MattTrain Posted July 15, 2011 Share #51 Posted July 15, 2011 I would extend B2 to the lutheren medical center via ave R and ocean parkway to ave P to 65th street then bay parkway to bay ridge ave and 68th street then meets with the B64 before going to 4th ave then serving 59th street station before going to lutheren medical center like a variant of B9 sort of. The B31 over ave P to bay ridge parkway or 79th and 80th to bay ridge 86th street station via fort hamilton parkway or to 14th ave via VA hospital then to bay ridge 95th street station. B31 may also try and indirectly help B82 then go on cropsey ave en route to bay ridge if that is more efficient. So according to your plans you want the B31 to run along with the B4 after running via Avenue P? I don't think the B82 needs too much help. Let alone, who travels along the B82 to get to Bay Ridge. Towards the west part of that route, you have three lines going to Bay Ridge that runs perpendicular to the B82, the B1, B64, and B4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 15, 2011 Share #52 Posted July 15, 2011 So according to your plans you want the B31 to run along with the B4 after running via Avenue P? I don't think the B82 needs too much help. Let alone, who travels along the B82 to get to Bay Ridge. Towards the west part of that route, you have three lines going to Bay Ridge that runs perpendicular to the B82, the B1, B64, and B4. just a way to make the lines unique and create more direct service between parts of bay ridge to reduce transfers and travel time. I am not very city centric so I think others can come up with better ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
553 Bridgeton Posted July 15, 2011 Share #53 Posted July 15, 2011 that means nothing if the route is hard to understand as the B31 merging with B2 will distrupt the travel patterns of the routes it will end up a flop. It's similar to merging B70 with B1 if the route has to backtrack to merge with a route then they can't efficiently merge. Ave R rush hour = HELL the new route would just get burned and piss off too many ppl. similar to X13 X14 merger again slowing down a route isn't cool ppl won't have it. And no none of these examples are like the idea but the concept is the same So you think you can do better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 15, 2011 Share #54 Posted July 15, 2011 So you think you can do better? read my other post for clues those lines B2 and B31 only share ave R en rte to kings hwy meaning they are basically 2 versions of an ave R line making them unmergable. But to enhance ridership extending them to serve more trip generators can help the rte a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 15, 2011 Share #55 Posted July 15, 2011 again the B2 and B31 have completely different routes I know I threw out similar ideas. I know those ppl they won't stand for it. The B31 and B2 leave kings hwy minutes apart from each other they can't combine. Any 2 routes that merge can't have a backtracking segment in the new route otherwise ppl will bitch and moan. The B31 and B2 already do a good job of taking ppl from point a to point B. You can't have the route go from point A to B then back to B and C that's inefficient. B31 and B2 can't merge B31 ppl who want kings plaza transfer to B3 and B2 ppl from kings plaza who want B31 transfer at gerritsen ave for B31. Or from kings plaza they use B3 to B31 rather than meander through kings hwy subway just to get to gerritsen that makes no sense. Again B2 and B31 can't merge cause then you would be better off just simply interlining the select runs. That one seat ride no one will use you are putting 2 ridership groups together without adding new riders. That is costly you are better off interlining plus then you will be killing off the free transfer between B31 and B2 for their unique segments of course. This is not a good merger It will confuse ppl. 1) gerritsen folks will still have the option of xferring at Av U.... try again.... 2) A route going from point A to B then from B to C, is no different than what 2 interlined routes do.... what the f*** are you talkin about.... 3) Who says they have to ride the full route? How many people ride the full B24? Q38? Bx23? 4) 2 ridership groups? now you're just reachin w/ BS for the hell of it.... again, it's all about gettin from point A to B.... that concept you're bringing up, is more what an express rider would worry about.... ....even better, this is coming from someone who sides w/ the MTA's study regarding merging the BM5 & the QM15.... that's putting two ridership groups together.... Hypocrite. 5) Interlining is the cheap way to go about serving people... The MTA aint low on buses, and there are b/o's out there that are willing to work.... Interlining is actually worse than what I'm proposing in this case, due to the crummy service levels of both the B2 & the B31.... You & interlining - shows me you really don't give a damn about the riders.... this is what I'm talkin about w/ you.... you claim to be so non-city centric, yet you're up here goin off at the mouth... Stay in your lane.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 15, 2011 Share #56 Posted July 15, 2011 This guy is too easy to shut down..... let's continue.... that means nothing if the route is hard to understand as the B31 merging with B2 will distrupt the travel patterns of the routes it will end up a flop. It's similar to merging B70 with B1 if the route has to backtrack to merge with a route then they can't efficiently merge. Ave R rush hour = HELL the new route would just get burned and piss off too many ppl. similar to X13 X14 merger again slowing down a route isn't cool ppl won't have it. And no none of these examples are like the idea but the concept is the same How the hell would it disrupt the travel patterns if there's ZERO difference in the routing.... If I'm a gerritsen beach rider seeking the subway, it would take the exact same B31 routing/portion to the subway.... If I'm a marine park rider also seeking the subway, I would take the B2 routing/portion.... Ave R is hell during the rush? lol... complete Bullshit.... Where are Marine Park & Gerritsen Beach folks complaints on that one.... Clearly you don't know what you're talkin about.... Ave U is where the "hell"ish traffic problems are at down there... so again, try.... again.... .....and it aint nothin like merging the B70 w/ the B1 b/c for starters, those routes don't even connect with each other (bad example).... the x13/14 merger made the commute longer for the pre June 2010 riders of the x14..... merging the B2 & the B31, no one's normal commute on either those current routes would be made longer.... that's what you're not getting.... just a way to make the lines unique and create more direct service between parts of bay ridge to reduce transfers and travel time. I am not very city centric so I think others can come up with better ideas. so let us "city centric" folks come up with them then..... So much for you sayin Didn't I already say that I have stopped???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 15, 2011 Share #57 Posted July 15, 2011 This guy is too easy to shut down..... let's continue.... How the hell would it disrupt the travel patterns if there's ZERO difference in the routing.... If I'm a gerritsen beach rider seeking the subway, it would take the exact same B31 routing/portion to the subway.... If I'm a marine park rider also seeking the subway, I would take the B2 routing/portion.... Ave R is hell during the rush? lol... complete Bullshit.... Where are Marine Park & Gerritsen Beach folks complaints on that one.... Clearly you don't know what you're talkin about.... Ave U is where the "hell"ish traffic problems are at down there... so again, try.... again.... .....and it aint nothin like merging the B70 w/ the B1 b/c for starters, those routes don't even connect with each other (bad example).... the x13/14 merger made the commute longer for the pre June 2010 riders of the x14..... merging the B2 & the B31, no one's normal commute on either those current routes would be made longer.... that's what you're not getting.... so let us "city centric" folks come up with them then..... So much for you sayin Didn't I already say that I have stopped???? I guess it could work, but I don't see folks in Marine Park & Gerritsen Beach going for it. If anything they may be more willing to part with the B2 and B100 being merged and slightly re-routed to serve both Kings Plaza and Mill Basin. While you are right in that generally Avenue R isn't as traffic heavy as say Avenue U, why do you feel that folks in that area would go for this loop bus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted July 15, 2011 Author Share #58 Posted July 15, 2011 yep... nothin from nothin leaves nothin..... It's convenient to hide behind cost-neutrality whenever a proposed change (usually a positive one for the betterment of the riders) is blurted out, b/c it's a reason as to why they don't have to consider said change.... I mean explain to me how in the world can you extend a route, or create a new route w/o spending more than you would have, if you simply left things alone/ as is.... Talk about automatic dismissal.... This is why I sincerely think we're gonna have a bunch of super routes all over the place when it's all said & done... it's not in their interest to find ways to make better use (if possible) of the underperforming, or even the average route..... every route can't, and isn't designed to carry like the B46, M15, Bx12, etc.... Apparently not to the MTA, but for the rest of us.... Coverage matters. So there's no way we could've piggybacked off each other.... cool beans... Anyway, I'll check out the article when it releases. Yeh, I mean, you can't save every fish in the sea, but there's always that one crab in the barrel..... It's the same perpetual BS.... cut cut cut, force riders to take alternative bus routes (regardless of the proximity the nearest bus is).... People are only gonna put up w/ alternate means of travel but for so long.... Public transportation (or lack thereof) is a very valid complaint/reason to consider moving out of an entire city; but what does the MTA care about any of that..... somehow this state of mind (gettin rid of the low performers) is supposed to give off the illusion that "Look at how well our buses are performing... each bus in each direction run carries @ max capacity... ridership has really grown over the past couple years"..... ^^ And my response to a comment like that would be, GFY.... What other options have you left us when entire routes (plural) in my community have been discontinued.... when the route you left us with, runs so damn infrequent, riders are forced to cram on the things...... What can I say? It seems we agree on all these points. Running the B64 via V.A. Hospital to 95th Station, eh? Ya know, the guy who made that Proposal for better Brooklyn Bus Service proposed merging the B64 and B70 to make a B66 route. Except now, if the B64 and B70 were merged, service on 13th Av, and on Bay Ridge Av between 8th Ave and 13th Ave would be lost (ironically, the B70 itself provides service on Bay Ridge Ave between 8th Ave and 3rd Ave.) The B9 would at least cover Bay Ridge Av service between the train and Shore Road. In addition, a B64/B70 merger would get rid of the direct transfer to the B1. Granted, the B1 would only be a block or two away from the B64/B70 merger (from Bath Av to 86th St.) Of course, merging the current B64/B70 would be more extending the B70 down Bath Ave than an actual merger With the B64 off 13th Ave, There would be no North-South line in Dyker Heights from the B16 on Fort Hamilition Parkway all the way to the B8 on 18th Av. I made that proposal. It was part of a plan for full 13th Avenue service and full Ft Hamilton Parkway service. No way I would support a 64/70 combination if it meant no 13th Avenue service in Dyker Heights. I would like a copy God knows where it is. I wrote that over 30 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 15, 2011 Share #59 Posted July 15, 2011 The simple moving of the B69 onto 7th av. saved that route actually.... When it moved onto 7th av, the B69 got a service increase & the B67 got a service decrease.... 7th av overall got a service decrease... The MTA knew exactly what it was doing with that.... the goal was to take as many physical buses off the road as they saw fit.... Even though I think the (current) B61 route better serves the communities that it does, the combination of routes involved in its creation (B77, B75, the old B61 [from red hook to queens plz]) still meant more buses running in service..... It's easy (easier) for the MTA to rid itself of the B67 & tell downtown riders (once again) to take the subway, or take the B41..... It's no accident that B69's are actually seeing riders southbound past grand army plaza... outside of schoolkids, the old B69 saw very little use along 8th av/PPW..... The geniuses @ the MTA that bases their justifications solely by lookin @ a map, sees the B67 as nothin more than a bus that serves a community (Park Slope) b/c those particular riders dont want to take the train ... I don't expect there to be 2 bus routes runnin up & down 7th av for too long..... I could see the MTA ridding itself of the B67, and extending the B69 to the "heart" of downtown brooklyn.... that's how frugal the MTA is being.... I could see that happening to the (B67) as well. The would make argument that 7th Ave/McDonald Ave(between Church Ave and Prospect Park West)can use the nearby (B61) ( trains. Or transfer to the (B41)at Flatbush/7th Ave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 15, 2011 Share #60 Posted July 15, 2011 1) gerritsen folks will still have the option of xferring at Av U.... try again.... 2) A route going from point A to B then from B to C, is no different than what 2 interlined routes do.... what the f*** are you talkin about.... 3) Who says they have to ride the full route? How many people ride the full B24? Q38? Bx23? 4) 2 ridership groups? now you're just reachin w/ BS for the hell of it.... again, it's all about gettin from point A to B.... that concept you're bringing up, is more what an express rider would worry about.... ....even better, this is coming from someone who sides w/ the MTA's study regarding merging the BM5 & the QM15.... that's putting two ridership groups together.... Hypocrite. 5) Interlining is the cheap way to go about serving people... The MTA aint low on buses, and there are b/o's out there that are willing to work.... Interlining is actually worse than what I'm proposing in this case, due to the crummy service levels of both the B2 & the B31.... You & interlining - shows me you really don't give a damn about the riders.... this is what I'm talkin about w/ you.... you claim to be so non-city centric, yet you're up here goin off at the mouth... Stay in your lane.... The problem is the B31 and B2 aren't the same they CAN'T MERGE just interline the runs and call it done. The B24 has no business running the way it does it is sloppy!!!! The B24 and Q38 need to become separate routes we DO NOT need more B24 like routes those are just dumb. Transparency needs to be considered. I support breaking those rtes up and having them merge with other rtes to eliminate the loop structure. The only reason why BX23 makes sense is beacause of co-op city's layout. Other than that the B24 and Q38 and what you are trying to do to the B2 again those folk will RIOT at the idea of merging. Plus I said the merger MTA idea should only be a last resort measure I know the commutes won't be longer but B2 and B31 together makes NO sense look at then closely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 15, 2011 Share #61 Posted July 15, 2011 I guess it could work, but I don't see folks in Marine Park & Gerritsen Beach going for it. If anything they may be more willing to part with the B2 and B100 being merged and slightly re-routed to serve both Kings Plaza and Mill Basin. While you are right in that generally Avenue R isn't as traffic heavy as say Avenue U, why do you feel that folks in that area would go for this loop bus? THEY WON'T GO FOR IT. Loop buses do not make any sense and they add cost for the rider. Loop buses only make sense when serving places like Co-op city. Those buses can hold their own at rush hour the B2 merging with B31 is just DUMB more loop buses = FAIL. MTA would be wise to rid itself of loop buses and break em up merge some with other rtes. Q53 can get a part of the B24 to greenpoint then let Q49 get williamsburg then weekend service can comeback. Q38 break into 2 rtes one to flushing interlines with several rtes originating in flushing. the other send it down oakland gardens via Q64 rting but the loop rtes are stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted July 15, 2011 Share #62 Posted July 15, 2011 The problem is the B31 and B2 aren't the same they CAN'T MERGE just interline the runs and call it done. The B24 has no business running the way it does it is sloppy!!!! The B24 and Q38 need to become separate routes we DO NOT need more B24 like routes those are just dumb. Transparency needs to be considered. I support breaking those rtes up and having them merge with other rtes to eliminate the loop structure. The only reason why BX23 makes sense is beacause of co-op city's layout. Other than that the B24 and Q38 and what you are trying to do to the B2 again those folk will RIOT at the idea of merging. Plus I said the merger MTA idea should only be a last resort measure Finally a post where you make sense! The (B24) and (Q38) need to be broken up. The (B2) and the (B31) can merge btw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 15, 2011 Share #63 Posted July 15, 2011 THEY WON'T GO FOR IT. Loop buses do not make any sense and they add cost for the rider. Loop buses only make sense when serving places like Co-op city. Those buses can hold their own at rush hour the B2 merging with B31 is just DUMB more loop buses = FAIL. MTA would be wise to rid itself of loop buses and break em up merge some with other rtes. Q53 can get a part of the B24 to greenpoint then let Q49 get williamsburg then weekend service can comeback. Q38 break into 2 rtes one to flushing interlines with several rtes originating in flushing. the other send it down oakland gardens via Q64 rting but the loop rtes are stupid Let's not get too crazy talking about getting rid of loops now. There are plenty of express buses that do loops (i.e Downtown Loop) and those buses hold their own in terms of ridership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 15, 2011 Share #64 Posted July 15, 2011 Let's not get too crazy talking about getting rid of loops now. There are plenty of express buses that do loos (i.e Downtown Loop) and those buses hold their own in terms of ridership. express buses operate differently than local buses the expresses are to shuffle ppl throughout downtown then to the outerboroughs. LOCAL buses other than BX23 won't loop properly they will look dumb. Express buses have a different purpose and shape and form than local buses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 15, 2011 Share #65 Posted July 15, 2011 express buses operate differently than local buses the expresses are to shuffle ppl throughout downtown then to the outerboroughs. LOCAL buses other than BX23 won't loop properly they will look dumb. Express buses have a different purpose and shape and form than local buses. I beg to differ. The only reason that I agree with you about the B2 and B31 is because #1, I feel that the two routes carry enough to remain split & #2 I feel that the B2 and B100 would be a better merger than the B2 and B31. You would also have a huge wait at the Kings Hwy stop to let all of those people get off and then reload again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted July 15, 2011 Share #66 Posted July 15, 2011 Running the B64 via V.A. Hospital to 95th Station, eh? Ya know, the guy who made that Proposal for better Brooklyn Bus Service proposed merging the B64 and B70 to make a B66 route. Except now, if the B64 and B70 were merged, service on 13th Av, and on Bay Ridge Av between 8th Ave and 13th Ave would be lost (ironically, the B70 itself provides service on Bay Ridge Ave between 8th Ave and 3rd Ave.) The B9 would at least cover Bay Ridge Av service between the train and Shore Road. In addition, a B64/B70 merger would get rid of the direct transfer to the B1. Granted, the B1 would only be a block or two away from the B64/B70 merger (from Bath Av to 86th St.) Of course, merging the current B64/B70 would be more extending the B70 down Bath Ave than an actual merger With the B64 off 13th Ave, There would be no North-South line in Dyker Heights from the B16 on Fort Hamilition Parkway all the way to the B8 on 18th Av. If the B64/B70 were to serve southern Bay Ridge I would try and find some way of serving 13th Avenue and Bay Ridge Avenue. I would probably have the B31 cover Bay Ridge Avenue, and have something else (maybe the B16, or an entirely seperate route) covering 13th Avenue. I'm not disagreeing per se, but rather making sure that I understand proposal. In other words you would make it function more as a "Loop" so to speak is that the idea?? If the goal of that would be to increase ridership, I'm not sure it would that. I think the better idea is to combine the B2 and B100 and re-route it slightly. I can agree with that. It could take the B2 or B100 route through Marine Park (whatever serves the area better), and then travel down Flatbush Avenue->Avenue U, and then continue to Mill Basin. yes, via... that's the whole point... it would act as a loop. The goal isn't to increase ridership... It's to increase service overall (including restoring weekend service on the B2 "portion").... IMO, the future of the current B2 is lookin real bleak.... I don't think it is a good idea to combine them just for the sake of increasing service (for that reason alone, the MTA probably wouldn't do it). Plus, they can always have some short turns that would operate from Gerritsen Beach to Kings Highway (so the B2 portion wouldn't see increased service). And they could always cut the B2 portion on weekends. I'll agree with Via Garibaldi: Modifying the B100 to serve Kings Plaza would be a better idea (the service could be increased a little bit, which would benefit Mill Basin riders) that means nothing if the route is hard to understand as the B31 merging with B2 will distrupt the travel patterns of the routes it will end up a flop. It's similar to merging B70 with B1 if the route has to backtrack to merge with a route then they can't efficiently merge. Ave R rush hour = HELL the new route would just get burned and piss off too many ppl. similar to X13 X14 merger again slowing down a route isn't cool ppl won't have it. And no none of these examples are like the idea but the concept is the same It wouldn't really slow down the route, but I just don't think this merged route is a good idea. The problem is the B31 and B2 aren't the same they CAN'T MERGE just interline the runs and call it done. The B24 has no business running the way it does it is sloppy!!!! The B24 and Q38 need to become separate routes we DO NOT need more B24 like routes those are just dumb. Transparency needs to be considered. I support breaking those rtes up and having them merge with other rtes to eliminate the loop structure. The only reason why BX23 makes sense is beacause of co-op city's layout. Other than that the B24 and Q38 and what you are trying to do to the B2 again those folk will RIOT at the idea of merging. Plus I said the merger MTA idea should only be a last resort measure I know the commutes won't be longer but B2 and B31 together makes NO sense look at then closely I'll agree with you there. Since very few people ride the B24 or Q38 ride the route from end to end, routes should be straightened out. Let's not get too crazy talking about getting rid of loops now. There are plenty of express buses that do loops (i.e Downtown Loop) and those buses hold their own in terms of ridership. The Downtown Loop buses are different. Nobody's looking to ride them within Lower Manhattan: They are used to get back to the outer boroughs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 16, 2011 Share #67 Posted July 16, 2011 The problem is the B31 and B2 aren't the same they CAN'T MERGE just interline the runs and call it done. The B24 has no business running the way it does it is sloppy!!!! The B24 and Q38 need to become separate routes we DO NOT need more B24 like routes those are just dumb. Transparency needs to be considered. I support breaking those rtes up and having them merge with other rtes to eliminate the loop structure. The only reason why BX23 makes sense is beacause of co-op city's layout. Other than that the B24 and Q38 and what you are trying to do to the B2 again those folk will RIOT at the idea of merging. Plus I said the merger MTA idea should only be a last resort measure I know the commutes won't be longer but B2 and B31 together makes NO sense look at then closely For starters, the B2 & the B31 already interline (during the AM hrs anyway).... and there wouldn't be any riots or any type of nonsense like that b/c there would be absolutely zero change in routing... and two, I don't know one group of riders that are screaming "we have too much bus service".... You keep sayin it makes no sense; & in doin so, you bring up lack of "compatibility" (w/e that means) as to why they "can't" merge.... now you on here talkin about "transparency".... disagree w/ the idea, but stop bringing up BS (and lies) regarding your reasoning.... ....and I'm not advocating keeping the current B24 & Q38 either... where did you get off thinkin I've implied otherwise? THEY WON'T GO FOR IT. Loop buses do not make any sense and they add cost for the rider. Loop buses only make sense when serving places like Co-op city. Those buses can hold their own at rush hour the B2 merging with B31 is just DUMB more loop buses = FAIL. MTA would be wise to rid itself of loop buses and break em up merge some with other rtes. Q53 can get a part of the B24 to greenpoint then let Q49 get williamsburg then weekend service can comeback. Q38 break into 2 rtes one to flushing interlines with several rtes originating in flushing. the other send it down oakland gardens via Q64 rting but the loop rtes are stupid Which is it? Do loop buses make sense or not... make up your mind.... ...and what you're talkin about here now w/ the Q53 & the Q49.... and you have the fortitude to call ANYONE's ideas dumb... man, that's like the blind leadin the goddamn handicapped.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 16, 2011 Share #68 Posted July 16, 2011 I guess it could work, but I don't see folks in Marine Park & Gerritsen Beach going for it. If anything they may be more willing to part with the B2 and B100 being merged and slightly re-routed to serve both Kings Plaza and Mill Basin. While you are right in that generally Avenue R isn't as traffic heavy as say Avenue U, why do you feel that folks in that area would go for this loop bus? I don't see them rejecting it wholesale either.... I really don't see the loopback along Av R being a major problem (that's the only sound/decent point against the idea so far), b/c that's not where most the riders board (or disembark) either of the two routes anyway.... I don't like the B2/B100 merge, for the simple fact that someone's gonna end up losing out (fillmore av or [av R/av S]).... that, and the B100 doesn't serve kings plaza in any capacity.... @ kings hwy subway, I don't see riders (originally) waitin for the B100 scampering a few yards ahead where the B2 (kings plz.) pickup area's at, for the B2 - if it arrives first.... or, vice versa.... I truly do think there's more to be lost w/ a B2/100 merge than a B2/31 merge.... I don't think it is a good idea to combine them just for the sake of increasing service (for that reason alone, the MTA probably wouldn't do it). Plus, they can always have some short turns that would operate from Gerritsen Beach to Kings Highway (so the B2 portion wouldn't see increased service). And they could always cut the B2 portion on weekends. I'll agree with Via Garibaldi: Modifying the B100 to serve Kings Plaza would be a better idea (the service could be increased a little bit, which would benefit Mill Basin riders) 1) The MTA wouldn't do most of what we propose on these forums... lol... Way I see it, they're out to screw bus riders, not make their commutes easier... I'm not lettin that be a deterrent in mentioning/bringing up ideas, ya know.... 2) Of the ppl. that mention merging the B31 w/ the 100, or the B2 w/ the 100.... there's never a formidable routing mentioned where the merged route would serve Kings Plaza... across 2 forums (don't know about subchat), I have yet to see one.... of (other) ppl that mention merging the B2 w/ the B31, they have the B31 "portion" goin the length of gerritsen av (that to me, makes the gerritsen folks' commutes longer) & turning off at quentin (like the 100).... ^^ problem I see w/ that is, more buses would physically touch kings hwy (and the layover space simply isn't there along E. 16th), which is the last thing that needs to be done right now IMO..... It's bad enough where you have spring creek buses (which would be B100's) parked on the other side of E 16th st (before it crosses kings hwy itself).... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 16, 2011 Share #69 Posted July 16, 2011 I don't see them rejecting it wholesale either.... I really don't see the loopback along Av R being a major problem (that's the only sound/decent point against the idea so far), b/c that's not where most the riders board (or disembark) either of the two routes anyway.... I don't like the B2/B100 merge, for the simple fact that someone's gonna end up losing out (fillmore av or [av R/av S]).... that, and the B100 doesn't serve kings plaza in any capacity.... @ kings hwy subway, I don't see riders (originally) waitin for the B100 scampering a few yards ahead where the B2 (kings plz.) pickup area's at, for the B2 - if it arrives first.... or, vice versa.... I truly do think there's more to be lost w/ a B2/100 merge than a B2/31 merge.... 1) The MTA wouldn't do most of what we propose on these forums... lol... Way I see it, they're out to screw bus riders, not make their commutes easier... I'm not lettin that be a deterrent in mentioning/bringing up ideas, ya know.... 2) Of the ppl. that mention merging the B31 w/ the 100, or the B2 w/ the 100.... there's never a formidable routing mentioned where the merged route would serve Kings Plaza... across 2 forums (don't know about subchat), I have yet to see it.... of (other) ppl that mention merging the B2 w/ the B31, they have the B31 "portion" goin the length of gerritsen av & turning off at quentin (like the 100).... problem I see w/ that is, more buses would physically touch kings hwy (and the layover space simply isn't there along E. 16th), which is the last thing that needs to be done right now IMO..... It's bad enough where you have spring creek buses (which would be B100's) parked on the other side of E 16th st (before it crosses kings hwy itself) I think a B2/B100 merger works best because it would allow for weekend service to be restored in Marine Park and also, why is it such a big deal to have the two buses merged when the generally run one block apart? Are you telling me that there ther B100 is in such demand that those folks can't walk one block over? Same thing with the B2. One block would not kill them. Having used the B2 a lot to get to Kings Plaza when I lived back in Midwood, I would propose the following: Keep the B31 as is. Have the B2 start where the B100 used to start at Kings Hwy Station and keep the B100 routing along Quentin Rd until Gerritsen Ave and then it would turn on Avenue R to maintain service along Avenue R, which IMO is more important than Fillmore Avenue AND is only one block over. Continue down Avenue R until 36th st and then turn down Fillmore and follow the entire old B100 route terminating in Mill Basin. Select B2s could go to Kings Plaza and you could split the route that way. Aside from that folks could still take the B2 and get off along Fillmore Avenue and walk to Kings Plaza from there when necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 16, 2011 Share #70 Posted July 16, 2011 I think a B2/B100 merger works best because it would allow for weekend service to be restored in Marine Park and also, why is it such a big deal to have the two buses merged when the generally run one block apart? Are you telling me that there ther B100 is in such demand that those folks can't walk one block over? Same thing with the B2. One block would not kill them. Having used the B2 a lot to get to Kings Plaza when I lived back in Midwood, I would propose the following: Keep the B31 as is. Have the B2 start where the B100 used to start at Kings Hwy Station and keep the B100 routing along Quentin Rd until Gerritsen Ave and then it would turn on Avenue R to maintain service along Avenue R, which IMO is more important than Fillmore Avenue AND is only one block over. Continue down Avenue R until 36th st and then turn down Fillmore and follow the entire old B100 route terminating in Mill Basin. Select B2s could go to Kings Plaza and you could split the route that way. Aside from that folks could still take the B2 and get off along Fillmore Avenue and walk to Kings Plaza from there when necessary. I could ask the same question about a B2/31 merger (what's the big deal about merging those 2 buses or w/e).... I mean, it's moot either way... To be honest w/ you, I don't like the fact that B100's take the routing that it does to get to the subway, but it is what it is.... the routing the B2 & the B31 takes is quicker to the subway (which is one of the reasons I think that pair would be a better candidate for a merge)... tied into the notion as to why I'd leave the 100 alone & keep the B2/31 combo on Av R, so neither one of those sets of riders would have to deal w/ the turning off ocean av @ kings hwy, and having to (for one, drive along kings hwy period, but then to) turn off kings hwy down E. 16th to the side entrance of the subway the way it (the current 100) does now.... As far as what you're proposing, it really looks like you're trying to add more riders to the B31 (by having it be the only route goin along av R b/w the subway & Gerritsen av).... but anyway, as far as the routing you'd have it take in marine park (for marine park folks), it wont be much of a problem.... the problem is that you'd be making Mill Basin folks' commutes longer by having it take those turns w/i marine park..... the part of your post I bolded & underlined, are you proposing a branch of (what would be) the merged route? If so, that defeats the purpose of merging them in the first place..... the part of the post that's just bolded (not underlined)..... lol... I can assure you that you're not gonna get folks walking from fillmore/flatbush (or fillmore/utica) to kings plaza... that's pushin it, and I think even you know that..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 16, 2011 Share #71 Posted July 16, 2011 I could ask the same question about a B2/31 merger (what's the big deal about merging those 2 buses or w/e).... I mean, it's moot either way... To be honest w/ you, I don't like the fact that B100's take the routing that it does to get to the subway, but it is what it is.... the routing the B2 & the B31 takes is quicker to the subway (which is one of the reasons I think that pair would be a better candidate for a merge)... tied into the notion as to why I'd leave the 100 alone & keep the B2/31 combo on Av R, so neither one of those sets of riders would have to deal w/ the turning off ocean av @ kings hwy, and having to (for one, drive along kings hwy period, but then to) turn off kings hwy down E. 16th to the side entrance of the subway the way it (the current 100) does now.... As far as what you're proposing, it really looks like you're trying to add more riders to the B31 (by having it be the only route goin along av R b/w the subway & Gerritsen av).... but anyway, as far as the routing you'd have it take in marine park (for marine park folks), it wont be much of a problem.... the problem is that you'd be making Mill Basin folks' commutes longer by having it take those turns w/i marine park..... the part of your post I bolded & underlined, are you proposing a branch of (what would be) the merged route? If so, that defeats the purpose of merging them in the first place..... the part of the post that's just bolded (not underlined)..... lol... I can assure you that you're not gonna get folks walking from fillmore/flatbush (or fillmore/utica) to kings plaza... that's pushin it, and I think even you know that..... don't be fooled by their speed because they run fast doesn't mean they are compatible. The backtrack on ave r alone makes the merge idea BAD. When merging rtes you DO NOT create loop routes. The only candidates for mergers are lines that don't share a route segment or run next to each other this alone makes B2 incompatible with B31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 16, 2011 Share #72 Posted July 16, 2011 don't be fooled by their speed because they run fast doesn't mean they are compatible. The backtrack on ave r alone makes the merge idea BAD. When merging rtes you DO NOT create loop routes. The only candidates for mergers are lines that don't share a route segment or run next to each other this alone makes B2 incompatible with B31 Routes don't have to be linear... you being more "suburban" with your plans, should know that better than anyone.... ...and I am not entertaining your "compatible" argument any further... tired of repeating myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 16, 2011 Share #73 Posted July 16, 2011 routes don't have to be linear... You being more "suburban" with your plans, should know that better than anyone.... ...and i am not entertaining your "compatible" argument any further... Tired of repeating myself. we don't need more loops!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 16, 2011 Share #74 Posted July 16, 2011 we don't need more loops!!!!!!!!!! use as much exclamation points as you want... say what you will about loops, but who asked you what "we" need.... ....and who's "we", by the way ? Don't act like you have NYC's bus riders' best interest at hand, when you come up with all the other nonsense you grace the forums with..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
via White Plains Road Posted July 16, 2011 Share #75 Posted July 16, 2011 use as much exclamation points as you want... say what you will about loops, but who asked you what "we" need.... ....and who's "we", by the way ? Don't act like you have NYC's bus riders' best interest at hand, when you come up with all the other nonsense you grace the forums with..... Agreed and well said bro! :tup::tup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.