Jump to content

Via Garibaldi 8

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    37,005
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    143

Posts posted by Via Garibaldi 8

  1. 1 hour ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

    Let enough time for the Brooklyn bus Redesign to sink into my head. Now it's time to give out my opinions on each route:

    B1: No change

    B2/100: saw the merger coming, but I rather keep the Kings Plaza section since it has more ridership. 

    B3: No change 

    B4: idk that Coney Island section seems iffy....

    B5/B6/84: B84 is basically split into the B5 and B6. If the B5 is gonna exist and you gonna have the B103 to New Lots (see below) don't see a need for a "B6 LTD" 

    B7: Just keep the B7 as is. This is the wrong route to go north (see B60)

    B8: could care less about the Av B section 

    B9: No change 

    B10/12: I'll honestly say I haven't rode the B12 enough to have a proper opinion but to what ik this wasn't the first time this "idea" was brought up. 

    B11: simplicity on the west end I see 

    B13: I swear this is the B18 without it being the B18. That said, is this really what they are doing bc you are missing a big chunk of Glendale/Ridgewood here 

    B14: basically direct service to Euclid Av (A)(C) . Guessing that's a W.

    B15: I'm wondering why the JFK portion wasn't its own route to begin with. B55 proposal aside, the first route should have been a New Lots Av bus route between Sutter Av (3) and JFK Airport. Also is that northward extension to the (L) really needed?

    B16: I understand Boro Park needs coverage but I feel the 13/14 Av section would be better off as a split off route and keep the B16 on Fort Hamilton. 

    B17/76: That B17 branch was a little off anyway so glad to see it as it's own route. 

    B20: I'll take the split, but having the north half as a B7 extension dosent seem ideal (see B60) 

    B24: Listen I feel the MTA wanted to be rid of "redundant loop routes" so they decided to split the Q38 and B24 in the Queens redesign and for the B24 the B53/Q68 was made. Q68 is a neat route, B53 I'll talk about soon 

    B25/26: if anything the late night service should be the B25 and the B26 should end at Franklin Av for consistency

    B27: this is basically a modified B75. Guessing the new B27 gonna save some time from not getting stuck on Flushing Av and Downtown Brooklyn

    B31: No change 

    B32/53: I just like the way the B53 is a combination of the B32 and ends of the B24, B46 and Q24. Gotta wonder how some of these ideas even went through to begin with.

    B35/55: if they do not have the B55 as an artic route I will be really upset. You also gotta wonder about the sight of XN60s at JFK Airport. 

    B36: No change 

    B37: No change 

    B38: Is the B38 really that dense to not need ltd service bc that route gets crowded even after artic conversion. Let's not even mention the Metro Av branch getting absolutely no replacement. 

    B39: while there are no changes, you couldn't at least go a couple blocks east to connect to Lorimer St (G)(L) ?

    B40/41: the split is something I thought was gonna happen. I don't dislike the idea 

    B42: No change 

    B43: wanna say congratulations to the board members that said "y'know what, the B15 and B43 are basically the same route in Bed-Stuy, might as well combine them" because you just made some extra work for some people. The B44/46 can't save anyone either

    B44: so SBS to Sheepshead Bay (B)(Q) but it's actually Coney Island hospital. Another case of confused riders getting on the wrong bus similar to the Bx6/SBS changes due next year. 

    B45: fine with the Ralph av section, the St Johns change smells one way conversion in the future. 

    B46: listen I don't have that much of a problem ending the B46 at Woodhull like most people likely would but if you gonna cut it back here why not extend the SBS here too? 

    B47: just a case of "straightening out the route" 

    B48/69: so what they swapped the northern ends of these routes and called it a day?

    B49/68: yeah I don't see this lasting in the final redesign. And why is it we have the last two B4x and B6x routes swapping out terminals? 

    B52: Just feel a bit indifferent on the minor reroute. 

    B54: No change 

    B57: That Jackson Heights section does not scream B57. Keep the Eastern terminal and if a Brooklyn connection is needed make a queens route run on Flushing Av/69 St between Woodhull Hospital and Jackson Heights. 

    B60: it makes no sense to have the B60 go to Broadway Junction. Just give it the northern half of the B20 to keep a consistent north-south run. 

    B61: If you gonna chip the park slope end and add a new B81 that duplicates half the B61 why keep the B61 on 9 St. Matter fact, make it more useful and run it on the B71 route on Union Street between 3 Av and Grand Army Plaza. 

    B62: NO ASTORIA SERVICE!!! have a separate route between Astoria and Williamsburg if it's that important.

    B64: they basically have the B64 replacing the Coney Island portion of the B82 while the B4 replaces the B64's segment. Just seems ehh 

    B65: I feel the eastern terminal just kills off one block or so but that one block may make a difference.

    B66: This section of the split B60 I like. I hope this B66 makes service more reliable.

    B67: that Brooklyn Navy Yard section was literally so pointless and just there when the MTA was adding "service based on demands" in the mid 2010's. 

    B70: what's there at 3 Av and 30 St bc I'm lost on this extension

    B74: No change 

    B81/103: so the Downtown Brooklyn portion of the B103 was discontinued just to make the B81 a thing. My memories may be gone, but this B81 (somewhat) looks promising with the segments of the B61, B67 and B23 it runs along. As for the New Lots extension of the B103, they basically make this a Canarsie shuttle that connects to the final stops on the IRT Lines. Somewhat W for Canarsie 

    B82: the local basically become identical to the SBS save the Bath Beach portion now becoming the B6 route. (Definitely didn't see that coming -_-) 

    B83: Do you really think Van Sicklen gonna let the B83 go away ? That's one of the spots that scream "do not take away my bus service".

    I already covered my brief thoughts on the BM routes so no need to mention them again.

    It's important to note that all of these lines have changes, even if the routing remains the same because bus stops are being eliminated/combined... Tons of them in fact, even on routes like the B74.

  2. 2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

    Some more thoughts:

    B74 - why keep this shuttle instead of making it useful? Extend it eastward to Kingsboro C.C to make it a true crosstown service.

    Why does it need to extended when its main purpose is to serve people to and from the subway and within Coney Island?  The more you extend a line, the more you increase the chances of it becoming unreliable and then the core base that is supposed to be served is not. Anyone who needs serve eastward takes the B36, which historically has been unreliable precisely because it does too much (I know as it was one of my home lines growing up).  Back in the day, the B36 was almost as bad as the B4. If it ran less frequently than the B4 it would've been.  The B49 was actually the most reliable.  Seeing what it is today is insane.  

  3. 13 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

    I misread the map.

    If they're concerned about that, why not just run the BM1 the entire length of Avenue J at Ralph Avenue? Far fewer turns. The only issue remains double parked cars on Avenue J. I wonder if it's because that would require relocating bus stops.  With their current proposal, they technically wouldn't have to. The BM1 could just stop where the B6 & B11 stop along J and they keep the other stops on Avenue K.

  4. 17 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

    Pension, that's why. I'm locked into my pension at NJT.

    Be prepared to make a decision either way. If you lie and one of them finds out, you can definitely be terminated.  Some workers have side hustles and they keep quiet about it, and it's not with two different transit agencies either. Even in that case you can be terminated.

  5. 24 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

    A conflict of interest that it's NJT? These are two completely different positions with no correlation to the other that don't even conflict with each other. I get what your saying, but that's wild.

    You should know by now that it's a liability issue with the accidents that have occurred over the years.  They don't want someone burning the candles at both ends so to speak. You need to be focused on one job, as you are operating with hundreds of passengers on board throughout the day. If you want to work for one or the other, do that and apply for overtime with the place you're working for, which is very likely to be available.  The likelihood of you working at both places is slim to none.  

  6. 15 hours ago, Lex said:

    You mean the section of Avenue J west of Ocean Avenue? That's not being covered by the express side.

    Also, have you actually seen how Avenue K interacts with Flatbush Avenue? It's basically a worse version of Glenwood Road and Flatbush Avenue.

    No he's talking about east of Ocean Av and I agree with him 100%. I lived in Midwood for a bit. Avenue K moves a lot better than Avenue J does. They deal with one issue with the BM1 but open up another. Not sure which is worse. The double parking on Avenue J is pretty bad at times.

  7. 17 hours ago, Lex said:

    Given how little the BM2 has in common with the others, I'd run the BM2 on Sundays well before the BM1, especially if it serves the Spring Creek Towers.

    I was actually talking about in general if there was no more weekend service. The BM2 riders in Canarsie are somewhat close to the (L) as option, even if not ideal and they have to take a bus to get to it. Mill Basin and Old Mill Basin have nothing. Anyone from Flatlands on could make their way to the BM1. I'm not proposing any of those options though. That said, the demographics in Old Mill Basin in particular have changed and a number of those people need the BM1 because they like BM2 riders work on weekends. Similar demographics to the BM2 in fact. I also don't see the (MTA) running a combined BM2/BM5 service. Too long... One trip could be almost two hours. 

    Petitions for Sunday BM service were started a while ago. Never went anywhere, even with a number of BM2 riders signing it. At a minimum, Saturday service needs to be kept, even if concessions have to be made. What some people do now is make their way to the X27 or X28 when there is no BM service on Sundays.

  8. 13 hours ago, JAzumah said:

    In addition, the operating costs of that boat is going to be very high.

    My guess is that the planners were expecting the ferry to go in and that would allow them to drop that mileage. In light of the city's budget crunch plus the siting issues, it isn't going to happen.

     

     

    They could put in a trial period of weekend service, but I expect Sunday ridership to be higher than Saturdays. They shouldn't run all four buses in. It makes no sense right now.

    The problem with not running all four is one neighborhood gets service and the others don't. Would make more sense to run the BM1 & BM3. BM2 & BM4 riders could make their way to those lines.

  9. 16 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

    Who said they weren't getting a ferry? EDC has been trying to add one but they're the ones who keep pushing against it, even though they were the ones who asked for it.

    They aren't pushing against it. Any community that asks for a ferry has to go through an EIS (Environmental Impact Study). There are quite a few examples of where a ferry dock was chosen and then the EIS found issues with said location. Same thing here. It is not easy to find a suitable location. The other option on the other side of Coney Island also doesn't seem feasible.

  10. 27 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

    -They can send four buses to Sea Gate in each direction. They aren't getting a ferry (and I don't think they need one), so they should definitely keep the express bus service.

     

    -Operationally, they can send half of the Downtown buses to 14 Street. 

     

    -The ridership is horrendous on weekends. They would be better off running one route to Manhattan and have the others shuttle to/from Church Avenue/E 7 Street for a timed transfer operation. You could probably add Sunday service for the cost of Saturday AND Sunday service if that were done.


    -I do like the new BM4 routing. Half of the X29 has returned.

    -There are people in Coney Island and Sea Gate that both wanted (and advocated heavily) for that ferry (it likely won't happen because of the environmental concerns raised).  I think they have to perform another EIS anyway if there was to be a new location selected.

    -And quite frankly that's what they should do. They argue that there isn't that much ridership north of Worth St, and that's just not true.  Some of the changes not just on the express bus side but also on the local bus side are being done to simply make travel less convenient and force people onto the subway.  If there is anything that the pandemic has shown, it's that people now have options since they don't need to go to the office every day.  They need to be enticing people to take whatever they want to use to get people back into the system.  I know a number of people now that absolutely refuse to take the subway because they are concerned about crime, so they take the local buses, even though they take longer. That should be fine. It's better than those people driving, but it seems like that's what the (MTA) is pushing for when they are in dire need of more fares and ridership.  Ridership continues to hover around 60% overall of pre-pandemic levels.

    -Ridership is what it is after years of horrendous service.  You can't just talk about how ridership is low without explaining why. I've been a BM rider in some capacity for over 15 years and Saturday service was brutal after they started cutting service.  Excessively late buses because the drivers were playing games OR better yet, no bus at all because the driver skipped the Downtown portion or another portion of the route entirely.  When you run crap service, people stop using it. The BM lines overall have lost a ton of ridership for this reason.  This Redesign in my mind is mediocre at best and downright bad in some cases, both local and express.

    -I like most of the BM4 routing as well. There's potential for a "new" market (even if it is part of the old X29). People in that area have been asking for some sort of express bus for years and you don't need three express buses along Ocean Av. The only issue I do have is the Downtown pattern.  The loop needs to be maintained.

  11. And here's another innocent person attacked in the system... Surely this person will be mentally ill too...

    Quote

    During argument in NYC subway station, suspect threw chemical liquid in woman's face: Police

    Friday, December 2, 2022 1:08PM

    The victim is in the hospital being treated for the burns on her face. Police could not immediately identify the liquid thrown at her.

    PROSPECT LEFFERTS GARDENS, Brooklyn (WABC) -- A subway rider in Brooklyn was attacked with an unknown liquid Friday morning.

    Officials say the incident happened at between Winthrop Street and Nostrand Avenue in Prospect Lefferts Gardens at around 12:45 a.m.

    The 21-year-old victim was standing on a subway platform, when a woman approached her and the two began to argue.

    Police say the suspect followed the victim up the station's stairs and then splashed an unknown chemical substance in the victim's face.

    The suspect ran from the scene and the victim was taken to Kings County Hospital, where she works, to be treated for her burns to the left side of her face.

    She was later transferred to Jacobi Medical Center in critical, but stable condition, officials said.

    The suspect was described as a woman between 20 to 30 years old, with black hair, dark complexion and a medium build.

    Officials say the suspect was last seen wearing a black jacket with brown fur on the hood, black pants with white drawings on the legs, and black boots.

    https://abc7ny.com/woman-burned-brooklyn-subway-crime-unknown-liquid/12518570/?ex_cid=TA_WABC_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A Trending Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1A5oZKfEmIHqPTm1A4Mt7hRqLtMXk0oht1t7qLbjJvcOAC6UZl0dcjqE0

    You could write a book on how often such incidents are happening.

  12. 3 minutes ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

    Having the city mandate that those individuals suffering from severe mental illness who pose a threat to others and themselves remain hospitalized at institutions indefinitely until they receive permanent housing and ongoing medical care would be a start. The institutions don't want to foot the bill and have a limited number of beds available, which is why funding should go towards empowering those institutions to better accommodate the number of these individuals. Also, that last snarky bit wasn't remotely amusing. You're real quick to dismiss everyone's posts with your classic starter of "that's not it, it's really about this" act. Nothing but argumentative gibber.

    It wasn't meant to be "amusing", as there is nothing funny about it.  It's a fact that people like yourself need to think about when you rant and rave about how the City isn't spending enough money, etc., as commuters continue to be randomly attacked and killed.  You talk about "argumentative gibbish", but what I said about how monies have been allocated (or not) is true.  If you were really that outraged about how resources were spent you would be far more critical of how that program "Thrive" was run (or not) to address the very issues you're raising.  There is plenty of money available for what you propose, but how it is being spent is another matter.  The State also recently opened up more beds to accommodate these individuals, which admittedly is a drop in the bucket, but it's a start.

    I don't feel the least bit sorry for people that make bad choices and have taken innocent victims down with them.  Those were people that were just going about their business that won't have another chance at life.  These people do that you empathize with do, even if you're not thrilled with the choices being made for them.

  13. 1 minute ago, Theli11 said:

    Wish they'd do something with the B39. We need better interborough travel, perhaps extending it to Lorimer St (L)(G) Brooklyn Side and either the East End of Houston St or a LES loop from Bridge --> Essex -> Houston or 14th St--> Columbia and/or Avenue D --> Grand --> Essex --> Bridge. 

    They want people using the subway for interborough travel.  Don't expect anything to change with the B39. It is short, direct, straight and only really exists because of ADA issues, otherwise they wouldn't have brought it back.  Despite what their Condition Reports state about better connectivity between the boroughs, they would prefer to avoid having any local buses do that where possible.  It's all about keeping costs down and the only way to do that is to eliminate stops, eliminate turns and keep bus lines as short as possible.

  14. 34 minutes ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

    Those laws govern what can and can't be done to the homeless when they're out on the streets. When they're in hospitals it's a different story. My point still stands. They're uninsured and won't have any long-term course of treatment available since medical staff would have no medium to ensure ongoing contact with them to maintain treatment after they've been discharged.

    Ok, so what's your solution then? I have no problem with what's being done. Most of these people are drug addicts that ended up the way that they are because of their own poor decisions. Different situation if they were mentally ill by no fault of their own. The City is expected to keep spending record amounts of money (taxpayer dollars that could be used for things like building more schools or other improvements) on the problem to be "equitable" to people that take more than they give by far. Everyone is human and mistakes are made, but these are people with chronic issues, and I don't think having more social workers come out is going to get anything done either. The biggest critics never seem to offer tangible solutions besides compassion and more wasteful spending. 

    If one of your family members were randomly attacked by one of these individuals, I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune.

  15. 1 hour ago, RTOMan said:

    Hence me saying patience...

    Also i can say this a few of those "Mentally ill" folks only act it they aren't..

    They aren't acting like that in certain areas because they would be dealt with...

    Must be a new trend then, but I always thought they were likely just jacked up something. lol Years ago I didn't recall seeing people shooting up in the subway the way I saw before I stopped taking it. There is one station along the (A) where it seemed quite popular.

  16. 21 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

    I just want to know what's by 1st Av and 58th St that's worthy of rerouting the B64 over there when it's already used as a pretty important crosstown route and the only route between western Bay Ridge and the zoned middle school in Dyker Heights.

    The Brooklyn Army Terminal isn't *that* much of a ridership generator. B11s over there are generally empty... I just don't get it.

    Nothing, but by removing the B64 from Bay Ridge over by Shore Rd, that means the only option is the B9 and if you need to travel say along Bath Av, you now need to transfer.  They are still using the idea of giving riders fewer choices to thereby force them to have to relay on just one route. It's their way of trying to maximize ridership on each line.  

  17. 9 minutes ago, RandomRider0101 said:

    100% agree; I see these mentally disturbed ppl all the time, everywhere; whether it's in Brooklyn, Manhattan, or anywhere else. It's a chronic problem in this city and has been for a very long time; it's about time they took some real action instead of just talking.

    And because these are people that became that way as a result of poor decisions such as rampant drug use, that is why I support this.  They need to be kept and treated until they can fend for themselves and get cleaned up.

  18. 56 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

    Surprised nobody mentioned this but no BM1-4 service along the "Downtown Loop" is not something I am ok with . I'm hoping @Via Garibaldi 8will do his best to keep the loop intact and the MTA stops trying to force riders onto the local bus/subway to make up for lost service. The "C" routes are iffy too with no wall St service. My suggestions for exp service 

    BM1: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM1/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM6

    BM2: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM2/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM22 (or if it "confuses riders" BM9)

    BM3: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM3/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM7

    BM4: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM4/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM8

    BM5: God knows why they even bothered renaming this to "BM35" when they literally said in the documents they wanna keep names as similar to the normal route as possible, but I guess you can't have a BM5c if there can't be downtown service to begin with. 

    X27/28: the Queens redesign has the QM63-68, not sure why they didn't do the same here (assuming bc it's easier to "take away the 2" from their names to create the BM7/8) Just have these routes as the BM27/28/C. 

    X37/38: The two routes that have appropriate names so no need to mess with it.

    Sea Gate service: I know they are gonna fight hard for express service over there. They need to retain at least peak service along the BM(2)8/38.

    As I said earlier, I like some of the express bus changes, but a lot of them are not good, either because they cut the span and or frequency or service or because they make the commute more difficult.  The Downtown Loop should be preserved for sure.  If you notice, in the morning people that get the bus by Church & Barclay in the afternoon would have no service west of Water St because that stop would only be served going back to Brooklyn. That is a huge stop too, so anyone that works in that area or west of it, has quite a schlepp in the morning, or they have to transfer.  As it is, some mornings, the Downtown Loop trips don't run and people have to transfer at other stops just to get a bus Downtown.  They would have to perhaps transfer twice some days.

    The Sea Gate cuts are ridiculous because from Cropsey & Canal to Sea Gate, that trip can be done in 10 minutes, so they are not saving much doing away with those trips.  They can maintain them.  Most of the usage in Coney Island is from the people in Sea Gate during the week.  On weekends there are people here and there, but again, you are not saving that much time.

    I also am going to push to have the X27 & X28 terminate at 14th St because there is definitely a chunk of ridership north of Worth St, which is where they're proposing to end service during peak periods. Terrible idea.  By terminating them at 14th St, this gives people north of Worth St service (under this plan they would lose service during peak periods). Anyone by 23rd St can hop on the X37 or X38 or go down to 14th St.

    The bus stop consolidation I am not going to protest because I do like what they did there in most cases and some of the tweaks to the routes in Brooklyn are not bad either. However, what I am concerned about with not having overlapping service for most of these routes now, particularly the BM lines is when they can't fill trips, those people will be SOL.  I don't believe that even with all of the cuts they're proposing that they will have enough bus operators at Spring Creek Depot to ensure that service runs the way that it should.   I'm looking to try to keep Saturday BM service too and off-peak on all lines.

  19. 11 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

    The B49 should go straight up Ocean. Thought they wanted to simplify the routes so they make the B49 more indirect for this transferring to the B35 toward Sunset Park.


    They brag how they are adding Coney Island service to the B44SBS, but conveniently omit they are removing it from the B4. Now they nursing home workers on Emmons Ave  from Crown Heights will no longer have direct SBS service and now may have to pay additional fares to use it if they already require a transfer. 

    Sending the B44 SBS to Kingsborough makes more sense than sending it to Coney Island Hospital when riders already have the B36. 

    If they want to straighten routes why did they leave the B16 basically as is? It’s because it would have required extra service and all they want to do is cut. They only filled two service gaps on Empire and Clarkson, but left many others. Totally not comprehensive. They totally ignored southwest Brooklyn. 

    The B44SBS route I just saw. Just keep the Southern end the way that it is. 

  20. 5 minutes ago, Kriston Lewis said:

    Some armchair thoughts:

    • Express buses on Beverley Road: Beverley Road homeowners are going to fight to the death on this one. They raise hell whenever a truck manages to get onto the street, I can't imagine the reaction to a bunch of MCIs.
    • Other express notes: I'm surprised that they didn't try to re-route the former Command expresses off the FDR to Sixth Avenue and Broadway. I am happy about the BM4 being re-routed to Coney Island Avenue which will maintain some Cortelyou Road service and restore part of the X29.

    None of the BM lines would use Cortelyou Rd. The BM4 would run via Avenue L to Coney Island Av.  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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