Why are Queens and Bronx so connected to Manhattan by bus, but not Brooklyn?

[mark1447]

For service out of Brooklyn, I wouldn't bring back a shuttle like the B39 / B51. Those routes were a spending, and duplicated Subway service.

 

I'd rather see a new route thats longer then those two routes then just a short route. Maybe something from Prospect Park to Midtown (NYP?) via Downtown Brooklyn. Similar to the Q32 from Jackson Heights to Penn.

[via White Plains Road]

For service out of Brooklyn, I wouldn't bring back a shuttle like the B39 / B51. Those routes were a spending, and duplicated Subway service.

 

I'd rather see a new route thats longer then those two routes then just a short route. Maybe something from Prospect Park to Midtown (NYP?) via Downtown Brooklyn. Similar to the Q32 from Jackson Heights to Penn.

 

And subway line did the B51 deplicate?

[mark1447]

And subway line did the B51 deplicate?

 

You already have the ( and a few others if you wanted Chinatown(), and Downtown Manhattan / Brooklyn..

[Queens Surface]

The only problem with the B51 being cut was with disabled people not being able to get into the subway stations around the B51...

[mark1447]

The only problem with the B51 being cut was with disabled people not being able to get into the subway stations around the B51...

 

So the B39 / B51 was originally created for those of wheelchairs, who can't access the Subway around them?

[Shortline Bus]

So the B39 / B51 was originally created for those of wheelchairs, who can't access the Subway around them?

 

The (B39)was around for many years before the term ADA came into play. While the (B51) was a modern version of the old "B19" and was created for the disabled and seniors.

[qjtransitmaster]

And where will you turn the bus? that area is pretty congested and will only be worse when there are home games.

 

As for the tunnel - not everyone wants to pay 2x the fare if they just want to get into Manhattan as opposed to taking the subway. So that point is not a reason why there can't be a local bus service via the tunnel.

 

err use the opposite direction 5 mins to cortelyou road for BM lines NEXT. You get what you pay for hon. B51 hmm end at grand army plaza or 3rd and 4th ave and dean street.

[via White Plains Road]

You already have the ( and a few others if you wanted Chinatown(), and Downtown Manhattan / Brooklyn..

 

That's not duplicating a line...those are near by stations and the closest station for the B51 was Jay Street-MetroTech (Borough Hall), but that besides the point. There was nothing wrong with the B51 route.....it would had more ridership if they extended the B51 from Park Row to BMCC!

[NX Express]

@QJT Can you please TRY to type in understandable English? I can't decipher what you mean right now.

[Grand Concourse]

err use the opposite direction 5 mins to cortelyou road for BM lines NEXT. You get what you pay for hon. B51 hmm end at grand army plaza or 3rd and 4th ave and dean street.

Um, maybe not everyone wants to ride the subway or can handle walking up and down a series of stairs (ie: elderly). Maybe you should read my previous responses just a few hours ago.

:tdown:

 

And using the BMs, again, not everyone can afford that. Thus the point about why the B51 and B39 should be brought back as they were LOCAL buses, so what's your real point?

[qjtransitmaster]

@QJT Can you please TRY to type in understandable English? I can't decipher what you mean right now.

grand concourse seems to understand you need to just read better. Let me repeat it slowly Bus to manhattan from prospect park yeah good luck with that who would use it and how will it get to the tunnel? DO YOU UNDERSTAND??? DO I NEED TO TYPE LIKE THIS?

 

 

No offence but you need to just read.

 

 

However NOT refuting that B51 should be back or B39. Never said they shouldn't.

[Gorgor]

grand concourse seems to understand you need to just read better. Let me repeat it slowly Bus to manhattan from prospect park yeah good luck with that who would use it and how will it get to the tunnel? DO YOU UNDERSTAND??? DO I NEED TO TYPE LIKE THIS?

 

 

No offence but you need to just read.

 

 

However NOT refuting that B51 should be back or B39. Never said they shouldn't.

 

If everyone has difficulty understanding what you've typed then the problem no longer resides in the reader, but the creator of said content; you.

 

If the sentence above was too intelligent for you to comprehend, how's this:

TAKE TIME 2 writ propr sentnces, we no understand what u try 2 say

[Grand Concourse]

If everyone has difficulty understanding what you've typed then the problem no longer resides in the reader, but the creator of said content; you.

 

If the sentence above was too intelligent for you to comprehend, how's this:

TAKE TIME 2 writ propr sentnces, we no understand what u try 2 say

 

Exactly, don't give me too much credit, I was still barely able to make sense of what he wrote. I get this isn't English 101, but this is not a chatbox, type up a proper sentence. That's not too much to ask for.

[mark1447]

That's not duplicating a line...those are near by stations and the closest station for the B51 was Jay Street-MetroTech (Borough Hall), but that besides the point. There was nothing wrong with the B51 route.....it would had more ridership if they extended the B51 from Park Row to BMCC!

 

I did not know that. Ty. Well, if it did had a lot of ridership, Why not combine with the current B61 route to your BMCC terminal and/or extend to the Ferry or in Battery Park City. That would make some sense.

[B35 via Church]

I did not know that. Ty. Well, if it did had a lot of ridership, Why not combine with the current B61 route to your BMCC terminal and/or extend to the Ferry or in Battery Park City. That would make some sense.

 

Totally different riderbase.

 

B51 riders were elderly (I'll be more specific & say older black women) that mainly came off the Ridgewood-Downtown routes (26, 38, etc) that worked around City Hall.....

 

B61 riders are folks emanating from that pocket of brooklyn b/w windsor terrace & cobble hill... folks coming off the R train to get to Ikea, included....

 

With the way the 61 routing is structured, forget about sending that to manhattan....

 

Bringing back the 75 & extending that to manhattan might be an idea worth talking about, though.... just to support your point regarding having a route go b/w brooklyn & manhattan that isn't a shuttle-type routing....

[Fresh Pond]

Have you been on Canal Street in the dead middle of rush hour? Even when the B51 was running, it got caught in traffic on Canal even though it traveled down Canal for about 4 or so blocks. Canal is the WORST street to put a crosstown route on

 

Tunnel traffic on the west + bridge traffic from the east = HUGE NIGHTMARE

 

So the B39 / B51 was originally created for those of wheelchairs, who can't access the Subway around them?

 

The B51 was originally part of the B63 and it was called (as a whole) the B15, and this was when the B15 back then was called the B10. Then around 1992-1993, routes were extended, split and renumbered (including the B10 extended to JFK THEN being renumbered to B15) to the current setup we have now

 

...until the 2010 budget cuts came into play

[checkmatechamp13]

err use the opposite direction 5 mins to cortelyou road for BM lines NEXT. You get what you pay for hon. B51 hmm end at grand army plaza or 3rd and 4th ave and dean street.

 

So let me get this straight. It's alright for a route to parallel a whole bunch of subway lines in Downtown Brooklyn (B51), but it's not alright for a route to start at a subway station further out (Prospect Park) and go to Lower Manhattan (which isn't even directly served by the Brighton Line), passing through an area where connections to Lower Manhattan are also poor (Park Slope and Carroll Gardens). You have the , but that's not within everybody's reach and it's also not the most frequent train.

 

And you're using express buses as a reason why that route shouldn't be created?????? When they serve an entirely different ridership base.

 

And using the BMs, again, not everyone can afford that. Thus the point about why the B51 and B39 should be brought back as they were LOCAL buses, so what's your real point?

 

To be fair, a transit agency shouldn't be creating new routes just for the purpose of allowing riders to have a cheaper fare, but again, you can't use express buses as an excuse.

 

If somebody were to suggest extending (for instance) the B103 to Lower Manhattan then it would be a different story because it parallels the BM2 and you have the subway as an alternative if you can't afford the express bus. But for an area that's relatively close to Manhattan, a bus route connecting the two boroughs isn't an outrageous request.

 

My opinion is that the B51 had subway alternatives that were ADA-accessable, so they were right in eliminating it, but the B39 should be kept in some form because of the lack of ADA-accessability at Essex Street.

 

On the subject of restoring bus service over the two bridges, there appears to be some agreement that it should be done. Where we tend to disagree is on what route or where the final terminal should be in Manhattan. I think that both the ridership is there and that it will produce the revenue as well.

 

Well, I don't think it will produce net revenue for the MTA. It would still cost money, but that's nto a reason why it shouldn't be done.

[Interested Rider]

The (B39)was around for many years before the term ADA came into play. While the (B51) was a modern version of the old "B19" and was created for the disabled and seniors.

 

I would like to correct your statement as to the B/51 being a modern version of the B/19. The route that you are referring to was the B/15 Manhattan Bridge route which disappeared and then resurfaced as the B/51 many years later (long after the B/10 New Lots Avenue was extended into Queens and the number was changed to B/15). A special thanks to my fellow forum member for his post on this subject,

 

The B/19 ran from the LIRR terminal to Flushing Avenue and Ryerson Street (right near where the BQE crosses Flushing Avenue into Williamsburg) via Carlton Avenue. It was eliminated many years ago.

 

There is a periodical article written in the late 1960's (or early 1970's) on the subject of the history of Brooklyn Buses which contained this infomration that I read many, many years ago. I do not know if the article was ever updated since that time. When I find the information as to its availability, I will send the information to the webmaster for review and approval to post.

 

On the subject of restoring bus service over the two bridges, there appears to be some agreement that it should be done. Where we tend to disagree is on what route or where the final terminal should be in Manhattan. I think that both the ridership is there and that it will produce the revenue as well.

[Shortline Bus]

I would like to correct your statement as to the B/51 being a modern version of the B/19. The route that you are referring to was the B/15 Manhattan Bridge route which disappeared and then resurfaced as the B/51 many years later (long after the B/10 New Lots Avenue was extended into Queens and the number was changed to B/15). A special thanks to my fellow forum member for his post on this subject,

 

The B/19 ran from the LIRR terminal to Flushing Avenue and Ryerson Street (right near where the BQE crosses Flushing Avenue into Williamsburg) via Carlton Avenue. It was eliminated many years ago.

 

There is a periodical article written in the late 1960's (or early 1970's) on the subject of the history of Brooklyn Buses which contained this infomration that I read many, many years ago. I do not know if the article was ever updated since that time. When I find the information as to its availability, I will send the information to the webmaster for review and approval to post.

 

On the subject of restoring bus service over the two bridges, there appears to be some agreement that it should be done. Where we tend to disagree is on what route or where the final terminal should be in Manhattan. I think that both the ridership is there and that it will produce the revenue as well.

 

Thanks for the info and for the history. By way Mr. Rider please try to avoid double posting on the boards on same comments.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Grand Concourse]

@checkmate: of course not, but what I mean is: "just take the express bus" was not a valid reason for Brooklyn-Manhattan bus service. And if there are people buying single fare rides or just enough for a round trip as opposed to a 10+ trip card, do you think they'd want to pay double the fare to one way? For that they'd just stick with the subway.

[Eric B]

M8 needs the boost take the gamble!!!!!

 

No need for prospect park to south ferry that is what the BM1,2,3,&4 are for!!!

I forgot to mention, [Re: when the (M6) went to the Battery], extending it through the tunnel and then across Union St.

[B35 via Church]

Are you kidding? That would have a huge riderbase, if you connected Park Slope say with Lower Manhattan? Yuppie-yuppie transport pays well, and you've got the Manhattan Bridge from Flatbush or the Battery Tunnel from the Gowanus. There's a huge population of that whole Battery Park City / Tribeca affluent-family types who head to Park Slope and other gentrified parts of Brooklyn, a route like that would have a ton of ridership.

He knows that was my idea (prospect park subway-to-lwr manhattan route), that's why he's hatin hard on it....

 

..."just take the express bus" was not a valid reason for Brooklyn-Manhattan bus service.

Agreed.... Who is he to tell people to take an express bus over a local bus that goes to manhattan (if such an option existed)...

 

But even if, there's no way you can feasibly take the express bus from prospect park/lefferts gdns, park slope, etc. to no manhattan anyway.... ole boy having brought that up as an alternative made ZERO sense either way...... the last stop of the BM 3 & 4 before it dives onto the prospect expwy is over there on church, just short of ocean pkwy.....

 

....because park slopers, etc. would look forward to such a commute... lmfao !

 

 

To be fair, a transit agency shouldn't be creating new routes just for the purpose of allowing riders to have a cheaper fare, but again, you can't use express buses as an excuse.

A transit agency shouldn't be steadily gettin rid of bus service & indirectly forcing people onto trains either, but that's neither here nor there....

 

While what you brought up is true, you still have to consider the reason QJT brought those exp. routes up in the first place.... it was a deliberate attempt to illustrate to us how poor/useless a prospect park-south ferry route is...

 

Too bad for him, MHV put him in his place quick as to how wrong that notion was....

[Cait Sith]

Just for the record, a majority of you guys are wasting your time replying to QJTransit______. We all know his ideas just absolutely suck.

 

So the B39 / B51 was originally created for those of wheelchairs, who can't access the Subway around them?

 

Not exactly created as said entity considering that the B51 as mentioned was once another route. But in the presented case, thats how it was. The B51 had a share of BMCC students and a lot of Elderly folks that couldnt access nearby stations. The B39, Essex Street was not ADA compliant and the process of even adding elevators is complicated so the B39 compensated for that. It always had a nice amount of elderly & handicapped riders each trip.

 

The B39 was also used as a hot transfer point for the M15.

[Grand Concourse]

It would be so nice if he was blocked again so we don't have to even see his pointless posts... wishful thinking.

 

As for the B39, looks like I was right about the ada reason, just got the side of the bridge wrong.