B44 +SelectBusService+

[Q43LTD]

So should Brooklyn get another SBS route?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So should Brooklyn get another SBS route?

Yes and I would choose the B1 as the route and throw artics on it if possible.  There is a huge service gap that needs to be filled for Southern Brooklyn with East-West travel.  Takes far too long for starters, and there is no subway set up aside from backtracking which also takes forever with the amount of transfers needed.

[Q43LTD]

Yes and I would choose the B1 as the route and throw artics on it if possible. There is a huge service gap that needs to be filled for Southern Brooklyn with East-West travel. Takes far too long for starters, and there is no subway set up aside from backtracking which also takes forever with the amount of transfers needed.

Ulmer Park with artics? Foamers delight lol...anyway I thought you wanted it back at Shore Rd?

[BrooklynBus]

@via Garibaldi 8

 

I believe only the subway guidelines were changed to make trains more crowded. Bus guidelines stayed the same as far as I know.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Ulmer Park with artics? Foamers delight lol...anyway I thought you wanted it back at Shore Rd?

Yes I do prefer the old set up, but if the B1 were to become SBS, I'd have it run straight down 86th and just turn up Shore Rd and go that way. I rode the B1 some months ago only for a short distance in Dyker Heights and it was painful to say the least.  Constantly stopping and hitting lights.

 

@via Garibaldi 8

 

I believe only the subway guidelines were changed to make trains more crowded. Bus guidelines stayed the same as far as I know.

Heh... All I know is the waits seem much longer than I remember on quite a few lines.

[BrooklynBus]

Yes and I would choose the B1 as the route and throw artics on it if possible.  There is a huge service gap that needs to be filled for Southern Brooklyn with East-West travel.  Takes far too long for starters, and there is no subway set up aside from backtracking which also takes forever with the amount of transfers needed.

The B1 should not be the route because it doesn't travel across southern Brooklyn. The be should be on Avenue P and Flatlands and possibly use 65 St. I don't know about exclusive lanes though without banning parking. I don't want road capacity reduced.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The B1 should not be the route because it doesn't travel across southern Brooklyn. The be should be on Avenue P and Flatlands and possibly use 65 St. I don't know about exclusive lanes though without banning parking. I don't want road capacity reduced.

Are you kidding me?  What do you call the areas that it travels through then?  Manhattan Beach to Bay Ridge is all Southern Brooklyn last I checked, and furthermore, there is no subway access for East-West travel along 86th street in South Brooklyn.

[BrooklynBus]

Are you kidding me? What do you call the areas that it travels through then? Manhattan Beach to Bay Ridge is all Southern Brooklyn last I checked, and furthermore, there is no subway access for East-West travel along 86th street in South Brooklyn.

That is southwest Brooklyn. Southern Brooklyn includes eastern Sheepshead Bay, Marine Park, and Canarsie.

 

 

 

 

Here is Part 3.

 

http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2013/11/b44-sbs-update-initial-reviews-are-in-part-2-of-3/

[Via Garibaldi 8]

That is southwest Brooklyn. Southern Brooklyn includes eastern Sheepshead Bay, Marine Park, and Canarsie.

 

 

 

 

Here is Part 3.

 

http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2013/11/b44-sbs-update-initial-reviews-are-in-part-2-of-3/

Oh please... Southern Brooklyn is Southern Brooklyn.   You're talking to someone who was born and raised in South Brooklyn.

[BrooklynBus]

Oh please... Southern Brooklyn is Southern Brooklyn.   You're talking to someone who was born and raised in South Brooklyn.

 

If you want to get technical, South Brooklyn is Red Hook. 

 

Southwest Brooklyn is only half of southern Brooklyn, but it doesn't matter what you call it.  The fact is the B1 only goes as far east as Manhattan Beach. An SBS route on the B1 would do nothing to connect Bensonhurst, the Kings Highway area, Marine Park, Canarsie, Spring Creek and Queens.  Besides, you've got the el to deal with.  You could never run buses fast on 86th Street.  Bath Avenue or 65th Street are far better choices.  

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If you want to get technical, South Brooklyn is Red Hook. 

 

Southwest Brooklyn is only half of southern Brooklyn, but it doesn't matter what you call it.  The fact is the B1 only goes as far east as Manhattan Beach. An SBS route on the B1 would do nothing to connect Bensonhurst, the Kings Highway area, Marine Park, Canarsie, Spring Creek and Queens.  Besides, you've got the el to deal with.  You could never run buses fast on 86th Street.  Bath Avenue or 65th Street are far better choices.  

Parts of 86th street move okay that are away from the subway, particularly in Dyker Heights.  Besides I didn't know we were trying to connect all of Brooklyn.  We're just talking about one bus line providing faster East-West service.

[Q43LTD]

Parts of 86th street move okay that are away from the subway, particularly in Dyker Heights. Besides I didn't know we were trying to connect all of Brooklyn. We're just talking about one bus line providing faster East-West service.

You'd prefer the B1 over the 82?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You'd prefer the B1 over the 82?

Yes.  I don't think the B82 needs SBS service.  Besides, if that were to happen, the would try to cut back B64 service as they did before.

[BrooklynBus]

The problem is getting across all of southern Brooklyn quickly, not just southwest Brooklyn. If they reactivated the LIRR Bay Ridge Division, then there woudn't be a need or SBS.

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

Ok...this is referring to VG8 and Brooklyn Bus

South Brooklyn..is considered of Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights, Bensonhurst, Gravesend, Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Manhattan Beach, and Sheepshead, end of discussion.

 

Now...B1 or B82 for SBS? Out of those two the more likely would be the B82. Think about it, all SBS buses used to have a limited.

The B1 is very unlikely to get SBS because of all the trains it runs under. The  train on 86st and the  /   on Brighton Beach Ave.

All the B1 needs is more frequency and drivers need to drive faster. Something that happens a lot with the B1 is drivers try to drive slow and such, "to stay on schedule", but then their bus gets packed and eventually you have 2-3 buses bunching, which causes huge gaps and chaos at the terminals in Bay Ridge.

 

As for the B82, this is more likely to get SBS because its a long route that connects with Coney Island (tourist attraction), along with many subway lines, other bus routes, and the streets are capable of supporting SBS. Also, the route is somewhat slow, and SBS would benifit. Question is can ENY hold artics? 

Other than that, these two routes really don't need it for the time being...but in the future I can see the the B82 getting SBS, but not the B1. The most the B1 might get is a limited if they figure out what to do with the streets under the trains.

[Culver]

Yes.  I don't think the B82 needs SBS service.  Besides, if that were to happen, the would try to cut back B64 service as they did before.

You've never been on Kings Highway between Ocean Avenue and Bay Parkway, have you? The concept is nice (one I wish was workable), but basically impossible because of Kings Highway being a tiny 2-way road west of Ocean.

[Acela Express]

Could've sworn this topic was about SBS44...

[Culver]

Could've sworn this topic was about SBS44...

Speaking of which...

That SBS routing will probably eventually become the local route, too. It's just a little too extreme to have the SBS and local northbound be that far apart. Even for a healthy person, the walk time is a nuisance.

[BrooklynBus]

Speaking of which...

That SBS routing will probably eventually become the local route, too. It's just a little too extreme to have the SBS and local northbound be that far apart. Even for a healthy person, the walk time is a nuisance.

That's what should happen but only if a new route is instituted on New York Avenue (or one that operates between Nostrand and Utica).

You've never been on Kings Highway between Ocean Avenue and Bay Parkway, have you? The concept is nice (one I wish was workable), but basically impossible because of Kings Highway being a tiny 2-way road west of Ocean.

An SBS route should use Avenue P not that portion of Kings Highway.

[Culver]

That's what should happen but only if a new route is instituted on New York Avenue (or one that operates between Nostrand and Utica).

An SBS route should use Avenue P not that portion of Kings Highway.

Well like I said, B40 b/w Flushing Ave and Flatbush junction, NY/Marcy northbound, Nostrand southbound.

 

Question is will annoyance at the 2-block difference between Rogers and NY actually turn to backlash and media coverage, and will the respond?

[Grand Concourse]

Yeah kings highway south of av P is a congested mess. It'd be better off running on av P and then zig zag somewhere to rejoin KH. For the B82, I don't think it needs the SBS, but more limiteds would be ideal because there's no reason it has to make every damn stop from Nostrand to flatbush av. What they should do is make the B7 run local for that segment while the B82 can be 'limited stop' only for that segment.

[BrooklynBus]

Question is will annoyance at the 2-block difference between Rogers and NY actually turn to backlash and media coverage, and will the respond?

I don't think the media will pay any more attention to this. Over time more people will walk the two blocks because they will get disgusted with unreliable local service unless steps are taken to increase reliability. Also more will use Rogers as they become more familiar with the route. When artics arrive on the local the problem should be solved. Bus Time should also help a little. I think the MTA will make some meager attempts to add local service, but only if the elected officials continue to complain. And they will only do that if the people keep complaining. If people give up and just walk the extra blocks to Rogers in defeat without saving time, that will help the MTA in claiming what a huge success SBS is after some "minor" initial problems as they will put it.

[B35 via Church]

You asked if I 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 want there to be more SBS routes without B44-like situations (meaning, without a huge loss of service on one road and redundant service on another, and huge gaps between some stops), but no service cuts. I do not really see SBS routes (as I would design them) as a service cut. I would not have designed the B44 SBS/local the way they are now.

 

I want there to be more SBS routes (without B44-like situations) because I think an SBS route that is designed properly will cut costs for MTA while making the system more attractive due to much-improved speed and reliability. The B44 SBS below "H" and above Fulton was probably not properly designed, and the parallel routes between Fulton and "H" need to be restructured.

Well now wait a second....

 

You say you don't see SBS routes (as you'd design them... w/e that's supposed to mean) as a service cut, but you would have more of them (as a means of saving money... right?), in lieu of paying for/funding B49's on NY av? What sense does that make..... The idea is to save more money from elsewhere, is it not? I don't see how you can honestly sit here & try to defend cutting costs to have B49's run up NY av, & try to defend what is or isn't a service cut (when you mention SBS) at the same time.... A cut is a cut is a cut is a cut.......

 

It's really looking like you're doing the latter to avoid answering why costs should be cut from somewhere else, to possibly have your B49 suggestion come to form....

 

First of all in answer to your other question while Williamsburg Plaza buses go to Sheepshead Bay, none of them go to Knapp Street except between midnight and 6 AM when SBS does not operate. The rest of the time there are two distinct SBS services WB to Ave U and Flushing to Knapp. I never really said there was anything wrong with that. The problem is that since no locals go to WB. B54 and B52 riders have to take three buses and pay two fares to go to WB. That would be avoided if the local were split as my friend suggested.

 

About the hierarchy thing, the MTA is wrong by eliminating bus routes to force you to take the subway. I never advocated that. I was talking more about planning new services, that if possible you should try to encourage use of the subway. The only example I could think of right now, is that I wasn't crazy about the B41 Limited when it started because I didn't like the idea of someone formerly getting on in Bergen Beach, for example, and changing for the #2 train to get to Borough Hall, changing his trip to taking a Limited and staying on the bus for the whole trip instead because he wouldn't save anytime on the bus, but if enough people did that you would have to increase bus service without any decrease in subway service. You are not getting additional revenue, but now you are spending more to serve the same number of passengers, resources that could have been invested to fill service gaps.

 

When I discussed this with the Director of Bus Service Planning in 2004, he seemed surprised that he didn't even realize this woud happen. He was bragging how successful the Limited was saying it increased patronage by like 20 or 40%. I asked him if he knew where those passengers were coming from, and if they were merely coming out of the train and taking the bus all the way instead. And if that was true, was it still a good idea? He had no idea what the passengers were previously riding. he just assumed they were all new riders because he was treating bus and train passengers separately. He seemed stunned like he never thought of it before. If he had, there might never have been through limited service offered from the southern terminals to Downtwn Brooklyn because the MTA would never intentionally take people out of trains and put them on buses. Of course if he tries to change it now, people would yell and scream.

 

If I planned the B41 limited, I would have overlapping Limiteds, from Downtown to the Junction and GAP to the southern terminals.

Yes, I get that you were talking about planning new services....

 

Anyway, So I was right.... You think your hierarchy method trumps how the MTA's going about providing service (or lack thereof) because the MTA blatantly forces riders onto other modes (which I never said you advocated btw... that's VG8's misconstruing of what you said), and your method puts people onto rails over surface transit first...

 

I honestly do not see much of a difference.... What the MTA is doing with their blatant forcing of folks onto the subway by cutting/bastardizing bus service is absolutely wrong - No counter-argument from me on that one..... However, this notion of planning so that folks take rails over buses first (this includes SBS', which is no secret that you have more of a hatred for than I actually do) isn't all too much better..... Your method puts bus service lower down on a totem pole, the MTA is trying to lessen the amount of ppl. that take buses....

[BrooklynIRT]

Well now wait a second....

 

You say you don't see SBS routes (as you'd design them... w/e that's supposed to mean) as a service cut, but you would have more of them (as a means of saving money... right?), in lieu of paying for/funding B49's on NY av? What sense does that make..... The idea is to save more money from elsewhere, is it not? I don't see how you can honestly sit here & try to defend cutting costs to have B49's run up NY av, & try to defend what is or isn't a service cut (when you mention SBS) at the same time.... A cut is a cut is a cut is a cut.......

 

It's really looking like you're doing the latter to avoid answering why costs should be cut from somewhere else, to possibly have your B49 suggestion come to form....

 

I do not think service has to be cut in order for operating costs to be cut. What have I still not answered? I keep harping on cutting operating costs in one part of the system (without cutting service, which is something that can be done with SBS) so that another part of the system can have more without increasing operating costs overall and while making the system more attractive to the public.

 

But you do not seem to see SBS as making the system more attractive. But perhaps you would if MTA did not screw up these projects so much (like what happened with the B44 local. I am not sure of the extent to which they screwed up with the M15 SBS/local and Bx12 SBS/local. I cannot comment on the S79 SBS/S78/whatever other buses are involved with the S79 or M34/A SBS other than to say that they seem to really suck).

[qjtransitmaster]

Well now wait a second....

 

You say you don't see SBS routes (as you'd design them... w/e that's supposed to mean) as a service cut, but you would have more of them (as a means of saving money... right?), in lieu of paying for/funding B49's on NY av? What sense does that make..... The idea is to save more money from elsewhere, is it not? I don't see how you can honestly sit here & try to defend cutting costs to have B49's run up NY av, & try to defend what is or isn't a service cut (when you mention SBS) at the same time.... A cut is a cut is a cut is a cut.......

 

It's really looking like you're doing the latter to avoid answering why costs should be cut from somewhere else, to possibly have your B49 suggestion come to form....

 

Yes, I get that you were talking about planning new services....

 

Anyway, So I was right.... You think your hierarchy method trumps how the MTA's going about providing service (or lack thereof) because the MTA blatantly forces riders onto other modes (which I never said you advocated btw... that's VG8's misconstruing of what you said), and your method puts people onto rails over surface transit first...

 

I honestly do not see much of a difference.... What the MTA is doing with their blatant forcing of folks onto the subway by cutting/bastardizing bus service is absolutely wrong - No counter-argument from me on that one..... However, this notion of planning so that folks take rails over buses first (this includes SBS', which is no secret that you have more of a hatred for than I actually do) isn't all too much better..... Your method puts bus service lower down on a totem pole, the MTA is trying to lessen the amount of ppl. that take buses....

I think you realize how he is by now dude in terms of BRT. Buses are meant to complement rails rather than compete with them. I think focusing on bus service far from subways should be the first priority. If they wanted to force more onto rails they can easily do it in Manhattan.