Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
B36 Via Ave U

Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

There might be a need for a connection to the Spring Creek Basin area from the west. An earlier plan, and an earlier iteration of the B84, which ran from Canarsie to Ashford Street, was ultimately combined with the B6 (which used to end at Ashford and Wortman). Then the B6 was extended up to the New Lots Avenue (3) station. Why do I bring this up? Might it be time to extend the B6 Local to Spring Creek basin as a branch of the B6, renumbered to B5?

The B5 would basically be an extension of the B6 Local. When the B6 Limited runs, the B5 would only run between Coney Island Avenue and Spring Creek Basin, except for pull-in and pull-out trips that would terminate/originate in Bensonhurst, since unlike the B84, this B5 would be out of Ulmer Park.

The last thing we need at this point is an extension from where via B6: Bensonhurst to Spring Creek. (Dead on arrival)

Honestly and truthfully, the integrity of the B6 service would suffer dearly if this extension you are proposing were to take place.

There are tons of routes in the area that can service the Spring Creek Basin including the infamous B84 that everyone here is to either extend, eliminate, and vice versa. If the (MTA)  was really smart and had more community input to its proposals situations like the B84 can easily be resolved. The 84 is strictly an East New York- Spring Creek bus that should provide service within the areas of East New York and Spring Creek only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said:

 The B64 on Bay Ridge Av is still eliminated under this plan, thus having Bay Ridge Avenue with one bus route going to where people want to go (Kings Plaza) without relying on subways through Downtown Brooklyn.

So you're leaving people like me on the western portion of Bay Ridge Avenue with two routes to Kings Plaza (the B2 and the B9) and no direct route to 13th Avenue and on to Bensonhurst?

That's not going to fly at all.

The B64 may meander, but it's an important direct connection between the northern section of Bay Ridge and Dyker along 13th Avenue and Bensonhurst.

4 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

 

The extension would serve an area that is almost all residential and where automobile use has skyrocketed as it has in other parts of southern Brooklyn.

Auto use along the B64 has skyrocketed specifically because of the 20 minute headways. Ridership is good on weekends when its every 10-15 minutes during the day, and weekdays in the AM peak, 10 minute headways are quite frankly not enough as eastbound buses get crush loaded before the bus even reaches 4th Avenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

There might be a need for a connection to the Spring Creek Basin area from the west. An earlier plan, and an earlier iteration of the B84, which ran from Canarsie to Ashford Street, was ultimately combined with the B6 (which used to end at Ashford and Wortman). Then the B6 was extended up to the New Lots Avenue (3) station. Why do I bring this up? Might it be time to extend the B6 Local to Spring Creek basin as a branch of the B6, renumbered to B5?

The B5 would basically be an extension of the B6 Local. When the B6 Limited runs, the B5 would only run between Coney Island Avenue and Spring Creek Basin, except for pull-in and pull-out trips that would terminate/originate in Bensonhurst, since unlike the B84, this B5 would be out of Ulmer Park.

That combination in question, gave that part of ENY (around the Boulevard Houses & those apts. due south towards Flatlands av.) access to the (3).....

The prior rendition of the B84 gave that same part of ENY access to the (L)....

Today's rendition of the B84 gave Spring Creek the same access to the (3) that the prior rendition never gave that aforementioned part of ENY....

Personally speaking, the network in that entire section of Brooklyn (East of Canarsie) should be re-drawn.... Unpopular opinion or not, but the B6 & the B82 does too much (esp. for a city that's becoming more congested).... People want one seat bus rides, but at the same time, are quick to complain when "their" route get significantly delayed.... Well, the longer the route, the more instances where it can get... delayed.

Generally speaking, I don't have a problem with giving Spring Creek bus service due westward towards the Junction (it's one reason the B6 is more popular than the B82 from eastern Brooklyn).... However, I wouldn't try to accomplish that with a branch of the current B6 (or the current B82, for that matter)....

 

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

So you're leaving people like me on the western portion of Bay Ridge Avenue with two routes to Kings Plaza (the B2 and the B9) and no direct route to 13th Avenue and on to Bensonhurst?

That's not going to fly at all.

The B64 may meander, but it's an important direct connection between the northern section of Bay Ridge and Dyker along 13th Avenue and Bensonhurst.

Not a lot of people do use that connection, which was the case in the early 2000s and now in 2018. In fact, the current B64 bypasses one of the good parts of Bensonhurst before even reaching the western edge of the other part. Besides, that's not the only proposal that would be made. In the system that was proposed in 2004, the B23 would become the B21 and traverse the length of 13th Av south of Bay Ridge. If you want serviced to 13th Av, under the 2004 plan, which is being modified under my plans, you can transfer at 13th Av for the B21. Please refer to this map of the 2004 system I'm talking about: proposed_system.gif

 

The new Bay Ridge Av routing actually better serves Bensonhurst better, especially the central portion along 65th Street parallel to the non ADA accessible (N) train. It would improve service since that stupid service gap on 65th St and Avenue P is closed. Also, why would anyone on Bath Av want to ride to Bay Ridge Av when the 95th Street and 86th Street stations are much better. That flip flop of the B1 and B64 was a huge mistake and MUST be corrected.

And technically, the B9 will no longer serve Kings Plaza under this plan. The B9, which has no business going there, would be rerouted to serve better places, like on Avenue N in Flatlands Av, to replace the useless B41 service on Avenue N. That service, which nobody rides outside of rush hours and is a rolling waste of money, vehicles, and drivers time, would be a rush hour only service (overnight service is something I can work around in my update), thus improving travel for everyone else. Refer to the map for that service.

Edited by JeremiahC99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

....And technically, the B9 will no longer serve Kings Plaza under this plan. The B9, which has no business going there, would be rerouted to serve better places, like on Avenue N in Flatlands Av, to replace the useless B41 service on Avenue N. That service, which nobody rides outside of rush hours and is a rolling waste of money, vehicles, and drivers time, would be a rush hour only service (overnight service is something I can work around in my update), thus improving travel for everyone else. Refer to the map for that service.

  1. Running the B9 to Veterans Av would not replace the B41 Veterans av branch.... That part of it extends past a mere difference of opinion & is simply not true... A diverted B9 eastward does nothing for anyone coming from areas along/around the B41 NORTH of Av N....
  2. On one hand, you say the B41 Veterans av branch is useless - but at the same time, you'd retain it during the rush? I mean, let's be a little more consistent here....
  • 2a] Running B9's to Bergen Beach at its current headways throughout the day & having B41's running there during the rush, is an immense waste of resources along Av. N during the rush....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Not a lot of people do use that connection, which was the case in the early 2000s and now in 2018.

You clearly don't ride the B64 in 2018 because this is flat out false. If someone wants to go from Bay Ridge Avenue to the other area of Bensonhurst near 65th that you mention, they take the existing B9. 

3 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Also, why would anyone on Bath Av want to ride to Bay Ridge Av when the 95th Street and 86th Street stations are much better. 

They're not going to the subway on Bay Ridge Avenue smart one, they're riding to/from shopping districts, be it going from Bath Av to shop in Bay Ridge on the upper portion of 5th Av or riding from Bay Ridge Av to the shops on Bath Av near 18th Av... You should know this if you're so in tune with B64 ridership patterns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

You clearly don't ride the B64 in 2018 because this is flat out false. If someone wants to go from Bay Ridge Avenue to the other area of Bensonhurst near 65th that you mention, they take the existing B9. 

They're not going to the subway on Bay Ridge Avenue smart one, they're riding to/from shopping districts, be it going from Bath Av to shop in Bay Ridge on the upper portion of 5th Av or riding from Bay Ridge Av to the shops on Bath Av near 18th Av... You should know this if you're so in tune with B64 ridership patterns.

The existing B9 would do absolutely nothing to close service gaps on 65th Street and on Avenue P, which has existed for two decades too long. The B2 proposal would aim to close those markets, provide a closer route to the 65th Street area, improve crosstown service, which is desperately needed, and provide alternate service to that area of Bensonhurst in place of the (N) train if that line is out. Also, in this proposal, a new route called the B66 would take over the B64 and B70. More specifically: 

  • The B66 would start at 39th Street/1st Av, and take the routing the B70 does until 86th Street. Here, the route would take 86th Street to 4th Avenue and take 4th Avenue to 92nd Street. The route would then head east on 92nd Street and continue the B70 routing to the VA Hospital, but instead of ending there, it would continue to 18th Avenue with the B8, shift onto 18th Avenue and Bath Avenue and remain on Bath Avenue (like the B64 does now) until Stillwell Av (the route will not deviate onto Harway Avenue) and continue south on Stillwell Avenue to the Coney Island station.

Those proposal, which is bought to you by Allan Rosen, the creator of the very successful 1978 Southwest Brooklyn Bus Changes, will keep the connection between the Bay Ridge Av corridor and Dyker Heights, Bensonhurst and beyond. What this will do is increase the number of trips made by one bus, better serve VA Hospital, Bay Ridge and that Costco on 3rd Avenue, while retaining some existing connections and adding new connections such as to the 86th Street Shopping area, where Staten Island buses over the Verrazano terminate. If Allan's SW Brooklyn changes of 1978 were very successful, then so can these proposals and his others from this site, which I RECOMMEND YOU TAKE A REALLY CLOSE LOOK AT: http://brooklynbus.tripod.com/index.html

 

For the page his B66 proposal is located, hit up this link: http://brooklynbus.tripod.com/id16.html (B66 Proposal is labeled Proposal H).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, lets continue to throw Allan's ideas on the wall until something sticks...

The B66 proposal doesn't make trips for current B64 riders better, in fact it makes trips for them worst because it misses the part of Bay Ridge that the B64 currently suerves and subjects them to 8th Avenue, 86th Street, 4th Avenue and 92nd Street traffic. That route would be a contender for slowest and lowest on time performance in the city. The bunching during peak periods would be insane. 

I respect Allan and what he's done for Brooklyn bus service but I don't agree with this change at all.

I agree with a B2 extension along 65th/Av P but it shouldn't be at the expense of the B64 and should go straight down 65th and end at NYU Langone with the B11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh wtf, this is beyond admiration....

Let the man's nuts breathe for f***'s sake.... This d**kriding has long gotten annoying.

  • Thanks 1
  • LMAO! 5
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Oh wtf, this is beyond admiration....

Let the man's nuts breathe for f***'s sake.... This d**kriding has long gotten annoying.

I was waiting for you to chime in LMAO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I look at changing any bus route, I not only look at streets, I look at communities where the change is to take place. 

The argument that 65th Street should have a bus is based on the theory that there is a big gap between the bus routes between the B/9 and the B/64. As I stated above, I look at communities and the communities include Borough Park and Sunset Park and Dyker Heights. The distance between the B/35 and the B/11 on 50th Street is 11 short blocks. The distance between the B/11 and the B/9 is 11 short blocks from 49th Street. The B/9 and B/11 are heavily used in Borough Park and into Midwood as the communities have a lot in common that have riders in these communities riding the buses. The distance south of 60th Street is different as there is  bus service on Bay Ridge Avenue (69th Street) to 13th Avenue, then 6 short blocks to Bay Ridge Parkway (75th Street) and finally 11 short blocks to 86th Street.

For all intensive purposes 60th Street is the line of demarcation between Dyker Heights and Borough Park. This can be seen in the ridership levels and headways both north and south of  60th Street.  For what purpose will an extension to Bay Ridge serve the riders of the B/2 or B/31. Putting a bus on 65th Street serves no purpose as the ridership from Borough Park or from the B/9 will not ride as it does not serve their institutions in Midwood as they live north of 60th Street. People living south of 60th Street are part of a totally different community that do not have that institutional connection that Borough Park has with Midwood. Both Bay Ridge Avenue and Bay Ridge Parkway buses have served communities that are south of west of Stillwell Avenue as that is where the interests were for many years. While the communities have changed, the institutions are not there that would justify the extension of either the B/2  or B/31.

My point about communities also involves the change to the B/9 to replace the B/41 to Bergen Beach. The B/9 needs the connection to Kings Plaza where riders transfer to the Q/35 as again it is the institutions in Belle Harbor and Neponsit. This does not exist in Bergen Beach as the community needs the connection to the Flatbush/Nostrand Station and the B/9 does absolutely nothing for them. Eliminating the B/41 Bergen Beach branch does nothing except to help the dollar vans.

Drawing straight lines and making them into bus routes does not work and has not worked for as long as can remember and I am going back close to 45 years.  Buses work best when the routes connect the institutions and places where the people need and offer quality, dependable service which encourages ridership. Sometimes the best thing for those who make the decisions is to get out of their offices where they can enjoy their view of New York Harbor and ride the buses, speak to the workers and the passengers. Until the rest of the MTA follows  Mr. Byford's example, the system will not change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

 

Those proposal, which is bought to you by Allan Rosen, the creator of the very successful 1978 Southwest Brooklyn Bus Changes, will keep the connection between the Bay Ridge Av corridor and Dyker Heights, Bensonhurst and beyond.  I RECOMMEND YOU TAKE A REALLY CLOSE LOOK AT: http://brooklynbus.tripod.com/index.html

 

For the page his B66 proposal is located, hit up this link: http://brooklynbus.tripod.com/id16.html (B66 Proposal is labeled Proposal H).

 

The way you praise this guy I would think you were his son......Mr I got on the back of the bus cause I didn't want to be seperated.....

  • LMAO! 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 8:38 PM, Jdog14 said:

The way you praise this guy I would think you were his son...... Mr I got on the back of the bus cause I didn't want to be seperated.....

I would think it was actually him....

Now he's run off to posting in the subway section more... If that's what it takes to stop his siphoning of another man's shaft, then good.

On ‎1‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 7:38 PM, Interested Rider said:

When I look at changing any bus route, I not only look at streets, I look at communities where the change is to take place.....

 

....Drawing straight lines and making them into bus routes does not work and has not worked for as long as can remember and I am going back close to 45 years.  Buses work best when the routes connect the institutions and places where the people need and offer quality, dependable service which encourages ridership. Sometimes the best thing for those who make the decisions is to get out of their offices where they can enjoy their view of New York Harbor and ride the buses, speak to the workers and the passengers. Until the rest of the MTA follows  Mr. Byford's example, the system will not change.

You would think it'd be common sense.... The "lines" on a map are nothing more than a visual representation of where the actual buses, in service, carrying actual people (some more than others), serving actual communities, travel along.... Over the years, I've coined a little phrase "straighter isn't always better" & as an add on to it, a turn or two can make all the difference (in whether some community utilizes/has a use for some bus route).....

Accuracy is one thing - However, when making maps, you have some folks that get too caught up in trying to make the perfect artistic composition of a map - as if that corresponds to, or even trumps how the actual routes would perform (in terms of their utilization & their day-to-day operation)....

Don't know about you, but I've never known anyone to ride a map to get to work/school :lol:

  • LMAO! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2019 at 10:50 AM, B35 via Church said:

That combination in question, gave that part of ENY (around the Boulevard Houses & those apts. due south towards Flatlands av.) access to the (3).....

The prior rendition of the B84 gave that same part of ENY access to the (L)....

Today's rendition of the B84 gave Spring Creek the same access to the (3) that the prior rendition never gave that aforementioned part of ENY....

Personally speaking, the network in that entire section of Brooklyn (East of Canarsie) should be re-drawn.... Unpopular opinion or not, but the B6 & the B82 does too much (esp. for a city that's becoming more congested).... People want one seat bus rides, but at the same time, are quick to complain when "their" route get significantly delayed.... Well, the longer the route, the more instances where it can get... delayed.

Generally speaking, I don't have a problem with giving Spring Creek bus service due westward towards the Junction (it's one reason the B6 is more popular than the B82 from eastern Brooklyn).... However, I wouldn't try to accomplish that with a branch of the current B6 (or the current B82, for that matter)....

 

The problem is turning it on its western end. I see two possibilities:

  1. Coney Island Avenue, serving Midwood via Brooklyn College on Bedford Avenue.
  2. Avenue H and Nostrand Avenue (Brooklyn College).
     

My plan presumed that operationally, it had to be Ulmer Park, since as currently configured, Spring Creek probably doesn't have room. But then one has to realize that how buses are parked at Spring Creek is an outlier at the MTA...with parking spaces like a typical parking lot, as opposed to tracks. This could be out of Spring Creek if the configuration is changed to a track configuration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2019 at 6:59 PM, Interested Rider said:

One last comment concerning the extension of the B/2 (or for that matter the B/31) from Kings Highway Station. There is no market for that service as the B/64 headway during the non peak hours is 20 minutes which means there is no reason to justify another route on Bay Ridge Avenue. The 69th Street Ferry is long, long gone and that was the reason that there were 7 minute headways 50 years ago and now has 20 minute headways.  The extension would serve an area that is almost all residential and where automobile use has skyrocketed as it has in other parts of southern Brooklyn. 

I have had limited internet access for the past two weeks and was unable to respond but will do that now in the order of the comments made. 

You are incorrect. First, we do not know if there is a market until we try. That is one of the faults of the bus system. There are never any trial routes which can be discontinued if u successful. The MTA retains all routes even if they fail. 

Second, your facts are wrong. The ferry was discontinued when the bridge was built, but the 7 minute headways on Bay Ridge Avenue was retained until 1978, not because a ferry once existed but because those headways were needed during rush hours due to heavy use in both directions to the 4th Avenue subway and to Xaverian High School. When the B1 was created in 1978, the new schedules reduced service on Bay Ridge Avenue to save money reducing the market. In 2010 when the B1 and 64 were flip flopped, service was reduced further because the B64 ran less frequently than the B1. So the increase in automobile use was a result of the MTA’s reduced service and not altering bus routes to meet demand such as for B2 and or B31 extensions westward. 

Also, I agree that the B1 / 64 flip flop should not have been done and a through 86 St route should have been properly created as I recommended in 1978 and again in 2003 and 2006. Infant from my bus survey of 8,000 riders in 1975, the flip flop was the first solution I eliminated after I saw the high numbers of B64 riders who would be inconvenienced with a longer trip to the 4th Avenue Subway by having to use the Bay Ridge Avenue Station instead of 86 St. That was before the B8 was extended to 95 Street from the VA Hospital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2019 at 11:30 PM, Future ENY OP said:

The last thing we need at this point is an extension from where via B6: Bensonhurst to Spring Creek. (Dead on arrival)

Honestly and truthfully, the integrity of the B6 service would suffer dearly if this extension you are proposing were to take place.

There are tons of routes in the area that can service the Spring Creek Basin including the infamous B84 that everyone here is to either extend, eliminate, and vice versa. If the (MTA)  was really smart and had more community input to its proposals situations like the B84 can easily be resolved. The 84 is strictly an East New York- Spring Creek bus that should provide service within the areas of East New York and Spring Creek only.

That the biggest problem the routes are not created based off the community needs. They are made by people who never stepped foot in these areas. We can utilize the B84 it just need to go where we want service and its not on Ashford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2019 at 3:24 PM, Around the Horn said:

Ah yes, lets continue to throw Allan's ideas on the wall until something sticks...

The B66 proposal doesn't make trips for current B64 riders better, in fact it makes trips for them worst because it misses the part of Bay Ridge that the B64 currently suerves and subjects them to 8th Avenue, 86th Street, 4th Avenue and 92nd Street traffic. That route would be a contender for slowest and lowest on time performance in the city. The bunching during peak periods would be insane. 

I respect Allan and what he's done for Brooklyn bus service but I don't agree with this change at all.

I agree with a B2 extension along 65th/Av P but it shouldn't be at the expense of the B64 and should go straight down 65th and end at NYU Langone with the B11.

I disagree with you about the proposed B66 being worse for riders. You have to remember that any change will inconvenience some riders. The goal is to make things better for more riders than you are inconveniencing. Yes some B64 riders, those going from Bay Ridge Avenue to Bath Ave would be inconvenienced. But how many riders are doing that now or are most Bay Ridge Avenue riders getting on and off on  13th Avenue with 13th Avenue riders replacing them and getting off on Bath Avenue? And what would be the alternative for those who are riding through. Two buses instead of one. But what about those now taking two uses and would now be able to ride a single bus because of the B66? All that has to be weighed before changes are made. The MTA did none of that when flip flopping the B1 and B64. 

I also disagree that 92 Street traffic is any worse than 86 Street traffic between 4th and 5th Avenue. Yes, 8th Avenue  traffic has considerably worsened since I made that proposal, and that also needs to be considered now. 

Also, what I would do now with 65 Street service is have it stop only on even numbered avenues since there is service a few blocks away on 60 Street which is what I proposed in Sheepdheadbites about six years later along with different routings. I will try to find that link later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I have had limited internet access for the past two weeks and was unable to respond but will do that now in the order of the comments made. 

You are incorrect. First, we do not know if there is a market until we try. That is one of the faults of the bus system. There are never any trial routes which can be discontinued if u successful. The MTA retains all routes even if they fail. 

Second, your facts are wrong. The ferry was discontinued when the bridge was built, but the 7 minute headways on Bay Ridge Avenue was retained until 1978, not because a ferry once existed but because those headways were needed during rush hours due to heavy use in both directions to the 4th Avenue subway and to Xaverian High School. When the B1 was created in 1978, the new schedules reduced service on Bay Ridge Avenue to save money reducing the market. In 2010 when the B1 and 64 were flip flopped, service was reduced further because the B64 ran less frequently than the B1. So the increase in automobile use was a result of the MTA’s reduced service and not altering bus routes to meet demand such as for B2 and or B31 extensions westward. 

Also, I agree that the B1 / 64 flip flop should not have been done and a through 86 St route should have been properly created as I recommended in 1978 and again in 2003 and 2006. Infant from my bus survey of 8,000 riders in 1975, the flip flop was the first solution I eliminated after I saw the high numbers of B64 riders who would be inconvenienced with a longer trip to the 4th Avenue Subway by having to use the Bay Ridge Avenue Station instead of 86 St. That was before the B8 was extended to 95 Street from the VA Hospital.

I stand by my statements that I posted here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2019 at 7:38 PM, Interested Rider said:

When I look at changing any bus route, I not only look at streets, I look at communities where the change is to take place. 

The argument that 65th Street should have a bus is based on the theory that there is a big gap between the bus routes between the B/9 and the B/64. As I stated above, I look at communities and the communities include Borough Park and Sunset Park and Dyker Heights. The distance between the B/35 and the B/11 on 50th Street is 11 short blocks. The distance between the B/11 and the B/9 is 11 short blocks from 49th Street. The B/9 and B/11 are heavily used in Borough Park and into Midwood as the communities have a lot in common that have riders in these communities riding the buses. The distance south of 60th Street is different as there is  bus service on Bay Ridge Avenue (69th Street) to 13th Avenue, then 6 short blocks to Bay Ridge Parkway (75th Street) and finally 11 short blocks to 86th Street.

For all intensive purposes 60th Street is the line of demarcation between Dyker Heights and Borough Park. This can be seen in the ridership levels and headways both north and south of  60th Street.  For what purpose will an extension to Bay Ridge serve the riders of the B/2 or B/31. Putting a bus on 65th Street serves no purpose as the ridership from Borough Park or from the B/9 will not ride as it does not serve their institutions in Midwood as they live north of 60th Street. People living south of 60th Street are part of a totally different community that do not have that institutional connection that Borough Park has with Midwood. Both Bay Ridge Avenue and Bay Ridge Parkway buses have served communities that are south of west of Stillwell Avenue as that is where the interests were for many years. While the communities have changed, the institutions are not there that would justify the extension of either the B/2  or B/31.

My point about communities also involves the change to the B/9 to replace the B/41 to Bergen Beach. The B/9 needs the connection to Kings Plaza where riders transfer to the Q/35 as again it is the institutions in Belle Harbor and Neponsit. This does not exist in Bergen Beach as the community needs the connection to the Flatbush/Nostrand Station and the B/9 does absolutely nothing for them. Eliminating the B/41 Bergen Beach branch does nothing except to help the dollar vans.

Drawing straight lines and making them into bus routes does not work and has not worked for as long as can remember and I am going back close to 45 years.  Buses work best when the routes connect the institutions and places where the people need and offer quality, dependable service which encourages ridership. Sometimes the best thing for those who make the decisions is to get out of their offices where they can enjoy their view of New York Harbor and ride the buses, speak to the workers and the passengers. Until the rest of the MTA follows  Mr. Byford's example, the system will not change.

You are incorrect again. The proposed 65th Street route is not based on the gap between the B9 and B64 which is only nine blocks for the Bay Ridge Avenue portion. It is based on the gap between the B9 and the B4 which is 15 blocks. 

The purpose of extending the B2 or B31 westbound to make them more than a single purpose route of taking passengers to and from the subway for four hours a day. The rest of the time those buses are virtually empty. If they connected additional neighborhoods, there would be more of a reason for their use during middays, evenings and weekends which is much more than just four hours a day. 

You are implying that there is no need to connect Marine Park and Gerritsen Beach to any other neighborhoods because they have nothing in common with other neighborhoods so there is little travel between them by bus. Part of the reason there is little travel between them is because three buses or indirect subway travel through Downtown Brooklyn is required to make those trips so consequently auto use in those neighborhoods is very high.

May I remind you that prior to 1978, I bet you would have made the same arguments against the B1 stating there is no need for a bus from Brighton Beach to Bensonhurst or Bay Ridge because those neighborhoods have little in common and there is little travel between them. That also was due the fact that three, four or five buses or long walks were required. That all changed by making a one bus trip possible and turning many three and four bus trips into two bus trips. Now those neighborhoods do have something in common and there is much travel between them.

Also prior to 1978, there was little travel by public transit between Borough Park and Midwood because three buses were required. The B11 extension changed the entire complexion of Midwood turning into a primarily Orthodox Jewish neighborhood. 

So available public transportation has a lot to do with the number of trips between neighborhoods.

i disagree that  Bergen Beach has no need to get to Avenue N. Yes the reason they use the Flatbush Nostrand Station is because they have no other choice if they live between Avenues J and Avenue M. How do you know they wouldn’t prefer the Brighton Line if that choice were available to them? You don’t. I am not saying that a connection to Flatbush Avenue should be completely severed. Perhaps rush hour service should be maintained. But I see no reason to keep the connection at other times. 

You also have to consider that if the B9 were extended, it is not only Bergen Beach residents and those going there who would use it. It would also make the B9 a usable route to residents of East Flatbush and those traveling there by providing a connection to the B46. Currently and in the past B46 riders cannot use the B9 without taking three buses and perhaps paying double fare which most riders will not do. 

I am not saying that a grid system works in all instances, but in this case and many cases it does. That does not mean the MTA should get carried away and not make exceptions. You remember we both opposed straightening the B36 to create an unnecessary walk to the Shedpshead Bay Station. 

But which do you prefer, a B36 along Ave is Z and a B4 along Neptune/ Edmond, or the pre-1978 Neptune /Z B36 and the Ave Z / Emmons route? Spaghetti like routes like that are confusing, make connections difficult and discourage occasional riders not intimately familiar with the routes which is why I changed it.

The only thing I agree with on here is the planners need to get out more and ride the buses and talk to passengers. They only do that now after they design the routes, then they talk to passengers so they can select stateme to publicize that support their pre-drawban conclusions.

if you don’t want to discuss this intelligently, I can understand a quick statement of dissmissal like you did this with my other comment.

5 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

I stand by my statements that I posted here.

Even though you are incorrect regarding when Bay Ridge Avenue service was reduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

The problem is turning it on its western end. I see two possibilities:

  1. Coney Island Avenue, serving Midwood via Brooklyn College on Bedford Avenue.
  2. Avenue H and Nostrand Avenue (Brooklyn College).
     

My plan presumed that operationally, it had to be Ulmer Park, since as currently configured, Spring Creek probably doesn't have room. But then one has to realize that how buses are parked at Spring Creek is an outlier at the MTA...with parking spaces like a typical parking lot, as opposed to tracks. This could be out of Spring Creek if the configuration is changed to a track configuration.

How about splitting the B6 into:

* Your "B5" - except service is branched to still running to New Lots (3) ... In other words, EB buses would terminate either in [New Lots] or [Spring Creek] 
* A B6 that does Bensonhurst - Flatlands (or whatever you consider Av H/Utica to be)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not like posting the comments listed below but sometimes it is necessary to remind a fellow member of what the purpose of the forum is to all of us who are interested in the subject

The purpose of this forum is for the exchange of ideas and views on various subjects. When I disagree with a person, I will use respectful terms such as "I disagree for the following reasons" or "this is my opinion" and leave it at that. I do not believe in bringing up past history or past battles that have been fought as all it does is create more problems and detracts from the original purpose of this forum. This is why when I post anything here or when I respond to anything on the internet,  I watch what I write as the use of the wrong words can quickly escalate into something that becomes a flame war. This is the way I was taught when I started working with the internet many years ago.

That said, i have read the last couple of posts concerning my comments on this thread and it seems the Brooklyn Bus is at it again  trying to ignite a flame  war like he had with me a couple of months ago. Let me state quite emphatically,  I have no plans to get involved in a flame war again with him  as it detracts from the original purpose of this forum. This is not the proper place for such a battle as it defeats the purpose of this forum which is the exchange of  different views on various topics. I welcome the views of members who disagree with me and I look forward to having a meaningful discussion  provided that we are respectful of one another's views. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

How about splitting the B6 into:

* Your "B5" - except service is branched to still running to New Lots (3) ... In other words, EB buses would terminate either in [New Lots] or [Spring Creek] 
* A B6 that does Bensonhurst - Flatlands (or whatever you consider Av H/Utica to be)

LMAO... I though you wrote BS in quotes instead of B5. :lol:

  • LMAO! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

I do not like posting the comments listed below but sometimes it is necessary to remind a fellow member of what the purpose of the forum is to all of us who are interested in the subject

The purpose of this forum is for the exchange of ideas and views on various subjects. When I disagree with a person, I will use respectful terms such as "I disagree for the following reasons" or "this is my opinion" and leave it at that. I do not believe in bringing up past history or past battles that have been fought as all it does is create more problems and detracts from the original purpose of this forum. This is why when I post anything here or when I respond to anything on the internet,  I watch what I write as the use of the wrong words can quickly escalate into something that becomes a flame war. This is the way I was taught when I started working with the internet many years ago.

That said, i have read the last couple of posts concerning my comments on this thread and it seems the Brooklyn Bus is at it again  trying to ignite a flame  war like he had with me a couple of months ago. Let me state quite emphatically,  I have no plans to get involved in a flame war again with him  as it detracts from the original purpose of this forum. This is not the proper place for such a battle as it defeats the purpose of this forum which is the exchange of  different views on various topics. I welcome the views of members who disagree with me and I look forward to having a meaningful discussion  provided that we are respectful of one another's views. 

 

I certainly have no interest in having a flame war with anyone. I only want to have  telligent discussions. You on the other hand seem to prefer to state your opinions and leave it at that even when you use incorrect facts as you did with Bay Ridge Avenue headways.

Then you made an emphatic statement that a grid system just doesn’t work by saying you shouldn’t draw straight lines on a map. I tried to explain that sometimes a grid system works and other times it doesn’t, giving you some examples, but you wouldn’t engage in further conversation. I also explained that many times there is little travel by public transportation between two neighborhoods because the places are difficult to get to which needs to be corrected, not because there is no need as you seem to conclude whenever there is little travel between neighborhoods. I think I have more experience than you do as a bus planner.

I know we used to once get along, once sending each other private messages, so I do not know what happened that you took such a dislike to me and now call my willingness to converse with you wanting a flame war. But as I said that is fine if you want to have nothing to do with me, there are many people here who do want intelligent conversations. But I will continue to challenge any conclusions you come to that I do not believe are not fact based.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

 I welcome the views of members who disagree with me and I look forward to having a meaningful discussion provided that we are respectful of one another's views.

This part of it goes past a difference of opinion though....

You said "The argument that 65th Street should have a bus is based on the theory that there is a big gap between the bus routes between the B/9 and the B/64.".... That's just not true; at best, it's misleading... Such an assessment overlooks the fact that the B64 turns down to serve 13th av - which means you have nothing (as far as bus service goes) inside the boundaries of 60th st, 13th av, Bay Ridge Pkwy, and the B8 on 18th av.... That's the gap that's proposers are aiming to address - and FWIW, it's one of the main reasons the B9 gets as packed as it does....

On 1/2/2019 at 3:24 PM, Around the Horn said:

Ah yes, lets continue to throw Allan's ideas on the wall until something sticks...

The B66 proposal doesn't make trips for current B64 riders better, in fact it makes trips for them worst because it misses the part of Bay Ridge that the B64 currently suerves and subjects them to 8th Avenue, 86th Street, 4th Avenue and 92nd Street traffic. That route would be a contender for slowest and lowest on time performance in the city. The bunching during peak periods would be insane. 

I respect Allan and what he's done for Brooklyn bus service but I don't agree with this change at all.

I agree with a B2 extension along 65th/Av P but it shouldn't be at the expense of the B64 and should go straight down 65th and end at NYU Langone with the B11.

To be perfectly honest, I always wondered how the old B64 would've fared if it "backdoored" its way to 86th/4th (meaning, turning left on 14th, to go on to serve the VA hosp., etc., instead of turning right on 14th to make its way to run along 86th the way it used to)..... With that said, I still wouldn't have combined such a route with the B70....

Quite sure this has to do with the demographical change in SW Brooklyn, but the narrative over the course of 20 years or so went from *the route potentially being on the chopping block* to a route that's holding its own (usage-wise).... It's one of the few routes these days in this borough that's seeing ridership increases as it is - despite the headache 8th av is traffic-wise.....

10 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

LMAO... I though you wrote BS in quotes instead of B5. :lol:

:lol:

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

This part of it goes past a difference of opinion though....

You said "The argument that 65th Street should have a bus is based on the theory that there is a big gap between the bus routes between the B/9 and the B/64.".... That's just not true; at best, it's misleading... Such an assessment overlooks the fact that the B64 turns down to serve 13th av - which means you have nothing (as far as bus service goes) inside the boundaries of 60th st, 13th av, Bay Ridge Pkwy, and the B8 on 18th av.... That's the gap that's proposers are aiming to address - and FWIW, it's one of the main reasons the B9 gets as packed as it does....

To be perfectly honest, I always wondered how the old B64 would've fared if it "backdoored" its way to 86th/4th (meaning, turning left on 14th, to go on to serve the VA hosp., etc., instead of turning right on 14th to make its way to run along 86th the way it used to)..... With that said, I still wouldn't have combined such a route with the B70....

Quite sure this has to do with the demographical change in SW Brooklyn, but the narrative over the course of 20 years or so went from *the route potentially being on the chopping block* to a route that's holding its own (usage-wise).... It's one of the few routes these days in this borough that's seeing ridership increases as it is - despite the headache 8th av is traffic-wise.....

:lol:

Yes, the gap between 60th and (75 St as locals call it) was another one if his inaccuracies I pointed out, but he dismissed that also as a discussion he didn’t want to enter. Correction for you or typo. You meant turning right on13th Avenue. 

And as far as sending the B64 to the VA hospital that was also part of my 1978 proposal that was not accepted. I proposed it to go around to Poly Place, left on 92 Street right on Fourth Avenue, right on 86 Street, terminate there, and right on 86 Street and right on Seventh Avenue back to the VA. I didn’t propose and combination with the B70. As I stated to Around the Horn, the additional traffic on 8th Avenue in the last ten or 15 years needs to be considered in determining if such a combination is still a good idea or would negatively impact too much on Bath Ave service. I also combined B8 and B64 services on Cropsey in 1978 as I did in 2003 and 2006.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.