Q43 Floral Park

if overcrowding is an issue as you say then all the more reason to add short turns on the 16 Any copy of a Bronx bus map post 1980s will prove the bold part is false, the Bx16/34 share the same route from 233/Katonah to Woodlawn and Norwood . If the 16 were to replace the 34 it would clearly be via Katonah... Let me know when you ride the route Norwood-Eastchester and I'll consider taking your opinions seriously. So you want MTA to stop pandering to Co-op when all residents want them to do is rectify the service issues the TA created? I mean that would give them more free time to pander to Riverdale about the need for more and more service.... I've seen "empty" weekend buses on all Bronx express routes because overall ridership is down (except on the 2 and 11). What times would the Bxm7 have 20 min headways and when would it be 30 mins? You were the one who stated that Co-op had better transportation options than Throggs Neck which would imply a need for better service in the latter. You wanted to know why the Bxm7 runs later than the 9 and I simply told you the Bx8/40/42/Bxm9 do a sufficient job as is and if anymore service was needed, East Bronx residents would request it. In other words, you're wrong.

re Bx34: The Bx16 already runs more frequently than the Bx34, with short turns you'd have a service increase re Co-op: Then use whatever knowledge you have of Co-op City and its routes (the map, the schedules, google) to come up with a solution for the thread. re Throggs Neck/Country Club: As I have previously stated, I do not wish to engage in any form of discussion regarding Bronx neighborhood associations. We clearly don't share the same view of the Bronx so I'd rather just keep the conversation light and on the topic of the transit issues. Only care to hear your remarks on why you think Throggs Neck needs more service or the Bx8.

The Bx38 would have better than the Bx25 but I think they just wanted to shift the ridership from Gun Hill. It seemed like there was an assumption that the 28/30 service was sufficient on GH/to get to trains (even if the latter meant a roundabout route) and that Sec 4-5 riders would go to WPR/Allerton over WPR/Gun Hill & Seymour/Gun Hill if they didn't have to go through all the Sections first. I can't find the schedule but realistically the only way that would've worked if the Bx25 took less time to reach a train than the Bx28 and if riders wanted the 2 over the 5. At this point they chopped a good portion of the 28 route off and the run time is still over an hour, Might as well recombine it and add the LTD I kind of wish they would have just replaced the Bx34 with an extended Bx16, short turns Norwood-Mundy La but I'm sure someone will say Woodlawn needs its own dedicated route. I'd rather not endure another roundabout debate about "neighborhood associations" so I'll just reiterate that the Bx8 fiasco is a good example that the Eastern communities will advocate for alterations in their service if needs aren't being met.

to a certain extent yes. there are also the malls that draw in people from neighboring communities. vs. The lack of venues in TN that would attract outside ridership. For the record, Throggs Neck and Country Club are in 10465 and S/E of 95 so it depends on how one chooses to associate things. I didn't mention Middletown-Pelham Bay because whatever local bus service they receive is dependent on what TN and CC allow to happen.

While TN may be further from the train than Co-op, those routes don't face nearly as much traffic as Co-op buses getting to the train especially when 95/Gun Hill are a mess. Throggs Neck/Country Club also seems to be more or less content with current service levels. When they rerouted the Bx8, the entire community complained about too many buses and that route barely runs as is. With Bx28s on 20 min rush hour headways you would be cutting every other bus. Section 5 riders would have a longer wait to get to the and then what little patronage it has south of Norwood would start to dwindle. The Bx26 carries because it's uphill to the (4)/(D) and the 28 routing actually helps it get to Fordham quickly while serving as an alternate in case the (4)/(D) have an issue. This probably looks like overkill but I would have done a combo of the pre/post 2010 service: Bx23: Loop local Bx25: BP to Co-op via 4-5 local rush hours only Bx26: BP to Co-op via 1-5 local Bx28: Fordham to Co-op via 1-5 LTD rush hours only Bx29: City Island to Co-op via PBP & Sec 5 local Bx30: Norwood to Co-op via 2-1-4-5 local Bx38: Norwood to Co-op via 4-5 local rush hours only Q50: Flushing to Co-op via PBP & 1-5 LTD all times Sec 1-3 riders have a LTD to the 2/5 and the 6, Sec 4-5 riders don't have to go through 1-3 during peak to get to Gun Hill or Allerton. LTD on the 28 provides a faster ride along Gun Hill.

I have a question: Does anyone know why the Bx26/28/29/20/38 signs don't display which sections they are via? Besides Co-op needing the service and PBP being full, it's only place the Bx26/28/29/30/QBx1 (the longtime routes) can realistically terminate. The residents aren't satisfied because all the MTA did over the past decade was split/recombine service and in turn cut off sections from each other. The Bx25 was canned and the 26 took over its route so now Section 1-3 have a 2 seat ride to Allerton. The Bx28 was split from Section 1-3 so thats another 2 seat ride if you coming from S/W of Norwood. They wanted to cut the Bx29 before and I believe both City Island and Co-op complained. Somehow the Bx30 which has the worst service ended up being the only route that hasn't really been screwed with. I agree with B35 the only one they got right was the QBx1=Bx23/Q50 because it was actually less tedious to go via the (5)/28 than deal with the QBx1 at PBP. The Bx28 really just needed some LTD service, with the Norwood-Coop runs as local but LTD service is never on the discussion table up here, look at how long it took to get it on the Bx36. I can't say if Throggs Neck is more isolated than Co-op because they're both disconnected by I-95 and the runtime on a PM Bxm9 is only about 4 minutes longer than a Bxm7. Throggs Neck is definitely less dense and populated so people are more likely to be out commuting in Co-op at night than TN. From personal experience, I would rather endure a walk from TN to the at Square than from any Section of Co-op to the . I do agree that half hour S/B service is overkill but I wonder if its done to prevent a DH from ECH-23 just for the N/B run. As for your older post: you're right but even if the Bx13 ran on 161 outside rush hours you would still have to change as those runs go to GWB not by Yankees-153 20 min rush hour headways on the Bx28? So, would you be adding more Bx10 service to compensate for people getting off the Bx38 at Norwood-206 needing to go west?

The Bx13 runs 5am-1am roughly, so unless you're catching one of the last 2 N/B Hudson trains out of 153, its an option. Sorry, I missed the 70 ending at PBP but I'm still having a bit of difficulty seeing how this route would be useful heading north. Inside Co-op, its another route which is great but outside The only standalone part is that stint on 241 and it doesn't hit the MN station (If the issue is service on 241, extend the 39 west). I'm not sure who would be dedicated Bx70 riders. If you're commuting to the area east of WPR (Wakefield/Edenwald/Co-op) from Manhattan via the 2, most people aren't going to pass the Bx28/30/38@Gun Hill, Bx31@233 and Bx16@Nereid to get to the Bx70@241. If you take the 5, same thing you have to pass the Bx28/38@Seymour and Bx30 @Baychester before the Bx16/70@Dyre. I had 2 ideas: 1) Swing your Bx70 south @Baychester/233 run it Baychester-Givan-222 and terminate it at 219/WPR. Co-op gets an extra bus that goes to the 2 and 5 trains, 222 gets a crosstown more or less 2) Create a Bx25 from 219/WPR to Pelham Bay via WPR-222-Boston-Baychester-Burke-Gunther-Stillwell-Pelham Parkway. This doesn't help Co-op but it fixes the lack of coverage in N/E Bronx.

Bx7: then you would have one unreliable bus running to City Line as opposed to 2 routes Bx9/10: long enough as is Bx23: I can't speak on the Mt. Vernon portion but you don't have it directly passing the at Dyre and Sections 3-5 riders would have to take the Q50 all the way around co-op to get to Pelham Bay Bx30: no service from Section 1 along Baychester thru Asch Loop Bx70: I'm sure theres a need for a 1 seat ride from Co-op to Wakefield for some but it overlaps the 16 alot and that route seems to do fine solo. the only standalone portion would be west of WPR/241 but where would it turn?

B35: I'd rather have a new route helping out bx7 and bx9 riders than to just use buses for Riverdale only short turns on the bx7. Could you clarify your suggestion on the bx9 service, it sounds like the current pattern but with buses actually turning at MH. Wouldn't we back to the issue of how would you turn around a route there? you don't need all that service to 262 but you only have 3 terminal options; Marble Hill and DH to KB, run all the way to 262 or turn at 242. I've only encountered a few instances wherein Bway/242 was utilized as a northern terminal. It might clog the intersection with BL buses looping in the opposite direction amongst other things. I'll second the vote for the Bx8 being the worst, I have seen it crowded and on time north of the square but never south of it. There really isn't a way to make it a more bearable route but I've always wondered why 226 was set as the terminal and not 233. Same goes for the Bxm10 ending at Boston Road. As often as that is out it always seemed off that the only express bus in the area doesn't travel that far north. I wonder if extending it to 233-Baychester Via Laconia would benefit Eastchester residents BM5: 15 min headways rush hours else 20/30 mins and Oddly I'd be alright with cutting some bx9 service. The bunching is so bad as is it rarely comes at the correct frequency. 231 Street would be better as a short turn terminal if you had a place to do it and didn't have that choke point at 230. That's why I wanted the 24 to stay on Bailey, you send it through Marble Hill directly and it'll be stuck behind the Bx7/9/20/bxm1. it takes more time to get from Bway/225 to Bway/231 than it does to get from Fordham/Sedgwick to Bway/231.

Shouldn't even dare? That implies theres something wrong with one of the 2 areas and connecting them... Just because he doesn't use Bx local routes nor see the need for a such service doesn't mean there isn't a hypothetical current demand for it. The purpose of me discussing a revival of the Bx24 wasn't primarily for Riverdale's benefit and I'm not sure why the focus is solely on their needs: 1. I originally suggested it to relieve pressure on the Bx9. LTD service isn't impossible but it's not really feasible due to the stop distribution between Fordham-Marble Hill and that's the area where service tends to lag the most. With all the economic development occurring along the route in Kingsbridge/Kingsbridge Heights/Marble Hill (malls at 225/230/236 plus the Armory project) it would be wise to find a way to get riders going between Fordham and Marble Hill off the Bx9 because it's only bound to get worse. 2. Putting a route on Bailey Av south of 231 gives people along the stretch a direct bus to train connection for the first time in 20 years. You literally have to take 2-3 buses to get from Fordham Hill (or any point S/o Sedgwick & Bailey) to River Plaza, the closest shopping center and they're 1.3 miles apart. I would have suggested extending the Bx12 Local but we've already covered the fact that there's no place to turn it. 3. I'm actually not sure how they got away with 1 route on Riverdale Av for so long but them complaining about it recently fit perfectly into a revival. HHP never needed 3 bus routes and even on 15 minute headways Riverdale Av would now have an extra 4 buses an hour to get them to the 1 train. 4. I don't believe in the concept of running short turns solely in one neighborhood when you could easily relieve pressure off 2 heavily used bus routes, restore an old service cut and provide a faster ride between 2 shopping districts. Even if the ridership is somewhat segmented at 231/Bway, what are the cons except for the fact that you have no control over who decides to take the bus? As for the suggestion of switching the Bx7/9 terminals, the good: Bx7 would have the benefit of improved reliability, a shorter run time and less crowding while the Bx9 would give Riverdale the artics they want. the bad: For old 7 riders you'd end up with the complaint of too much service In Riverdale at times, inconsistent service at other times and rampant bus bunching all the time and they can't get the A. People would riot if they had to go to the GC for the on a weekend when the is out. On the Bx9s end, no one can get to any of the stores on Bway N/o of 231 or to/from North Riverdale from points east without transferring. Connectivity needs to be improved not taken away.

The only part where I disagree is that during my HS years, a great of the kids that used the 22 actually came from S/E of Fordham. It's absolutely plausible things have changed but under his plan any rider who already had to take the 5/21/39 to the 22, would now have a 3 seat ride to BP. I'm not saying a lot of people would be affected but unless you have an unlimited that's a problem. Last I checked you get 3 swipes a day on a student Metrocard and that would be 2 swipes in a day in one direction, unless a 2-legged x-fer was enacted but MTA is stingy about that. Truthfully I don't like the concept of any of those routes terminating in Fordham(bx22/28/34) as they currently do but I'm not sure what can be altered. Going off the am schedule, the 22 runs on 6 min headways and alternates to BP so If it went to the VA maybe every third bus goes to BP? It would be Approx 18 min headways Rush hours and 36 mins midday. If Artics are removed maybe add some rush short turns on the south end? I'm not truly sure what would happen with both the 22/32 there but in my experiences I've seen more people transfer at Burnside/Tremont than Fordham on the S/B 32 which always surprised me

Transportation planning isn't as simple as you seem to think it is otherwise a lot more of the people here would be in operations planning. Even better, those who are tasked with implementing changes usually don't live in the communities yet are required to be well versed in the issues plaguing the entire route not just the area they want to change. Kappock and Johnson comes to mind as a choke point in Riverdale (Spuyten Duyvil) wherein buses have issues bypassing each other. The stops are directly opposite one and other and during rush hours you have 5 routes using 1 lane of traffic in each direction. Despite the fact that traffic isn't unusually heavy in the area, drivers are aggressive and the intersection could use a light as opposed to the current stop sign. I've had numerous close calls while on foot/jogging and seen other pedestrians have issues as well. The light sequence at 238/Riverdale isn't synced with the one at 236 or 239, combine that with a heavy crowd and that sometimes adds an extra 1-2 mins to the 7 run. Whether or not they account for it in the run time already is debatable but there are 2 examples against your claim. The Bx7 runs along Broadway between 168-231 and the Bx10 runs on a multitude of streets east of 231/Bway, be specific about the choke points and why they exist. Or is it that because you don't ride the routes you don't know where they are? When you decide to gain a first hand account of Bronx service south and east of 231/Bway, I'll be inclined to take your opinions on the service levels there more seriously. But when you don't even ride the 7/10 frequently it just comes across as you being biased towards the opinions of the political machine in Riverdale. Not that there's anything wrong with being biased, you just come across as misinformed and unable to be open minded, especially when I'm not the only one who has used Bronx service and is suggesting changes S/E of 231 QJT: forcing people to take the 4 doesn't account for people who might have had to transfer to the bx22 just to get to that side of the bronx Or the fact that KB and BPB aren't ADA compliant stations .

So why are you commenting on my local bus proposal and deeming it pointless when that isnt in your area of expertise? If it is a simple concept, tell me where are those points lie along the Bx7/10 routes and how you would address them?

You ride the Bx7/10 erratically at best and aren't familiar with the ridership and routes in your own backyard/surrounding communities. That's probably why you wouldn't see the point of killing two birds with one stone even when it's been broken down to you. How do you fix bus bunching? B35: I worry about removing the Bx22 from Goulden because it does see usage from the students along the corridor. does the Bx22 really need Artics?

That bus bunching is occurring on most of KBs routes. I watched 4 Bx3s do that last night on a Sunday when the headways shouldn't allow for more than 2 buses to be in the same place at the same time. They plan to add more 7/10 runs in April but I wonder: will an increase in headways on these routes make bunching more or less probable? We were discussing the Bx9 as well but you didn't comment on that part so I'd like to know why you only seem to care about the needs of a small part of the NW Bronx when everyone else is attempting to look at the big picture? What I'd really love to know is, where are the dispatchers along these routes?

225 and 231 are bad places to terminate a route unless it's going straight to KB afterwards. You could turn at 231/Riverdale Av but you don't have room for 5 routes to use the W/B stop at Broadway Altering the 10/26 gives Bx26 riders a connection to the Bx9 again but leads to a 2 seat ride from Riverdale/Kingsbridge to Norwood (montefiore). It might be easier to add a new route than to try rerouting the current NW Bronx bus routes. This is why I suggested having something comparable to the old Bx24 coming back. The Bx9 needs coverage between Marble Hill-Fordham BID and the Bx7 needs it between 231-263.

It's something that I've been conflicted about for a while. I use the 9 primarily between Fordham-262 so I can't speak about the route southeast of crotona. I would have to say LTD service would help the rampant bunching but only provide a faster ride west of Sedgwick and east of the concourse. It would have to make every stop between Sedgwick and GC and that's the area where it ends up taking forever.

What was false about my statement? You just reiterated my point that observations based simply off living in an area arent enough to say you know how people commute. As for what's common, you may see one thing happening in Riverdale like overcrowding and a lack of Bx7 service and I observe another such a supersaturation of service with empty artics resulting in 40 footers on other KB routes (especially now that 126 isn't covering the extra runs anymore). We can't say which is the common case without stats but I'm less inclined to believe the opinion of someone who doesn't utilize the service. Do we really need to account for those who drive primarily in a discussion about bus proposals? We aren't suggesting establishing a park & ride or anything conducive to getting them to reduce their carbon footprint. We haven't even really said anything that would result in a loss of parking spaces. If you want to include them nonetheless, I'm in agreement with qjt. people can't use a service that doesn't exist so they will be naturally inclined to drive if that present itself to be less troublesome. On the other hand, I don't agree with the proposal of sending a bus from Woodlawn to Broadway but to say no one wants/needs to get that way is implausible. I'm going to propose some short turns on the Bx3 to the VA Hospital during rush hours. Recently, some of the operators have said that they've had to short turn at KB anyway to make up for lost runs so making it official would probably improve reliability and bus bunching.

It's not faster than 2 buses and the 1, map it

I've always wondered why they never added a stop at Allerton (possibly the proximity to Gun Hill) but I do think it would have shifted ridership to the 26. This is the same logic VG8 uses for Riverdale and its faulty because you can't observe every pattern of ridership. There are outliers, in a hypothetical scenario: Someone lives in Woodlawn and works at Columbia Pres. It would be faster to take two buses to the 1 train than to the options you gave.

The last thing the 10 needs is an extension, it'd be nice if they ran it straight on Goulden to BPB. Extend the Bx28 to the current Bx34 Fordham Terminal, N/B runs via valentine-Fordham-GC-192-Kingsbridge. the Bx22 short turns take over the old Bx28 terminal, N/B via Fordham-concourse and terminate at KB/GC Bx1/2 stop, right on KB, layover and first s/b stop at 192 St. All of the routes in the area should directly connect with the SBS the Bx38 has a few runs to Fordham Center on Sundays; I can't say the bx26 to FC was/is needed but you have a 3 seat ride from Allerton av to W Kingsbridge Rd (bx3/9/32) without it. Not sure how many people make that trip but it's something that's personally inconvenienced me in the past. If anything were to replace 34 service, it'd be the Bx16.

Broadway Plaza @230 St is partially open, Riverdale Crossing @237 St is only ~70% completed in terms of construction. I agree, the selection of stores needs to be improved (ex. Barnes & Noble where Loehmanns used to be) but I see Riverdalians and Northwest Bronxites as a whole driving to the new BJs as opposed to trekking to Pelham Manor. We are both well aware that it should have been named Kingsbridge Crossing as that's the actual neighborhood (Van Cortlandt Village if you want to be technical about it) however according to MTA that's Riverdale (see the Bx1/3 designation signs). Do you have any remarks on my Bx3 proposal?

It would be overkill and exacerbate bus bunching which is already rampant enough. The only thing they should do to the Bx12 local is make the W/B last stop Sedgwick/Bailey where the Bxm3 stops. I would like to propose adding Artics on the Bx3 during rush hours as well as altering the N/B terminal to 238/Irwin adding N/B stops at 238/Corlear and 238/Irwin and S/B stops at 240/Tibbett and 238/Corlear. I'm all for making U-turns to save time looping around the block but the U-turn performed at KB avenue is nowhere as efficient as the ones made at Riverdale Line (Bx7/9/10). There simply isn't enough room in the intersection, it blocks traffic, puts pedestrians in harms way, all in all it is a major nuisance. As of late, construction has begun to improve walkability and safety on Broadway thus the N/B terminal has been combined with the S/B first stop on the North side in a similar manner to the Q46 @ Kew Gardens (it was never mentioned by MTA). Riders are forced to run to Bailey/238 or wait up to 20 mins, if the bus leaves early. While the construction may be temporary, the ped island they've placed adjacent to the SW corner isn't and now it's become even more difficult for B/Os to navigate that turn. Traffic is only bound to worsen with Riverdale Crossing on the way...

5774 was on the Bx12-SBS today but it still has KB stickers

I saw it yesterday from a N/B Hudson local, I'd love to see it on any YON routes as long as it has express seats.