Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.


Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by BrooklynBus

  1. I thought the reason was to reduce conflicts with cars turning right at the intersection which is the highest cause of bus accidents.
  2. Ìf they decide to implement the Bronx plan, do you think they will have to hold another public hearing (either real or virtual) given the time that has passed?
  3. The MTA promised they would replace overnight subway service with bus service, but in Brooklyn at least. I see no new bus routes. Borough Park is totally devoid of bus service except for the B11. No replacement for the D or N Lines. No subway or bus service between 5 Ave and 18 Av and between 50 Street and 86 St. Not acceptable. https://new.mta.info/coronavirus/overnight?fbclid=IwAR1lfkKza7oLqiyaB790uIqUXyHvwNyp_Ea4eO_rwwJAKqAO8Cv1BBloviE
  4. Where is the B46 SBS progress report? The route was started in July 2016.
  5. https://new.mta.info/bronxbusredesign/publicnotice?fbclid=IwAR24GafOYFODdRiwGsSiDIe3A1MRIwwA6Br6NJLbJ8vo9yFoYUEcOJn_G7c
  6. I think all are possibilities. Truncate the B63 at Barclays if they don't eliminate it. End the B103 at McDonald and Church. End the B103 at the Junction. The thing is if they do cut or eliminate the B103, you think they would have to come up with a good reason since it is so unlike any other Brooklyn route. Reasons like it costs much more to operate per mile than other routes which would be a possibility since I expect there is less turnover on that route with many trips similar to Express riders' trips with a trip average of 5 miles or greater instead of 2.3 miles for local routes.
  7. It is not meaningless speculation. Anyway, I never said they would succeeed in getting any of this done. Merely that they would try. And if the QT1 goes through, you know it would replace the B62, not supplement it. And I changed my B15 prediction to half the stops being eliminated and it running on Linden non-stop after Brookdale Hospital. I picked the B63 instead of the B37 because the community worked so hard to get it restored. If they try it again, it would be too obvious, they don't care about the passengers.
  8. https://patch.com/new-york/foresthills/forest-hills-commuters-decry-mtas-proposed-q23-bus-redesign?fbclid=IwAR2n39hEEVRf1tPvjfANzRlFKibkwAOXtMmsFIjrS9x8Rfu_6F-5ybVaBJI
  9. Yes there certainly is a lot of information there, but sone of it is also misleading like the map that shows everyone is within a quarter mile of a bus route which makes it appear there are no transit deserts. The map should show how many are within a quarter mile of an east west AND a north south bus route. Because if you are within a quarter mile of an east west route, but you need to go north south you may have to walk further than a quarter mile. If you first have to take the east west route to get to a north south route you need, you will need multiple transfers to get to your destination. Theoretically you could only have east west routes and no north south routes and that map would show everyone is within a quarter mile of a bus route when in reality most people couldn't get where they need to go unless they need to travel in a straight line. East New York is a perfect example.
  10. I agree that he did nothing to help the situation and was also disappointed in him. But still, I believe DOT is to blame expecially the Brooklyn Commissioner who lied to the Plumb Beach Association by flatly stating DOT never installs bike lanes unless the community asks for it, but at the same time installed them on Queens Blvd against community wishes. In Manhattan Beach, the community along with the councilman you mentioned asked DOT to move "pilot" bus lanes from Oriental Blvd installed in 2003 to Shore Blvd sidewalk where they belong, because there is a dual sidewalk that was actually built that way so it could be a bike lane. DOT has now been "studying" that for ten years and has tried to say it was up to the Department of Parks, not them. I think he is generally a good person and you are blaming the wrong person. DOT is the one who pushed it through without giving the community a say and that who deserves the blame. Anyway, when I asked him why he wouldn't help he told me that more of his constituents told him they preferred the route go straight on Ave Z. If he was telling the truth is your guess as much as mine. Though I can't see why he would lie about that. I can't answer your question regarding his political ambitions. I know my conscience is clear in that I did whatever I could including handing out stickers with the web address of my petition. Unfortunately, I didn't know how to use social media and was only able to get 60 signatures so I never even submitted it to DOT. I needed at least several hundred to make a statement. I am more worried about what the MTA will do to our bus routes and the bus stops they will remove. I have over 1600 signatures for that petition. We can't give up on that fight. When did they change the traffic on Avenue V? I was last there about a month ago.
  11. I won’t mention names since you didn’t. But what I would like to know is how you know this individual is the one who was responsible for this change? I also do not believe this individual to be vindictive to take the action you predict. This is how I remember everything going down. About three years earlier DOT comes to C.B. 15 with a proposal to make Sheepshead Bay one way for two blocks to supposedly relieve traffic congestion. That change would mean the B36 would have to be altered in the westbound direction to proceed directly on Av Z. The CB thinks this is a bad idea and tells that to DOT. Everyone assumes the proposal is dead since nothing happens for about three years. Then a lady crossing East 17 Street at Avenue Z is killed by a B36 making a left turn which has been made safely for over 40 years without any problems. The cause of the accident is never made public so we do not know of it was the drivers fault or the pedestrians. But since no one said she was crossing against the light, it is assumed it is the fault of the driver. But no information is giving regarding the bus like if the brakes were properly working, etc. DOT then gathers some facts that shows there were other crashes in the area in the past five years or so, but no other fatalities. So they immediately conclude that intersection (although that was the only incident there) as well as the entire area is dangerous. (You can go to any area and find a few crashes in the past five years and conclude if you want to that any area is dangerous.) No comparison is made to other areas, so no one knows how dangerous it really is or if it is dangerous at all. But that is how DOT operates. So they propose to close E 15 Street to traffic and convert two blocks to one way which necessitates that the B36 operate straight along Avenue Z. The MTA is asked by DOT if they have any objection. Of course they wouldn’t because it means they save a few feet of route mileage. Riders aren’t happy so they approach the individual in question and ask him to intervene. That individual has told me he has an excellent relationship with DOT so he doesn’t want to jeopardize that by opposing them. His solution is to get them to install a few lights under the train, because some claimed it would be too dangerous to wait for a bus at the new bus stop in the dark. He obtains the lights and considers the matter closed. The MTA is asked what they think and their response is the buses are no longer getting stuck in traffic so it’s a good thing. That is an outright lie, because there was no traffic during the evening rush hour one week before which I have on video. The bus spent a maximum of an extra minute serving the station with the sixth highest bus subway transfer volumes in the city. Now several thousand a day must walk an extra block, some running dangerously across Avenue Z to catch a bus and others just missing a bus or train because of a change where half the passengers on every bus gets off or on at Sheepshead Bay Station.
  12. The term of the ads used to be every three months which if it still is would be reasonable in terms of labor costs. I think the problem is the minimum number of buses you have to advertise in. A chain store or internet company could advertise in every bus in the city. But that wouldn’t make sense for a local business with a smaller audience that perhaps would only want to advertise on buses in a single depot. I don’t believe the MTA lets you advertise by depot which is why local businesses would not be interested in advertising in every bus in the city. Also, the rates they are asking are probably too high since no one wants to advertise inside the buses anymore.
  13. But when the MTA puts in artics with more capacity, they also reduce service to compensate so the buses stay just as crowded.
  14. 1. When you say every two blocks, I assume you mean city blocks or every 550 feet. But in the 65 St discussion we were talking avenue blocks. Every two avenue blocks is every 1500 feet. Except for 65 Street and a few other cases, I believe that is to wide a spacing. Every 550 feet for very lightly utilized stops or every 750 feet is correct because that means most riders are a quarter mile from a bus route. So they won’t mis transfer points, but skipping 12, 16 and 20 Avenues and all odd numbered avenues means that some who live along 65 St will have to walk over a quarter mile and those on nearby streets will have even longer walks which violates the quarter-mile standard which they claim they are still adhering to. 2. The purpose of the B12 is not only to serve the hospital but it is a major destination along the route. I want to change it for the same reason the MTA wants to change it because it is very slow and makes an excessive amount of turns. Every time it turns, it misses a traffic signal. I used to use that route very often in my younger days. The route I propose going down Empire is not very long but almost the same distance as the existing B49. And if all you want to do is reflect all the existing travel patterns, why change any route at all? The purpose of connecting the B16 with the B12 is to enable more two bus trips around the park which is even one of the stated problems. The reason I hooked the B16 up with the B7 was to maintain the northern half of the B7 which I believe isn’t needed more than the southern half which I propose to eliminate because of its proximity to neighboring routes. If they even retain the B7, they will have it stop once every mile making it even more useless. 3. Both my B4s, the proposal and the option do not change the route near Coney Island Hospital. 4. The B41 Branch is lightly utilized during non rush hours. It also makes scheduling more difficult. An extension of the B9 provides important transfers to the B46 and B47 enabling many trips currently requiring three buses to be made with two buses. That is the primary reason for the proposal. 5. And how do you propose the B44 have better ways to connect riders to KBCC. A fast direct one bus trip is the best connection. There are many students in Bed Stuy, Crown Heights, and Flatbush and East Flatbush who would use it. Much better than the slow B49. It would help many more than it would hurt. If the MTA would allow a bus, train, and a bus for one fare, then it would not be necessary and I would withdraw the proposal. 6. That is what I would do which differs from the MTA plan so you can’t say the proposals are the same. 7. I am saying that there are similarities between what I propose and what they will do, but under my proposals very few will be hurt, while under theirs the numbers hurt will be as great as the numbers helped and with the decreased frequencies and wider bus stop spacing proposed, their proposal will be a huge negative. So you can’t my proposals would be close to what I think they will propose. That would be a totally inaccurate statement.
  15. I am making this about my predictions just to see how close I am to what’s really going to happen. You say they are going to change just about every route. Is that what they did in Queens? I didn’t study every proposed change there. They say they are starting Brooklyn and Queens from a blank slate which is first of all is the incorrect way to proceed because you are not planning a new city but one with existing travel patterns. But from certain statements they made, they are not really taking that approach so how can you believe anything they say? If they really are starting from a blank slate, they wouldn’t make a statement like the B38 is always going to exist.
  16. Yes they will have some startling new routes running every 20 minutes and stopping every mile or half mile, but I don’t believe those will supplement the existing system or actually connect neighborhoods that need to be connected. As I said, I can see Park Slope’s complaint that it is difficult for them to get around the park which is actually I addressed in my 1973 Masters Thesis, and the MTA has yet to address it. They will make a few changes to address that problem which is good. But let’s say they make some wild route from Red Hook to Bensonhurst? Do we really need that if it reduces the dusting bus stops from every 750 feet to every 2,000 feet? If we take their statement about growth literally, then the proposed system should not be cost neutral but should provide additional service miles and access as well as improve connections reducing the percentage of riders requiring a transfer from 37 percent to 25 or 30 percent. But that won’t happen with a perfect grid system where most would need to transfer unless they are traveling in a straight line and don’t need to go across a borough where the route doesn’t do that. I am curious what routes you think are in jeopardy of the ones I think they won’t change.
  17. You obviously did not carefully read what I wrote. Yes, Brooklyn has basically a grid like system and that’s is good. Yet some irregularities need to be straightened like on Ft Hamilton Parkway. Yet others like the B49 serving Sheepshead Bay Station need to remain. But in the MTA’s applying of formulas to solve problems, they want to straighten all irregularities which is a disservice to bus riders. 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. 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. 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. Bergen Beach. the B41 Branch is needed during rush hours. 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. 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. B84. Yes it is the same in this case. Of course no one will say satisfied with everything, it the MTA’s proposal will cause much more disatisfaction than mine would.
  18. I don't think they will be changing bus routes just for the sake of doing that. Their guidelines are clear. No bus routes on congested streets especially one way streets. That describes the B11 to a T. But they won't get away with getting rid of it. There will be riots. They will also get rid of Caton Ave which is very congested. Their Q 1 replaces the B62. The only real problem is how often it will stop. As far as service gaps, they mention the difficulty of getting to Red Hook which is why they will extend or create a route from Red Hook to some place far away that no one needs to go to and it will stop every mile. The other problem they rightly mention is the difficulty of getting around Prospect Park which is why I believe they will extend the B61 around the park in exchange for shortening the B16. They might even split it in half so it fits their grid system scenario. Reinstituting the B71 means too many extra miles unless they run it with stops a half mile apart and they won't run it to Manhattan for reasons I previously stated. It would be too successful. They will also add a route from central Brooklyn to Gateway because they mention it's a problem. If they don't intend to fix that, it wouldn't be mentioned as a problem. Extending the B84 northward at 30 minute headways is cheap and the service gap can't be ignored. Also look at their misleading map that shows no service gaps with virtually everyone within a quarter Mike if a bus route. The problem with the map is that it doesn't dustinguish between north south and east west routes. If you are within a quarter of a north south route, it means nothing if you need to go east west or vice versa, because your trip will require at least three buses. The map should show a quarter mile walk to or from a north south and east west bus route. Then you would see real service gaps. And why show an isolated area like Red Hook and not show Gerritsen Beach which is also isolated? Because they don't intend to fix that one. I explained how they will fix indirect routings by straightening the B16 which everyone wants, changing the B12 to miss the hospital and requiring an extra transfer for B12 riders and rerouting the B43 as I suggested. The B49 old routing and shortening it. There aren't that many indirect routes in Brooklyn.
  19. It's not meaningless speculation. I am not saying they will get away with eliminating the B63, but they will try to either take that away or the B37. Since they were unsuccessful with permanently taking the B37 away, I don't think they will try it again. As for why they woukd want to take something away, did you read what they say about frequency and coverage? They say they can't provide both. Well you have buses on 3rd and 5th Avenue and a subway on Fourth. They show a theoretical map with six bus routes and claim the system would be better if there were only two routes instead of six but operating more frequently because people want better frequencies and don't mind walking more. So it logically follows they woukd propose doubling the frequency if the B37 from 20 minutes to ten minutes in exchange for eliminating the B63 or increasing service on the B63 and eliminating the B37 as well as reducing the number of bus stops on the route that remains. They have been trying to get rid of the B25 for years claiming it duplicates the subway. Opposition has prevented that and I believe will continue to prevent that from happening, but they will try. I revised my statement about the B15 being eliminated although in the Queens Draft it specifically states the Queens route operating on Hegeman would replace the B15. In the Brooklyn Existing Consitions they make it appear that the B15 was created to serve JFK when that is a recent extension to a former trolley route operating since the 1890s. They state that it shouldn't make local stops to the airport which is why an believe it will remain but be moved to Linden and operate non-stop to the Airport. They want it to operate faster and previously talked about it being converted to SBS. So I believe it won't make stops closer than every half mile or every mile. They will claim there are other routes within a quarter mile riders could take for local service, just as they proposed in Queens by proposing stops every 6,000 feet along 101 Ave. They are replacing the B62 with the Q1 which is why it is on the list for elimination. There are reasons for all my statements. It is speculation, but certainly not meaningless.
  20. No. Only a few of what I stated are my ideas and by using part of them, they won't be making things better. When I proposed the eastern extension of the B9, it was with the stipulation that a renumbered B41 shuttle remain during rush hours and during overnight hours. By not keeping the B41 during rush hours, they will be causing protests because the riders who use it during rush hours won't be happy. Other times it is lightly used. Same thing with routing the B43 to Kings County Hospital. While it should be taken off Empire, the B12 still needs to serve Kings County Hospital. If it is moved to Empire, many riders will have an extra transfer. That is the exact shit they did in Queens. Help some and hurt as many as you help, when you can help many and hurt a relatively few which is how I proposed it.
  21. Slight modification to what they will do to the B15. They won't eliminate it. Instead they will increase bus stop spacing in Bed Stuy to every half mile, and then every mile after that until it reaches Brookdale Hospital. Then it will operate along Linden Blvd and Conduit non stop to the airport.
  22. I just read the Brooklyn Existing Conditions Report and see how they are setting the stage for their draft proposals which will destroy Brooklyn bus service just like they intend to destroy Queens service. The goals are the same: increase bus speeds, more SBS, eliminating half the bus stops, more unnecessary bus lanes, reducing coverage and providing fewer bus hours to save money. There will be a few good ideas, some of them mine, but mostly bad ideas. They will claim buses will be more reliable and more frequent but that won’t happen. Ridership will continue to decline. You might think I am jumping the gun or giving them bad ideas, but I think I know them well enough to make accurate predictions of what they will propose. We will see how close I will be to what they actually propose. I predict they will propose: Elimination of the B4, B7, B11, B15, B20, B24, B25, B32, B39, B45, B52, B62, B63, B64, B74, and B100 with the following route changes and assuming the Queens proposal goes forward. B2 extend to Bay Ridge Ave and Shore Rd via 65 St on western (as I proposed) but stopping every half mile and operating every 20 to 30 minutes and extend to Mill Basin on eastern end. B6 will no longer serve New Lots subway and be rerouted to Gateway. B8 will be spit in two. Will terminate at Flatbush Ave. New route will take over eastern half and be rerouted from Brookdale to Gateway Mall. B9 Reroute to Lutheran (NYU Langone) and extend eastern end along Ave N to E71 St. ( I proposed eastern rerouting only) B12 rerouted along Empire Blvd to Ocean Avenue. B16 straighten along Ft Hamilton Pky (as I proposed) but operating every 20 minutes and shortened to Park Circle. New route along 13/14 Avenue to VA hospital, also every 20 minutes but stopping every half mile with northern end to ridiculous destination like Red Hook and stops every mile north of 39 St. B36 eastern end rerouted to go south on Nostrand and east via current B4 route. B41 will make SBS and eliminate Bergen Beach Branch. B43 rerouted off Empire to Kings County Hospital as I proposed. B46 will terminate at Dekalb. B48 southern end truncated. Will terminate around Dekalb Ave. B49 terminated at Foster Ave from the south end and returned to pre 1978 routing after community rejects proposal to ban all cars from Sheepshead Bay Road. B57 service on Smith and Court eliminated. B61 extended east to replace a shortened B16. B67 extended to Williamsburg Plaza. B83 straight on Pennsylvania. B84 extended north. Other routes unchanged except for decreasing service span and increasing frequency. Those are B1, B3, B12, B13, B14, B17, B26, B31, B35, B37, B38, B42, B44, B47, B54, B60, B65, B67, B68, B69, B70, and B82. They will not be successful in eliminating all the routes listed, but they will try. Again, this is not what I want to see, but I believe what they will try to do.
  23. Ridiculous idea. Where does she think the cars will go. I know they will just disappear because everyone will just sell them and take the bus. How about this idea. Let's curb pedestrian deaths by banning all pedestrians from Northern Blvd. Does that qualify me to run for the Assembly?
  24. I pretty much agree with everything you said. Just look at the difference between him and Cipriano. He told the press that the routes were designed from a blank slate to better serve the riders without cost being a concern. One reporter picked upon that and compared it to Byford’s comment to Assembly people in Albany that budget was a prime consideration, but he didn’t go as far as saying the plan had to be cost neutral. He said they had a certain leeway regarding the budget and could make exceptions so the final plan would be something everyone could live with. Byford was being honest and Cipriano was just telling the press what the people wanted to here. On another note, a friend of mine and myself both dropped notes to Byford regarding his departure. I bet he got hundreds or thousands of them. Yet he managed to answer both of us. Last week I sent an email to Mark Holmes and copied Byford. Byford replied but not Holmes. All this says a lot about how things are going to function without him.
  25. We can only hope he is asked to come back as MTA head with a new working arrangement that he and Cuomo can agree upon.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.