B44 +SelectBusService+

[Interested Rider]

It has now been one week and tomorrow I will be taking my first trip on the B/44 local as the stop that I change buses was a limited stop and now is a local stop.

 

There are some things that  I am watching in terms of the B/44 SBS:

 

1) Direct Service to Kings County Hospital, I will not be surprised if in the next couple of months there will be a slight change in route via Rogers, Linden. New York and the next two way street back to Rogers. The reason will be stated is they re-examined the route and decided to restore service to the hospital.(Translation: Political pressure forced them to do it)

 

2) Ocean Avenue service north of Flatbush Avenue. In looking at the schedule, there is a B/49 limited that originates at Church Avenue in the AM rush period to Kingsborough Community College.Many of their students come from Flatbush and the B/49 is not only in the mix but the B/44 SBS, the Q train and B/49 shuttles from Sheepshead Bay. Brooklyn Bus discussed the service to the college in one of his recent blogs about the students arriving at Brighton Beach and the need for more buses on the B/1 Shuttle. Is there a possible cut in the B/49 service that will force more ridership unto the Q from the B/49 and eliminate the morning limited service and the shuttle service from Sheepshead Bay? Based on what is happening, they are looking to save money and the B/49 has become a prime target for the bean counters.

 

3) Ocean Avenue Service to Empire Boulevard via Ocean Avenue. Interesting idea that is supported by many of us for many different reasons. Will never happen as it came from the public, so therefore it is dead until the idea is long forgotten and then it will be resurrected as an original idea from the planning department.

 

4) B/36 Service. Why am I mentioning this here? When the B/44 local service was extended to Knapp Street, many of the B/44 local riders did not have to transfer at Avenue U and this reduced the number of riders going south to Avenue Z. If the number of riders on the B/36 from the Nostrand Avenue stops has increased then it will indicate that the B/44 has problems, however if the number of riders actually increases then look for the pretend (A/K/A mainstream) media trumpeting it as a triumph for the planning department. It is my contention is there is something else here and it is the bean counters (again) who have this fixation on their every run (bus and subway) shall not be more than 8 hours and pay not more than 8 hours. If the B/44 local and the B/36 schedule are almost the same then do not dismiss what Brooklyn Bus wrote about extending the B/36 to the junction to replace the B/44 local service south of there. Something tells me that the planners and the bean counters are already thinking about it and give it some time, it will be put into effect.

 

5) What happened to transit operating for the public good? It has disappeared as it is the bean counters and the "my way or the highway" types that are running the system and forget the public!

[B35 via Church]

Alert: I generally think of a net service cut as being a service change that hurts more people than it helps. This DOES NOT MEAN that I think any service change that does not hurt more people than it helps does not/will not have problems that should be fixed!!

 

I reiterate that I do not think any service change that does not hurt more people than it helps does not/will not have problems that should be fixed.

 

Aside from the SBS not making many of the local stops at the ends of the line that the LTD used to make (like the M15 SBS not running local north of E 96 St or wherever the way it used to), I do not see SBS as a net service cut if the rest of the route and most of the stops are kept the same (like the M15 SBS staying on 1st/2nd Aves, and few stops being eliminated).

 

The B44 SBS is seen as a service cut because the gaps between stops in Bed-Stuy and Midwood (and Sheepshead a little) are huge. But if this were not done, then the buses would be slow and in some cases too slow because of too many stops..unless the presence of automobiles other than in-service NYCT passenger buses on the routes in question were drastically reduced and the traffic signals were made more helpful for the buses.

 

That being said, I have no personal opinion about what happens to the B44 SBS south of "H" or north of St. John's or Empire as long as it does not negatively impact service between St. John's/Empire and "H". Therefore I have no personal opinion of how slow or fast the buses should be north of St. John's/Empire or south of "H".

 

There absolutely was a net service cut when they removed local stops in Williamsburg and they have also absolutely cut net service north of Flushing and south of "U".

 

If we had a hypothetical situation in which a bus never used NYA (so basically after the roads were one-wayed in the 1950s, the northbound Nostrand Ave bus, the B44, were moved to Rogers Ave and not NYA) and they had the B44 LTD going up Rogers since the 1980s when LTD service started and then converted it to SBS and kept the stops at Myrtle, Gates, Bergen, "L", "R", and "Z", sent every local B44 from Wash Plaza to Knapp St since the B44 local bus was first created in the 1950s and had it make all local stops in Williamsburg and Sheepshead until the present, would you still call it a net service cut? Also this may sound a bit ridiculous since I am asking about such a specific hypothetical situation, but assume the B44 LTD/SBS headways and hours of operation and B44 local headways (and its 24-hour service) stayed the same from the 1980s to the present.

 

The thing is that in the hypothetical situation, I am not seeing it as a net service cut because my opinion is that if the buses are sped up enough, easily more people benefit (those at all ex-LTD stops except possibly Glenwood) from the SBS than not (those north of Flushing and south of "U" and those at Glenwood unless they eliminated parking on the s/b side of Nostrand b/w Glenwood and FB and made it a drop-off stop for the SBS) in the hypothetical situation.

 

Can you look at the current M15 SBS/local and tell me what aspects of it made/make it a service cut (net or not) compared to the old M15 LTD/local (you can look at before and/or after City Hall trips were cut if you want)? I just want to use an example so I can better understand why you think the M15 SBS is a service cut (net or not, but preferably net; I want to better understand why you think the M15 SBS is a net service cut).

 

Or just make a statement or statements that will otherwise clear things up. The way I look at some things makes things complicated for me. It is just me.

If this post was aimed at me, I'ma put it like this man, because it's looking like you're intentionally ducking my question.... I mean seriously now, what is all of this..... You're still going on about the notion that the SBS is a service cut, compared to the LTD - Which has NOTHING to do with what I asked you.....

 

It's a simple question I'll ask again - Why do you want cuts to happen elsewhere to support the B49 to run on NY av?

 

I mean, is this not what you wrote?

 

".....if they just make more SBS routes or cut costs in other ways that are not too terrible they can save even more money and then some of that money can be used on something like what I proposed for the B49."

 

What are you going on about what makes something a service cut, what a net service cut is, & what underwent a net service cut or an (outright) cut is, for... Matter fact, what is all this talk about net service cuts?

 

You implicitly say CUT COSTS in that statement (in blue), BrooklynIRT..... What else could you possibly mean by cut costs, if not for garnering money from said cut(s) to pay for the B49 diversion B49 you're suggesting.... You suggested adding more SBS routes to the system - the questions you're asking here, you should be asking yourself & pondering upon them accordingly... I mean come on, Why would you make a statement like that ("if they just make more SBS routes or cut costs in other ways") if it wouldn't result in more money being available to support the same B49 diversion......

 

I don't see what is so hard to understand about what I'm asking....

[B35 via Church]

It has now been one week and tomorrow I will be taking my first trip on the B/44 local as the stop that I change buses was a limited stop and now is a local stop.

 

There are some things that  I am watching in terms of the B/44 SBS:

 

1) Direct Service to Kings County Hospital, I will not be surprised if in the next couple of months there will be a slight change in route via Rogers, Linden. New York and the next two way street back to Rogers. The reason will be stated is they re-examined the route and decided to restore service to the hospital.(Translation: Political pressure forced them to do it)

I personally don't see this happening.... the politico's will lose out on this one because with the MTA, the SBS reigns supreme over all other types of surface transit service (local, LTD, express)... They are stubburrrrnnnn (lol) when it comes to SBS....

 

2) Ocean Avenue service north of Flatbush Avenue. In looking at the schedule, there is a B/49 limited that originates at Church Avenue in the AM rush period to Kingsborough Community College.Many of their students come from Flatbush and the B/49 is not only in the mix but the B/44 SBS, the Q train and B/49 shuttles from Sheepshead Bay. Brooklyn Bus discussed the service to the college in one of his recent blogs about the students arriving at Brighton Beach and the need for more buses on the B/1 Shuttle. Is there a possible cut in the B/49 service that will force more ridership unto the Q from the B/49 and eliminate the morning limited service and the shuttle service from Sheepshead Bay? Based on what is happening, they are looking to save money and the B/49 has become a prime target for the bean counters.

 

 

3) Ocean Avenue Service to Empire Boulevard via Ocean Avenue. Interesting idea that is supported by many of us for many different reasons. Will never happen as it came from the public, so therefore it is dead until the idea is long forgotten and then it will be resurrected as an original idea from the planning department.

 

4) B/36 Service. Why am I mentioning this here? When the B/44 local service was extended to Knapp Street, many of the B/44 local riders did not have to transfer at Avenue U and this reduced the number of riders going south to Avenue Z. If the number of riders on the B/36 from the Nostrand Avenue stops has increased then it will indicate that the B/44 has problems, however if the number of riders actually increases then look for the pretend (A/K/A mainstream) media trumpeting it as a triumph for the planning department. It is my contention is there is something else here and it is the bean counters (again) who have this fixation on their every run (bus and subway) shall not be more than 8 hours and pay not more than 8 hours. If the B/44 local and the B/36 schedule are almost the same then do not dismiss what Brooklyn Bus wrote about extending the B/36 to the junction to replace the B/44 local service south of there. Something tells me that the planners and the bean counters are already thinking about it and give it some time, it will be put into effect.

2 - I think you mean Ocean av service north of Foster.....

 

2 & 3 - I guess I'm one of the few that's against that plan BrooklynBus came out with, because 1] I don't feel that gap in service on Empire (or ocean) needs to be filled.... and 2] I abhor removing the B43 from Prospect Park subway to have it truncated to KCH itself, in lieu of having 49's running up Ocean & across Empire.... But Lol @ your commentary in #3....

 

4 - That's why I mentioned the age-old 36 extension to the junction suggestion when BrooklynBus posted that plan the friend of his thought up (breaking up the 44 local into [a Bed Stuy-Sheepshead segment] & [a WBP - Junction segment])..... If it's not extending the 36 to Kings plaza, it's the extending the 36 to the junction..... All in all, it's another route that runs like molasses from end to end & the MTA does squat to try to rectify anything on it.....

 

I take it that you remember BrooklynBus' suggestion of running 44 SBS' to Sheepshead subway as well... why not go for the gusto and really treat the 36 like pure shit; instead of via an extension, it would be so by truncation.... (they can) Pick their poison.

 

5) What happened to transit operating for the public good? It has disappeared as it is the bean counters and the "my way or the highway" types that are running the system and forget the public!

A waning economy happened, and the higher-ups are trying to get as big a piece of the pie as they possibly can.... But you didn't hear that from me.

 

Jokes aside (well not really a joke, but) I, and I can bet many that rely on public transportation in this city are sick & damn tired of being treated as numbers, instead of people with needs..... You ask yourself what is public transportation without the public's input (I mean they intentionally have these hearings at times where they know full well those that ride public transportation are at school/work or whatever - further limiting the amt. of people that would actually/really like to attend the things, but can't... of course that's by design) & you need not look no further than what we got going on here in NYC.....

[Interested Rider]

My thanks to B35 via Church for pointing out some of the errors that I made in my last post on the the B/44 select service. He is correct that I was supposed to write in Flatbush instead of Foster, so forgive me for my error in # 2. He is also correct as to the B/36 having problems as many days, it pays for me to walk from the Q train to my home as the bus service is not the best. To understand my point in # 4,however, you have to think like a bureaucrat working in one of these agencies. They are so insulated from the general public that they do not care about making things better but worse. Knowing the track record of the MTA, if it will cut some more money from the budget in terms of employee's pay checks, it will be done no matter how non-sensical the idea may be to the rest of us. The irony is that they will trumpet it as a cost-saving measure and the pretend media will post it on page 1 as a triumph for the agency even though we all know that the service got worse.

 

The problem with government agencies getting involved with something that unfortunately could not make money when it was private is that the same politicians who vociferously complained about the service to the public, now keep quiet as their political friends are working there. What the "progressives" of both parties did  in this state was to create agencies that are responsible to no one. Even if a public hearing is announced, the time and place is for the convenience of the agency, not for the general public. So if you are not retired, want to sacrifice a day  from work (if you can get it) or school (for that matter), you are deliberately excluded from the process. After all , who reads the New York City Record" which lists the meetings of all governmental units or for that matter the "New York State Register" which lists all proposed rule changes for the state. The City Record should be available at all public libraries as for the Register most likely at (possibly) a college (if you are lucky).

 

What the MTA has is absolute power, and they figure they can flaunt it as no one will stop them. It reminds me of a quote from my high school days by Lord Acton "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" and even though it was used in reference to kings and queens, it could apply here as well. 

[bobtehpanda]

5) What happened to transit operating for the public good? It has disappeared as it is the bean counters and the "my way or the highway" types that are running the system and forget the public!

 

It isn't easy to allocate scraps. Belt tightening only goes so far.

 

I feel that the MTA will probably be adding stops past the Junction; the stop spacing is considered far, even for rapid transit.

[BrooklynBus]

The first part of it, is going way back to the discussions we'd have on RD (it was a part of that whole run the B36 up to the junction mess)... The second part of it, I'll admit is original (fulton to sheepshead).....

 

As far as the 2 plans in their entireties as is.... Ideally, that would make perfect sense as far as how the 44 is utilized....

(some have a similar plan to have that done w/ the Q60, but it's not as feasible as it would be w/ the B44 with how they're used...)

 

Determining how often each 44 segment would run, would be the question to have to be answered though....

This would determine how much that plan would cost, over how the way the current 44 local is ran/serviced......

 

The SBS can be kept under the 44 notation, but another question I guess that'd have to be asked is, is it time to consider splitting up the 44 local into 2 separate routes? (as opposed to running the 44 in its totality as is - with the SBS' going Nostrand/Rogers & the locals going Nostrand/New York)......

You hit the bulleye. The determinant if the plan I suggested would work, depends on the schedules and service levels. On the surface, I think it could be done within existing costs and woud relieve the overcrowding in the center of the route. Again, it was not my idea, but the idea of a friend of mine.

 

You ask if it is time to split up the local. The SBS is already split. No SBS bus goes from one end to the other. So why should it be so difficult to split the local?

 

As far as the B49 remaining as is, I wrote about that numerous times. After the immediate problems are solved with the B44 by increasing local service, I believe it would be best to move the B44 local to Rogers and replacing NY Avenue service with a new route I will discuss later. This coincides with my plan to reroute the B49 straight up Ocean and east on Empire to Utica Avenue. (I spent 25 years of my life growing upon East Flatbush and there were countless times I needed to take a bus along Empire and couldn't. We would end up walking two and three miles rather than using indirect circuitous, time-consuming bus routes. There really is a need for this service.)

 

The B16 could be cut back to Ocean and Parkside and half or all the B43s could be routed south to Kings County Hospital passing Wingate HS. Another route could start at Eastern Parkway overlapping the B43 to Empire Blvd and continue south to Winthrop Street to New York Avenue to Church Avenue, then along Brooklyn Avenue to Clarendon, then on Albany Ave to Avenue K. (I envision this route with 15 or 20 minute headways.). Then it would turn west to Flatbush and terminate at Flatbush and Kings Highway. On its return trip, it would make a right at NY and Clarkson, left on Albany, right on Winthrop and right on Kingston. A cheaper but less effective alternative would be route from Eastern Parkway, south on Brooklyn, west on Empire, and south on New York to Avenue H and terminate near the Junction. On its return, it would use Kingston instead of Brooklyn. Since this route is relatively short, it could also operate as an extension or branch of the B43 from Empire which would probably be better.

 

I wrote three articles this week for Sheepsheadbites on the B44 SBS. The first one is tomorrow.

[BrooklynIRT]

If this post was aimed at me, I'ma put it like this man, because it's looking like you're intentionally ducking my question.... I mean seriously now, what is all of this..... You're still going on about the notion that the SBS is a service cut, compared to the LTD - Which has NOTHING to do with what I asked you.....

 

It's a simple question I'll ask again - Why do you want cuts to happen elsewhere to support the B49 to run on NY av?

 

I mean, is this not what you wrote?

 

".....if they just make more SBS routes or cut costs in other ways that are not too terrible they can save even more money and then some of that money can be used on something like what I proposed for the B49."

 

What are you going on about what makes something a service cut, what a net service cut is, & what underwent a net service cut or an (outright) cut is, for... Matter fact, what is all this talk about net service cuts?

 

You implicitly say CUT COSTS in that statement (in blue), BrooklynIRT..... What else could you possibly mean by cut costs, if not for garnering money from said cut(s) to pay for the B49 diversion B49 you're suggesting.... You suggested adding more SBS routes to the system - the questions you're asking here, you should be asking yourself & pondering upon them accordingly... I mean come on, Why would you make a statement like that ("if they just make more SBS routes or cut costs in other ways") if it wouldn't result in more money being available to support the same B49 diversion......

 

I don't see what is so hard to understand about what I'm asking....

 

You asked if we should hope for more service cuts for other riders in order to have more service on NYA than there is now, and I am saying I do not really see SBS routes as a net service cut.

 

And the objective I was aiming for was to cut costs without making net service cuts.

 

This does not mean I do not think the B44 SBS/local should not be altered. Although I do think the southbound B44 SBS b/w St. John's/Empire and "H" should not be altered.

[Trainmaster5]

@ BrooklynIRT  

 

Did you really propose bi-directional B49 service on Bedford Avenue at the northern end? I'd like to hear what some of the other posters think about your idea. I, for one, think that's the worst thing to propose to the . At the extreme northern end the B49 is already blanketed by the B48 and the B44 (all variants). South of Empire Blvd the B41 takes the place of the B48 with the B44SBS one block over. I lived in that Prospect-Lefferts area when the B49 was originally sent s/b on Bedford Avenue and no one wanted buses to run on Bedford, period. If the were to take any action your idea would be the poster child for truncation of the route, which most of us are against. I can't ever be called an apologist for my old employer but with this SBS thing and your complaints about , , service on parts of this corridor I think you might be exaggerating the problems on Nostrand Avenue to a degree. This is hardly an underserved transit wasteland by any stretch. Stevie Wonder could see that, IMO. I'm sure that there are other parts of Brooklyn that deserve more service. Carry on.

[BrooklynIRT]

Well, I might have liked for the B49 to have been removed from Bedford Ave, but unfortunately I suspect that the percentage of the local population that does not want buses on Bedford now is much lower than it was when buses were placed there 60 years ago.

 

I think personal automobile ownership rates play a huge part in whether a neighborhood deserves/has the ability to accommodate/warrants/wants/needs more or better mass transit service. Do these other parts of Brooklyn you might have in mind have lower or higher personal automobile ownership rates than the neighborhoods within roughly a half-mile of IRT Nostrand Ave stations?

 

I have been told time and time again that most people who drive for non-work purposes do not care if mass transit improvements are made that give them the option to avoid using their cars. Since they do not care enough to petition for such improvements, the government does not implement them. In some cases an attempt might be made by the government, like the addition of a bus route somewhere, and when that happens get ready for lots of complaints about parking removal to make room for bus stops. Especially since people say parking situations around the city are getting even worse as time goes on.

[Acela Express]

All in all, the SBS44 is successful, whether you like or not.

I'll put it like this: after January when BusTime is activated for Brooklyn, the control room of dispatchers will adjusting buses where needed along the line, because of now, the 44s are officially clocked at one location - Flatbush Junction, and he can do but so much. 

 

There's folks saying they've seen SBS buses running empty, and that's because you'll have 5-7 locals bunched in a train-like movement that many would just hop on the first thing smoking out their stop, leaving 'that' SBS with little to no work. GPS will adjust where needed to keep an even flow.

[BrooklynIRT]

Remember that a lot of people want to avoid mass transit (this would not be so terrible if they were all bicycle users, but they tend to be personal automobile users) regardless of how frequent it is because they feel that mass transit is dirty, they feel a need to avoid whatever lowlives or crazy people they think they will run into, they ride crowded subways to/from work during the week and do not want to be anywhere near them on the weekends, they want privacy, and all kinds of other 'reasons'.

 

Then you still have this part of American culture where people drive far from home on weekends a lot, especially in the summer (beach trips that some people need cars for or think they need cars for come to mind). Adding mass transit service in those people's neighborhoods might not help them since not enough of those people or visiting people will be in their neighborhoods to justify it.

 

Admittedly I may be looking at this from the POV of a glass half empty person.

 

The thing about me going nuts about Nostrand Ave is that I do not want a situation where a neighborhood has very good mass transit and then has that very good mass transit compromised in such a way that it produces a net detriment for that neighborhood. Especially when it comes to the service or services that are used the most. This can cause people to leave. In fact this census map (http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map) indicates that neighborhoods around Nostrand b/w about Fulton St and Ave "K" lost people from 2000 to 2010. I wonder if train problems had anything to do with this.

 

Of course if you live there, the train's relevant service area (the city and Downtown Brooklyn) does not have to be the center of your universe, but I am sure there will be some things for which you absolutely must go there during the times that the is not running to FB (which are the times that the train has most of its problems). Even if they added running time as SubwayGuy suggested, I think the problem would still be quite prevalent. These are some of the reasons that I consider the or local to B44 SBS connection so important.

 

And if people leave, it makes a neighborhood more vulnerable to service cuts.

 

There are other parts of Brooklyn and the other boroughs that could use more service, but a neighborhood that has very good mass transit should not have that mass transit compromised in such a way that it produces a net detriment for that neighborhood (like a decrease in transit use accompanied by an increase in personal automobile/taxi use), especially when it comes to the service or services that are used the most there.

[peacemak3r]

Remember that a lot of people want to avoid mass transit (this would not be so terrible if they were all bicycle users, but they tend to be personal automobile users) regardless of how frequent it is because they feel that mass transit is dirty, they feel a need to avoid whatever lowlives or crazy people they think they will run into, they ride crowded subways to/from work during the week and do not want to be anywhere near them on the weekends, they want privacy, and all kinds of other 'reasons'.

 

Especially when it comes to the service or services that are used the most. This can cause people to leave. In fact this census map (http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map) indicates that neighborhoods around Nostrand b/w about Fulton St and Ave "K" lost people from 2000 to 2010. I wonder if train problems had anything to do with this.

 

1 - I can assure you that a lot of people along Nostrand Ave do not avoid the B44 like the plague as you seem to put it. The only people avoiding mass transit or the B44 as a whole are only avoiding it probably because it's faster to drive there rather take mass transit or the B44 won't take them to where they need to go.

 

2 - Also I hope you do know that if people are leaving a community/neighborhood, it's not always because of mass transit problems or what not. It could of possibly be the neighborhood itself or it's safety.

[bobtehpanda]

1 - I can assure you that a lot of people along Nostrand Ave do not avoid the B44 like the plague as you seem to put it. The only people avoiding mass transit or the B44 as a whole are only avoiding it probably because it's faster to drive there rather take mass transit or the B44 won't take them to where they need to go.

 

2 - Also I hope you do know that if people are leaving a community/neighborhood, it's not always because of mass transit problems or what not. It could of possibly be the neighborhood itself or it's safety.

 

^This. There are many perfectly legitimate reasons why a neighborhood's population could dwindle. More of it could be dedicated to commercial activities. The last of the Echo baby boomers (the Millenials born to the original Baby Boomers) could've left the nest. Retirees no longer living with children could have downsized or upsized their homes and moved to other areas.

 

@BrooklynIRT: I take issue with your readiness to chalk everything up to transportation, as if everything is a binary, one-choice issue. It's not. And can we stop with the whole cars are completely evil, let's preserve all mass transit at any costs logic here? Robbing other services to pay for the B49 makes no sense; if the B49 becomes redundant on Rogers, then it becomes redundant on Rogers. You can't rob Peter to pay Paul.

[BrooklynBus]

The B49 will become redundant on Rogers and the MTA shoud have realized this five years ago when they came up with the route. The SBS plan required a thorough restructuring of other bus routes in the area. The. B49 needs to be moved to run straight up Ocean Avenue and New York Avenue service should be replaced with a new route, possibly to be combined with an existing route. But all that takes time. It can't be done overnight although the MTA had the time to plan all of this while they were planning SBS.

 

In the short time the local riders need relief with additional or restructured service. A future MTA response that local service will be replaced with artics when the buses are available will noth appen quick enough, forcing riders to use SBS against their will, because they will soon tire of waiting for buses that don't show up for 40 minutes.

[realizm]

I'm looking at the map right now and studying the route:

 

MTA/NYC DOT

 

secondavenuesagas  

 

I think in my estimation this is a brilliant move on the part of the MTA. Finish the IND Second system proposal by introducing a Select Bus Service to South Brooklyn. This provides a fast way to get into the hub at Atlantic Pacific for the BMT, IND or IRT into the financial district. It will serve well for the Flatbush community in a fast commute to work and a way to get home.

 

 

From Sheepshead bay a bus can reach its destination on the IRT and the  to the IRT Station approx 28 minutes on the Nova Bus LFS low-floor articluateds (12:43 - 12:15 = 28 minutes correct me if I'm wrong). That is pretty quick way to go for neighborhoods serving these areas if you work in Manhattan and live in Brooklyn. The agencys that ran our subways since its creation made proposals of creating a subway replacing an original trolley that has been defunct for a lifetime come to completion. No subway is going to be built out there anytime soon (if ever) so an enhanced NYDOT prepared surface transit route is a good alternative. Smart move.

 

 

 

 

.

[realizm]

In fact this census map (http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map) indicates that neighborhoods around Nostrand b/w about Fulton St and Ave "K" lost people from 2000 to 2010. I wonder if train problems had anything to do with this.

 

Of course if you live there, the train's relevant service area (the city and Downtown Brooklyn) does not have to be the center of your universe, but I am sure there will be some things for which you absolutely must go there during the times that the is not running to FB (which are the times that the train has most of its problems). Even if they added running time as SubwayGuy suggested, I think the problem would still be quite prevalent. These are some of the reasons that I consider the or local to B44 SBS connection so important.

 

And if people leave, it makes a neighborhood more vulnerable to service cuts.

 

 

You just answered your own question, the 2010 budget cuts.

[BrooklynIRT]

Robbing other services to pay for the B49 makes no sense

 

Does converting more routes to SBS without doing anything B44-like to those routes (like a drastic service cut on the road the LTD used to use and huge spacing between some bus stops) count as robbing those services or their local counterparts?

 

--------------------------------------------

 

Also (Trainmaster) I should amend what I said about personal automobile ownership rates and whether a neighborhood warrants more or better mass transit. A lot of bus routes have been proposed in different neighborhoods including those with high personal automobile ownership rates, and if those bus routes were implemented, they would see decent use if the communities they would serve were in support of their implementation. The communities will support them if certain actions are taken, for example mass transit supporters like us getting them to petition or something. More participation in government should probably be encouraged..

[BrooklynBus]

This provides a fast way to get into the hub at Atlantic Pacific for the BMT, IND or IRT into the financial district. It will serve well for the Flatbush community in a fast commute to work and a way to get home...From Sheepshead bay a bus can reach its destination on the IRT and the to the IRT Station approx 28 minutes on the Nova Bus LFS low-floor articluateds (12:43 - 12:15 = 28 minutes correct me if I'm wrong). That is pretty quick way to go for neighborhoods serving these areas if you work in Manhattan and live in Brooklyn...Smart move.

What is so quick about 28 minutes? It takes far less time to take a crosstown bus to the Brighon Line (B4, B36, B3, B82, B7, B9) than to take the SBS to the IRT station. Also, the IRT is the most crowded subway. If more people board it at the terminal, that means less room for others getting on further down the line. The only reason someone near Knapp Street would choose the SBS to get to the subway instead of the B4 has nothing to do with running times. It's the waiting time that is the factor in making that choice. They made the SBS operate every 5 minutes and the B4 operate every 15 or 20 minutes. Although the trip to the subway is far quicker on the B4 than on the B44 SBS, you can lose 20 minutes waiting for the B4 bus, doubling your travel time. So which bus would you choose? There is far too much SBS service to Knapp Street, a total waste of scarce resources.

[BrooklynIRT]

 

 

From Sheepshead bay a bus can reach its destination on the IRT and the  to the IRT Station approx 28 minutes on the Nova Bus LFS low-floor articluateds (12:43 - 12:15 = 28 minutes correct me if I'm wrong). That is pretty quick way to go for neighborhoods serving these areas if you work in Manhattan and live in Brooklyn. The agencys that ran our subways since its creation made proposals of creating a subway replacing an original trolley that has been defunct for a lifetime come to completion. No subway is going to be built out there anytime soon (if ever) so an enhanced NYDOT prepared surface transit route is a good alternative. Smart move.

You posted the local bus schedule, and the local bus does not use LFSAs. And only half the SBS buses serve Knapp Street most of the time.

 

I thought the SBS should have been able to get from Knapp to FB in 16 minutes maximum barring wheelchairs or motor vehicle accidents or road work or whatever (2 from Knapp to Emmons/Nostrand, 5 from Knapp to Ave "X", 7 to Ave "U", 11 to Kings Highway, 16 to Flatbush Ave). But all that went right out the window for various reasons.

 

I also retract my previous statements about taking the B44 SBS to the IRT instead of taking a crosstown bus to the Brighton, especially during rush hours. I have no opinion about that anymore.

 

It is not great for rush hour ridership to increase too much on the IRT unless they re-do Nostrand junction, which is about as likely to happen as the subway being extended.

[BrooklynBus]

http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2013/11/b44-sbs-update-initial-reviews-are-in-part-1-of-3/

 

I quoted some of you in Parts 2 and 3 to appear later this week.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What is so quick about 28 minutes? It takes far less time to take a crosstown bus to the Brighon Line (B4, B36, B3, B82, B7, B9) than to take the SBS to the IRT station. Also, the IRT is the most crowded subway. If more people board it at the terminal, that means less room for others getting on further down the line. The only reason someone near Knapp Street would choose the SBS to get to the subway instead of the B4 has nothing to do with running times. It's the waiting time that is the factor in making that choice. They made the SBS operate every 5 minutes and the B4 operate every 15 or 20 minutes. Although the trip to the subway is far quicker on the B4 than on the B44 SBS, you can lose 20 minutes waiting for the B4 bus, doubling your travel time. So which bus would you choose? There is far too much SBS service to Knapp Street, a total waste of scarce resources.

I disagree with your statement.  It amazes me that you could stand here and say that Sheepshead Bay doesn't need that service, especially considering how limited transportation options are in that area.  You complained about too much BM3 service for Sheepshead Bay and that's been cut back substantially to almost nothing.  Now you complain about too much B44 local bus service!! How are people who don't have cars in the neighborhood supposed to get around down there? Maybe you forgot, but I didn't forget all of the shuttered businesses all along Emmons Avenue due to a lack of public transportation in the area, as the B4 had been cut back from serving Sheepshead Bay outside of rush hours.  You've got a glut of apartments sitting empty in the area precisely because a lack of transportation (especially the condos down there.  You heard it with your own ears at the Town Hall Meeting that we both attended, that people were leaving that part of Sheepshead Bay due a lack of transportation (i.e. BM3 for example)).  Therefore, it perplexes me how you can claim that an area that is starved for transportation options has too much local bus service when many of us from that area including myself fought to get the B4 restored.  They need all of the transportation they can get down there and I have been adamant in trying to at least preserve what little BM3 express bus service exists in the area.  

[BrooklynIRT]

Now you complain about too much B44 local bus service!!

He said SBS service in the post you quoted though.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

He said SBS service in the post you quoted though.

To clarify, what I meant was local bus service as in local bus service vs express bus service, which would include SBS service. I still view SBS service as being under local bus service, even though it's an "express service".

[BrooklynBus]

I disagree with your statement.  It amazes me that you could stand here and say that Sheepshead Bay doesn't need that service, especially considering how limited transportation options are in that area.  You complained about too much BM3 service for Sheepshead Bay and that's been cut back substantially to almost nothing.  Now you complain about too much B44 local bus service!! How are people who don't have cars in the neighborhood supposed to get around down there? Maybe you forgot, but I didn't forget all of the shuttered businesses all along Emmons Avenue due to a lack of public transportation in the area, as the B4 had been cut back from serving Sheepshead Bay outside of rush hours.  You've got a glut of apartments sitting empty in the area precisely because a lack of transportation (especially the condos down there.  You heard it with your own ears at the Town Hall Meeting that we both attended, that people were leaving that part of Sheepshead Bay due a lack of transportation (i.e. BM3 for example)).  Therefore, it perplexes me how you can claim that an area that is starved for transportation options has too much local bus service when many of us from that area including myself fought to get the B4 restored.  They need all of the transportation they can get down there and I have been adamant in trying to at least preserve what little BM3 express bus service exists in the area.

 

For heaven's sake why are you so angry and what are you talking about?

 

First, when did I ever state that there was too much BM3 service in Sheepshead Bay?

 

Second, where did I state that there is too much B44 local service in Sheepshead Bay? I said there was too much SBS service south of Avenue X. That is not the same thing. I actually have been saying for the past year that there would not be enough local service, not too much. You can check my article from last March if you want to.

[Vistausss]

@VG8: To be fair, SBS is neither local or express service. It's simply more or less BRT without fully seperated lanes (with that I mean: no interference with other traffic at all like you'd find on BRT or SBSBRT).