The MTA's Secret Plan to Eliminate the B2

[BrooklynBus]

http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2011/07/the-mta%e2%80%99s-secret-plan-to-eliminate-the-b2/

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I wrote to Senator Golden about the B2, as well as the B31 and his response was that they were looking into the feasibility of both routes in terms of the lost service that they had. I get the feeling that the B2 is going to be axed and thinking about it, I don't think it's that big of a deal. Why is it such a big deal when you've got the B100 as an alternative one block away?? Even though the B100 doesn't go directly to Kings Plaza, it stops close enough that one can walk to Kings Plaza. Now if there was no local bus service at all in Marine Park, I would be much more pissed, but that's why I've proposed merging the B100 w/the B2 and slightly re-routing it. This could help maintain the B31 or perhaps help the BM4 stay afloat by having folks switch to those routes.

[MattTrain]

I guess they felt like the (B100) runs a similar route to the (B2) (in which Via has stated) and that's why they are considering removing the (B2). They have eliminated the (B2) on weekends already, which looks like a step towards eliminating the route entirely.

 

What's next?

 

1. Increasing headways?
   
2. Modifying the route to make it shorter?
   
3. or just elminating the whole route all together?
   

 

 

That's all I can think of.

[BrooklynBus]

I don't think it's that big of a deal. Why is it such a big deal when you've got the B100 as an alternative one block away??

 

The B 100 is not a block away if you live near Avenue S and East 36th Street. Instead of having a bus on your corner, you now have over a quarter-mile walk, over the service guidelines, to walk either to the B9, B3, or B100. That's an inconvenience and will add 10 minutes to your trip. If you are going to ignore your own guidelines, why have them. We are not even talking about adding service to meet the guidelines, which I understand cannot be met in every instance. But if you already meet them, why make a change that doesn't meet them?

 

Yes, maybe the B2 does not perform well. But you could either extend it westbound as I suggested, or to the Rockaways as someone else suggested. Either one would definitely improve the patronage the route receives, the Rockaways probably even more than what I suggested in 1975. Today, it makes more sense to extend the B31 westward and the B2 to the Rockaways.

 

What gets me upset the most is how the MTA only is looking to eliminate routes, not how to make them stronger and eliminating them by doing it in a deceptive manner intentionally trying to get routes to fail. That is not what they should be doing. They should be trying to encourage mass transit, not discourage it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The B 100 is not a block away if you live near Avenue S and East 36th Street. Instead of having a bus on your corner, you now have over a quarter-mile walk, over the service guidelines, to walk either to the B9, B3, or B100. That's an inconvenience and will add 10 minutes to your trip. If you are going to ignore your own guidelines, why have them. We are not even talking about adding service to meet the guidelines, which I understand cannot be met in every instance. But if you already meet them, why make a change that doesn't meet them?

 

Yes, maybe the B2 does not perform well. But you could either extend it westbound as I suggested, or to the Rockaways as someone else suggested. Either one would definitely improve the patronage the route receives, the Rockaways probably even more than what I suggested in 1975. Today, it makes more sense to extend the B31 westward and the B2 to the Rockaways.

 

What gets me upset the most is how the MTA only is looking to eliminate routes, not how to make them stronger and eliminating them by doing it in a deceptive manner intentionally trying to get routes to fail. That is not what they should be doing. They should be trying to encourage mass transit, not discourage it.

 

I agree, but they could simply re-route the B100 in some cases. I personally have a hard time believing that ridership is oh so strong on Fillmore Ave and Quentin Rd, so in some cases, the B100 could replace the B2.

[checkmatechamp13]

I wrote to Senator Golden about the B2, as well as the B31 and his response was that they were looking into the feasibility of both routes in terms of the lost service that they had. I get the feeling that the B2 is going to be axed and thinking about it, I don't think it's that big of a deal. Why is it such a big deal when you've got the B100 as an alternative one block away?? Even though the B100 doesn't go directly to Kings Plaza, it stops close enough that one can walk to Kings Plaza. Now if there was no local bus service at all in Marine Park, I would be much more pissed, but that's why I've proposed merging the B100 w/the B2 and slightly re-routing it. This could help maintain the B31 or perhaps help the BM4 stay afloat by having folks switch to those routes.

 

The B31 wasn't going to be eliminated, though (and I don't see what the BM4 has to do with it either). Gerritsen Beach ridership is low on the weekends, but it isn't low enough to the point where they would eliminate it (for the cost per passenger, they would eliminate it if there were alternatives, but since there are none, they are forced to keep it)

 

I guess they felt like the (B100) runs a similar route to the (B2) (in which Via has stated) and that's why they are considering removing the (B2). They have eliminated the (B2) on weekends already, which looks like a step towards eliminating the route entirely.

 

What's next?

 

1. Increasing headways?

2. Modifying the route to make it shorter?

3. or just elminating the whole route all together?

 

 

That's all I can think of.

 

I don't see how they could make the B2 shorter. If they cut it back from Kings Plaza, they might as well just eliminate it.

 

The B 100 is not a block away if you live near Avenue S and East 36th Street. Instead of having a bus on your corner, you now have over a quarter-mile walk, over the service guidelines, to walk either to the B9, B3, or B100. That's an inconvenience and will add 10 minutes to your trip. If you are going to ignore your own guidelines, why have them. We are not even talking about adding service to meet the guidelines, which I understand cannot be met in every instance. But if you already meet them, why make a change that doesn't meet them?

 

Yes, maybe the B2 does not perform well. But you could either extend it westbound as I suggested, or to the Rockaways as someone else suggested. Either one would definitely improve the patronage the route receives, the Rockaways probably even more than what I suggested in 1975. Today, it makes more sense to extend the B31 westward and the B2 to the Rockaways.

 

What gets me upset the most is how the MTA only is looking to eliminate routes, not how to make them stronger and eliminating them by doing it in a deceptive manner intentionally trying to get routes to fail. That is not what they should be doing. They should be trying to encourage mass transit, not discourage it.

 

Avenue S/East 36th Street is still under the 1/4 mile guideline for bus service. Google Transit says that it is a 3 minute walk (1/4 mile is 5 minutes).

 

And anybody not within walking distance of the B100 is within walking distance of the B3.

 

You're right that it would make more sense to have the B31 extend westward (down 65th Street) and the B2 extend to the Rockaways. I'm sure there are people who would take it to avoid the long subway ride and infrequent service.

 

In any case, I don't think it would be too bad if the B2 and B100 were rerouted to serve the same parts of Marine Park. That way, riders get more frequent service on one street, rather than two infrequent routes a block apart.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The B31 wasn't going to be eliminated, though (and I don't see what the BM4 has to do with it either). Gerritsen Beach ridership is low on the weekends, but it isn't low enough to the point where they would eliminate it (for the cost per passenger, they would eliminate it if there were alternatives, but since there are none, they are forced to keep it).

 

Why do I always have to spell everything out?? I wrote to him about the loss of overnight service on the B31, not about it being eliminated. As for the BM4, as I said before it could push folks to use it instead of using the local bus to the subway. Quite frankly I'm trying to figure out where all of the B2 riders went? As BrooklynBus said the guy opted for a cab when told that the B2 doesn't run on the weekends, so these folks can probably afford the express bus even if they have to drive over to it.

[checkmatechamp13]

Why do I always have to spell everything out?? I wrote to him about the loss of overnight service on the B31, not about it being eliminated. As for the BM4, as I said before it could push folks to use it instead of using the local bus to the subway. Quite frankly I'm trying to figure out where all of the B2 riders went? As BrooklynBus said the guy opted for a cab when told that the B2 doesn't run on the weekends, so these folks can probably afford the express bus even if they have to drive over to it.

 

But overnight B31 service has nothing to do with the B2. You said "This could help maintain the B31 or perhaps help the BM4 stay afloat by having folks switch to those routes"

 

And as far as the BM4 goes, I doubt it's going to make any difference. Those riders would be using the BM4 regardless of whether the B2 existed or not.

 

Plus, if those drivers are driving anyway, they could always go a few blocks extra and take the BM3.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

But overnight B31 service has nothing to do with the B2. You said "This could help maintain the B31 or perhaps help the BM4 stay afloat by having folks switch to those routes"

 

And as far as the BM4 goes, I doubt it's going to make any difference. Those riders would be using the BM4 regardless of whether the B2 existed or not.

 

Plus, if those drivers are driving anyway, they could always go a few blocks extra and take the BM3.

 

 

Ay yay yay... Can't you separate several things being discussed at once?? Obviously I wasn't referring to overnight service on the B31, but service in general when talking about the B2.

 

Yeah or they could go a few blocks extra and take the BM4. Matter of which is more convenient and the BM3 is further over than the BM4.

[aemoreira81]

The B31 as I see it isn't going anywhere as it serves an area isolated by geography. However, as I posted on that link (using Disqus), given that Kings Highway on the is going to get ADA accessibility in the near future - why not extend it southward? I propose a Midwood to Arverne route.

 

My plan would have the route run as follows: Extend the B2 (I would rename it the Q75 as it would extend into Queens and be assigned to Far Rockaway) slightly westward to Coney Island Avenue at the B7 stand. Then run the route via Avenue P, Marine Parkway, Fillmore Avenue, Flatbush Avenue, Newport Avenue, Rockaway Beach Boulevard, and Beach Channel Drive, terminating at Peninsula Hospital, which is essentially at the front door of the Far Rockaway Depot.

 

Paying for it: The B2 would be eliminated, the QM16/17 would be eliminated, and some Q22 trips would be truncated to run only between Far Rockaway and Beach 73 Street.

 

This is different from what I posted on BusChat, BTW.

[Shortline Bus]

The B31 as I see it isn't going anywhere as it serves an area isolated by geography. However, as I posted on that link (using Disqus), given that Kings Highway on the is going to get ADA accessibility in the near future - why not extend it southward? I propose a Midwood to Arverne route.

 

My plan would have the route run as follows: Extend the B2 (I would rename it the Q75 as it would extend into Queens and be assigned to Far Rockaway) slightly westward to Coney Island Avenue at the B7 stand. Then run the route via Avenue P, Marine Parkway, Avenue R, East 36 Street, Avenue S, Flatbush Avenue, Newport Avenue, Rockaway Beach Boulevard, and Beach Channel Drive, terminating at Peninsula Hospital, which is essentially at the front door of the Far Rockaway Depot.

 

Paying for it: The B2 would be eliminated, the QM16/17 would be eliminated, and some Q22 trips would be truncated to run only between Far Rockaway and Beach 73 Street.

 

This is different from what I posted on BusChat, BTW.

 

1 problem. Riders on both sides of the Rockaways will scream losing the only mass transit line (bus or subway)serving the entire pensuila. Might as well run your so called "Q75" to the Mott Ave station.:eek:

 

And just also can the "Q22" bus. Personally I had called for about a year or two earlier in another post mergering the (Q35) and (Q22) with some trips start/ending at Kings Plaza.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The B31 as I see it isn't going anywhere as it serves an area isolated by geography. However, as I posted on that link (using Disqus), given that Kings Highway on the is going to get ADA accessibility in the near future - why not extend it southward? I propose a Midwood to Arverne route.

 

My plan would have the route run as follows: Extend the B2 (I would rename it the Q75 as it would extend into Queens and be assigned to Far Rockaway) slightly westward to Coney Island Avenue at the B7 stand. Then run the route via Avenue P, Marine Parkway, Fillmore Avenue, Flatbush Avenue, Newport Avenue, Rockaway Beach Boulevard, and Beach Channel Drive, terminating at Peninsula Hospital, which is essentially at the front door of the Far Rockaway Depot.

 

Paying for it: The B2 would be eliminated, the QM16/17 would be eliminated, and some Q22 trips would be truncated to run only between Far Rockaway and Beach 73 Street.

 

This is different from what I posted on BusChat, BTW.

 

What does the the QM16/QM17 have to do with it??

[Shortline Bus]

What does the the QM16/QM17 have to do with it??

 

 

I think he was suggesting to pay for a (B2) (Q22) merger was to can the QM16/QM 17 express routes which have among the lower ridership of the current Bus/ (NYCT)Manhattan express routes.

 

With that said, i agree the future of the QM16/17 is an apples and oranges issue not related.

[checkmatechamp13]

Ay yay yay... Can't you separate several things being discussed at once?? Obviously I wasn't referring to overnight service on the B31, but service in general when talking about the B2.

 

Yeah or they could go a few blocks extra and take the BM4. Matter of which is more convenient and the BM3 is further over than the BM4.

 

But my point is that, if those B2 riders were to use the BM4, they would be using it already. I highly doubt ridership on the BM4 has increased to the point where it would still run if it were an NYCT route (since it's an MTA Bus route, obviously the MTA doesn't care whether ridership increased)

 

And that's what I was referring to in the previous post: The B31 is in no danger of being eliminated, but I doubt the service would be increased (substantially) if the B2 were eliminated. If anything, I would expect the B100 to see the larger increase.

[aemoreira81]

I think he was suggesting to pay for a (B2) (Q22) merger was to can the QM16/QM 17 express routes which have among the lower ridership of the current Bus/ (NYCT)Manhattan express routes.

 

With that said, i agree the future of the QM16/17 is an apples and oranges issue not related.

 

It is also an issue of room at Far Rockaway; I estimate that you will need buses at least every 10 minutes peak (when there could also be short-turns within Brooklyn only) and 20 minutes off-peak.

 

An upside: If the B2 is eliminated, the Q35/75 can take its spot at the Kings Plaza bus bays, having the second-best loading spot (currently, the B46 has the best loading spot).

 

Every other Q22 would still run to Roxbury. It may also be harder to dog it, as is frequently done on the Q22, as there is a dispatcher near Kings Highway and East 16 Street, and the other end is right at the depot.

 

(Now to fix the lack of bus service to Bayswater...)

[checkmatechamp13]

It is also an issue of room at Far Rockaway; I estimate that you will need buses at least every 10 minutes peak (when there could also be short-turns within Brooklyn only) and 20 minutes off-peak.

 

An upside: If the B2 is eliminated, the Q35/75 can take its spot at the Kings Plaza bus bays, having the second-best loading spot (currently, the B46 has the best loading spot).

 

Every other Q22 would still run to Roxbury. It may also be harder to dog it, as is frequently done on the Q22, as there is a dispatcher near Kings Highway and East 16 Street, and the other end is right at the depot.

 

(Now to fix the lack of bus service to Bayswater...)

 

Couldn't a few Q22 buses just extend to Bayswater? (And when did they eliminate the Q22A? I don't remember seeing it on the Queens Bus map)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

But my point is that, if those B2 riders were to use the BM4, they would be using it already. I highly doubt ridership on the BM4 has increased to the point where it would still run if it were an NYCT route (since it's an MTA Bus route, obviously the MTA doesn't care whether ridership increased)

 

And that's what I was referring to in the previous post: The B31 is in no danger of being eliminated, but I doubt the service would be increased (substantially) if the B2 were eliminated. If anything, I would expect the B100 to see the larger increase.

 

When did I say that the B31 was in danger of being eliminated? To clarify since it isn't clear, I wrote to him about overnight service on the B31. What else would I be writing about on the B31 aside from that? That's the only service that has been lost and I don't want to rehash about whether or not it's necessary to restore because we already had that conversation in another thread.

 

As for the BM4, that's neither here nor there. The point is if people are inconvenienced enough they will change their commute patterns. Aside from that parking is a bit easier towards the BM4 than the BM3, as there are more apartment buildings along Ocean Avenue than the areas by the B2 riders.

 

And if what you say is true then you wouldn't have all of these folks that are local bus riders flocking to the X10 on the weekends because of the f*cked up shuttle bus to the ferry service, so clearly people can and do change their riding patterns when forced to, even if it means paying more to do so. It's just a question of whether or not they can afford to consistently do so.

[checkmatechamp13]

When did I say that the B31 was in danger of being eliminated? To clarify since it isn't clear, I wrote to him about overnight service on the B31. What else would I be writing about on the B31 aside from that? That's the only service that has been lost and I don't want to rehash about whether or not it's necessary to restore because we already had that conversation in another thread.

 

As for the BM4, that's neither here nor there. The point is if people are inconvenienced enough they will change their commute patterns. Aside from that parking is a bit easier towards the BM4 than the BM3, as there are more apartment buildings along Ocean Avenue than the areas by the B2 riders.

 

And if what you say is true then you wouldn't have all of these folks that are local bus riders flocking to the X10 on the weekends because of the f*cked up shuttle bus to the ferry service, so clearly people can and do change their riding patterns when forced to, even if it means paying more to do so. It's just a question of whether or not they can afford to consistently do so.

 

But that's what I'm not getting: How does the B2 (which hasn't run overnight since 1995) affect the B31 getting overnight service?

 

And that's what I'm saying: I doubt there was a significant increase in ridership on the BM4 as a result of the B2 elimination. Saturday ridership was 69 riders back in 2009. I doubt it increased past 100 riders, and even that's pushing it.

 

And this isn't as dramatic as ferry riders taking the X10 on weekends. Walking over 1 block to a different bus is different from wasting 20-30 minutes on the ferry vs. the express bus.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

But that's what I'm not getting: How does the B2 (which hasn't run overnight since 1995) affect the B31 getting overnight service?

 

And that's what I'm saying: I doubt there was a significant increase in ridership on the BM4 as a result of the B2 elimination. Saturday ridership was 69 riders back in 2009. I doubt it increased past 100 riders, and even that's pushing it.

 

And this isn't as dramatic as ferry riders taking the X10 on weekends. Walking over 1 block to a different bus is different from wasting 20-30 minutes on the ferry vs. the express bus.

 

The B2 and the B31 are two separate issues. Period. There is nothing to discuss about either route that we haven't discussed already. The point I was making was that I wrote to him about both routes addressing separate issues.

 

Ay yay, stop arguing about things that I'm not even making arguments about. All I was saying was that people are likely to use more convenient modes of transportation when they can afford to do so.

[B35 via Church]

I wouldn't bother extending it (the B2) to the Rockaways... at best, you steal riders off the Q35 at av S or Av U.... way I see it, such a route would flourish during the summers only.... comin from the rockaways, I don't see the masses (so to speak) abandoning access to the for the ; lookin at it from that angle....

 

If the B2 were to get cut, I highly doubt they'll re-route the B100 anywhere w/i marine park; they'll continue to keep it along fillmore.... If the premise is to keep the B31 as is, then the viable option would be (as much as I don't care for it) extending B2's westward..... Reason I proposed a merge of the B2/31 is b/c you'll maintain ridership on both ends w/o loss, and quite frankly, I don't think the current B2 route should be extended on either end.... In the prior musings regarding the B2 & the B100, I tried my best not to bring that up (the fact that the city subsidizes the 100) b/c such a point (to me) sounds so weak....

 

Apparently, it's weak enough that the MTA would use it to justify cutting a nearby route !

The riders don't matter.

 

As far as the article goes... that's what I keep sayin about most of these routes that has had it's weekend service cut.... they're lookin to do away with em.... talk about discouraging bus usage

(I'll say that as many times as I have to, too)....

[BrooklynBus]

I agree, but they could simply re-route the B100 in some cases. I personally have a hard time believing that ridership is oh so strong on Fillmore Ave and Quentin Rd, so in some cases, the B100 could replace the B2.

 

I have no problem if they combine the routes so that the least number of people have longer trips. That's how it should be done. In fact, I support combining the routes to eliminate waste. What I oppose is just eliminating the B2 without making any other changes which is what I feel they will probably do.

 

The only other change they may make is to move the B100 to Avenue R so that it takes riders from the B31, so they have an excuse to cut headways on that route too.

 

 

Avenue S/East 36th Street is still under the 1/4 mile guideline for bus service. Google Transit says that it is a 3 minute walk (1/4 mile is 5 minutes).

 

In any case, I don't think it would be too bad if the B2 and B100 were rerouted to serve the same parts of Marine Park. That way, riders get more frequent service on one street, rather than two infrequent routes a block apart.

 

You are correct on your first point. I think I might have been getting the route of the B100 a little confused in my mind. However, the B2 still serves Marine Park better than the B100 which has fewer stops and longer walks for most residents. I used a poor example. I should have stated that you will be over the guideline if you live near Quentin Road in Marine Park and east of East 32nd Street.

 

As for your second point, see my response to Garibaldi,above.

 

I wouldn't bother extending it (the B2) to the Rockaways... at best, you steal riders off the Q35 at av S.... way I see it, such a route would flourish during the summers only.... comin from the rockaways, I don't see the masses (so to speak) abandoning access to the for the ; lookin at it from that angle....

 

I don't agree. It also depends on where you destination is. If it saves you a change at Atlantic Avenue, people would switch to the (, .

 

(the fact that the city subsidizes the 100) b/c such a point (to me) sounds so weak....

 

Apparently, it's weak enough that the MTA would use it to justify cutting a nearby route !

The riders don't matter.

 

 

 

But the MTA would never publicly admit that would be the reason. They would just state that the B2 is no longer necessary because other routes serve the same purpose.

[B35 via Church]

The B31 as I see it isn't going anywhere as it serves an area isolated by geography. However, as I posted on that link (using Disqus), given that Kings Highway on the is going to get ADA accessibility in the near future - why not extend it southward? I propose a Midwood to Arverne route.

 

My plan would have the route run as follows: Extend the B2 (I would rename it the Q75 as it would extend into Queens and be assigned to Far Rockaway) slightly westward to Coney Island Avenue at the B7 stand. Then run the route via Avenue P, Marine Parkway, Fillmore Avenue, Flatbush Avenue, Newport Avenue, Rockaway Beach Boulevard, and Beach Channel Drive, terminating at Peninsula Hospital, which is essentially at the front door of the Far Rockaway Depot.

 

Paying for it: The B2 would be eliminated, the QM16/17 would be eliminated, and some Q22 trips would be truncated to run only between Far Rockaway and Beach 73 Street.

Eliminating the express bus down there to extend a local route from midwood to the rockaways... yeah right... that's just as illogical as extending the B2 to Cropsey av & getting rid of the x28....

 

Even looking at the routing itself, I don't know what you're thinkin w/ this one....

 

 

1 problem. Riders on both sides of the Rockaways will scream losing the only mass transit line (bus or subway)serving the entire pensuila. Might as well run your so called "Q75" to the Mott Ave station.:eek:

 

And just also can the "Q22" bus. Personally I had called for about a year or two earlier in another post mergering the (Q35) and (Q22) with some trips start/ending at Kings Plaza.

foolish idea... I despised it years ago when ppl. in this community went advocating for it, and I despise it just as much today.... With the houses they're building up around the Beach 60's/70's, Q22 usage is going to go UP.... meaning buses are gonna drag even slower w/i the Rockaways....

 

The folks that currently use the Q35 to xfer to the Q22 just short of Beach 149th (queens bound) or at the Beach 169th st (brooklyn bound), let em continue to do so - everyone can't have a 1 seat ride... a route going from Far Rockaway to Flatbush junction (or kings plaza) I find to be nothin short of ridiculous...

 

What does the the QM16/QM17 have to do with it??

Squat.

 

 

I don't agree. It also depends on where you destination is. If it saves you a change at Atlantic Avenue, people would switch to the B/Q

Yes, you have your isolated cases...

 

....but of what I notice @ Atlantic av, there are more riders panning from the B/Q area of the station walking down the passageway looking to xfer to the IRT (in the mornings, and vice versa in the evenings)... or the LIRR (which has nothin to do w/ anything here)....

 

The IRT platform (2/3) @ atlantic is much more crowded than the B/Q platform @ Atlantic....

 

 

It is also an issue of room at Far Rockaway; I estimate that you will need buses at least every 10 minutes peak (when there could also be short-turns within Brooklyn only) and 20 minutes off-peak.

 

An upside: If the B2 is eliminated, the Q35/75 can take its spot at the Kings Plaza bus bays, having the second-best loading spot (currently, the B46 has the best loading spot).

 

Every other Q22 would still run to Roxbury. It may also be harder to dog it, as is frequently done on the Q22, as there is a dispatcher near Kings Highway and East 16 Street, and the other end is right at the depot.

 

(Now to fix the lack of bus service to Bayswater...)

I actually think Q22's should be truncated on the western end... no reason why there should be 3 Q22's arriving @ B. 169th w/i 5 mins of each other on 10 min headways (projected).... virtually all those riders that ride it there, are seeking the Q35 anyway...

 

far as Bayswater, if those folks want to be secluded, let em.... it isn't like gerritsen, city island, *ughk* those folks in country club where ppl. actually fought to have the bus service they have...

[BrooklynBus]

 

The IRT platform (2/3) @ atlantic is much more crowded than the B/Q platform @ Atlantic....

 

.

 

Simple reason for that one. Most LIRR passengers are going to the Wall Street area, not Midtown and the is the easiest train to access without any stairs.

[B35 via Church]

Simple reason for that one. Most LIRR passengers are going to the Wall Street area, not Midtown and the is the easiest train to access without any stairs.

Oh, of course.... I don't dispute that at all.

 

 

But back to your original pointer there.... I don't think saving an xfer at atlantic alone would be a reason for Rockaway folk to consider (guess abandon is too strong a word) the Brighton over the Nostrand av line....

[Q43LTD]

I guess the (MTA)'s "secret plans" aren't so secret after all. Why does the wait so many years after a mall/shopping center opens they decide to send dome buses out there? I mean, the subway can only take me but so far. I do have some ideas for Canarsie Plaza. Why can't all routes flourish evenly?