see how it would fare out (remember that the LFS is a 244"/253" split, while the LFS rigid is 244"--the Xcelsior articulated is a 229"/293" split), as they would make more sense on SI where the LFS is the workhorse bus. If that works out, then after an order to convert the B15 and B82 to articulated service, one could then consider about 50-55 with options for another 40...to convert the S40/90 to articulated service along with the S79...the S40/90 could move to Yukon.

What about moving the Q60 to the main roadway between Jacobus Street and 57 Avenue, and between 62 Drive/63 Avenue and Union Turnpike, with stops located at traffic lights? That would likely help ease delays on the Q60.

That is what I was hoping as well. Those buses that are swing buses in Brooklyn could be reactivated for service if need be. But why are the XDE40s, which have similar plug-style rear doors, not affected?

I have to wonder if any of the O7s in the 6690-6905 series in storage can be re-activated to cover for the shortage caused by the parking of all of the LFS hybrids.

Even if they were, the bus is now 17 years old.

In addition to 3974...3989, 4538, and possibly 4556 are now scrap as well.

I would also ask why the Q100 shouldn't be rerouted between 21 and 31 Streets to serve Ditmars Boulevard for better coverage, and also why there isn't a Q100 stop at Steinway Street, to provide customers with more options there. As for the base issue, I would see the Astoria Boulevard intersection as the most complex issue. I would propose the following fixes (also involving a nearby street) 1. Make Astoria Boulevard one-way between 14 and 21 Street (eastbound only). 27 Avenue would carry westbound traffic only (and be westbound to 8 Street) and Astoria Boulevard would carry eastbound traffic only. 2. Dead-end 28 Avenue before the intersection with Astoria Boulevard and 14 Street. This would reduce light phases from 3 to 2, and create a longer green for detoured traffic from 14 Street. (Truck traffic would be detoured to 8 Street to access Vernon Boulevard.) 3. Dead-end 14 Street before it merges with 21 Street. I had initially thought closing would be a better option, but where can the lost parking spaces be replaced? You only lose 6-8 or so with dead-ending as opposed to 20 with a closure.

That bus will be on legal hold for a good while, but by the time that's over, I would expect that only the MTA Bus O7 first generations are still around.

I ended up tracking it and shooting it in Glendale. I won't be editing it for a while though because of my work schedule.

Curious: has 7851 seen service yet?

I have to wonder why only 60, when the batch being replaced was originally 1700-1799, although more artics would make more sense to convert the 4/6/40/41 to all articulated operation.