Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Q43LTD]

I don't feel like multi quoting, so here goes. I said I was considering breaking up the B43 and 47, but since there's little to no complaints about them, I'll leave them alone. Since the 82 is broken up, I'll cut back the 50 to Starrett and send the 83 back out there. As for my B5, I sent it to Kings Plaza since there's an "untapped market" and probably better than extending the B36 to KP. Your B5 isn't bad either. I don't understand why Gleason has so many routes. I kind of have an idea on how to restructure each Brooklyn division depot. If the B12 or 40 still served eastern Brooklyn, I would've sent one of them to Queens, in the process cutting back the Q7. The B14 to Ozone Park isn't bad either. I like GC's idea of full fledged Kings Highway route. Coney Island to Ocean Hill. Another untapped market. However, I'm kind of on the fence about making the Q35 closed door in Brooklyn.

Edited November 27, 2012 by Q43LTD

[qjtransitmaster]

Getting them to actually reverse a erroneous decision they make is almost next to impossible though. I've been at it with getting them to restore that damn M104 segment of the U.N and I've been speaking with various politicians about it and they tell me that the won't move on the issue despite petitions being signed with thousands of signatures, so I suggested looking into a lawsuit if possible citing ADA concerns since many seniors and disabled folks esp. have complained to force them to restore the M104 back to the U.N. I'm not done yet. I've got to explore a few more options on that front...

 

I think your idea is a good one though and rest assured that if their hand is forced enough they may just reconsider.

 

And they say I am not realistic. get over it Most M104s I see by 42nd are empty give it a rest there is no need to make a reliable route UNRELIABLE when there is the simple solution of adding M42s. Or even better use M50. question How many ADA riders were on M104 beyond 42nd street southbound that did not board at 42nd. Lawsuit really when you have alternatives and M104 has become more reliable since the truncation CMON MAN. A lawsuit so you can slow down a bus and ruin it's reliability good cause.

I don't mean to keep going off topic, but I wanted the M6 and 98 restored as well

 

ok but you sure M6 is needed M5 is doing fine. M98 runs so infrequent I am surprised it has ridership left. Edited November 27, 2012 by qjtransitmaster

[Q43LTD]

And they say I am not realistic. get over it Most M104s I see by 42nd are empty give it a rest there is no need to make a reliable route UNRELIABLE when there is the simple solution of adding M42s. Or even better use M50. question How many ADA riders were on M104 beyond 42nd street southbound that did not board at 42nd. Lawsuit really when you have alternatives and M104 has become more reliable since the truncation CMON MAN. A lawsuit so you can slow down a bus and ruin it's reliability good cause.

ok but you sure M6 is needed M5 is doing fine. M98 runs so infrequent I am surprised it has ridership left.

 

Can we go back to Brooklyn please?

[qjtransitmaster]

Can we go back to Brooklyn please?

 

yeah yes we can what will a linden blvd route do I call it B33 JFK to windsor terr or kensington via linden blvd stopping at

 

• Eldert la

• postal facility(shift times only limited trips)

• fountain

• Ashford st

• penn ave

• van siclen ave

• mother gaston

• brookdale hospital

• remsen and kings hwy

 

Then via remsen to winthrop then ocean ave to caton ave to church subway ends. Windsor terr trips via prospect park sw to 15th street prospect park subway.

 

[Q43LTD]

yeah yes we can what will a linden blvd route do I call it B33 JFK to windsor terr or kensington via linden blvd stopping at

 

• Eldert la

• postal facility(shift times only limited trips)

• fountain

• Ashford st

• penn ave

• van siclen ave

• mother gaston

• brookdale hospital

• remsen and kings hwy

 

Then via remsen to winthrop then ocean ave to caton ave to church subway ends. Windsor terr trips via prospect park sw to 15th street prospect park subway.

 

 

You do know Winthrop ends at Flatbush, right?

Edited November 27, 2012 by Q43LTD

[B35 via Church]

As for my B5, I sent it to Kings Plaza since there's an "untapped market" and probably better than extending the B36 to KP.

Yeah, I figure that's what you were trying to accomplish.....

I don't side with any idea involving running buses between CI & kings plz, so whichever solution is better, to me is moot.....

 

 

I like GC's idea of full fledged Kings Highway route. Coney Island to Ocean Hill. Another untapped market. However, I'm kind of on the fence about making the Q35 closed door in Brooklyn.

Considering the usage of the B7, I think a route running the length of kings hwy. is a ridiculous waste of mileage & resources..... It would be like running a route along the length of linden blvd in Brooklyn...... Your B5 even makes more sense.

 

As far as Untapped? I don't agree.... Don't get the sense that service from CI to Ocean Hill (or vice versa) is warranted, or would flourish....

 

 

Yeah I also agree there's no need to send the B5 (in his plan) down to KP since a person has the B2 which would be 'more direct'. That's an interesting idea to send it up to the junction.

{I would've figured they could just merge it with the B7 since the B7 runs part time to 16th st. That B5 could then be a 'full length' Kings Highway line.}

 

Q35 should then be drop offs n/b and pickups s/b focusing mainly on the Queens end as opposed to a B41 backup/supplement line.

I'm not quite sure what you mean (w/ the B7 statement in brackets), but, not a good idea to have a route run the length of kings hwy.... In a general sense, patrons in SW Brooklyn wouldn't ride it past flatbush (I really wanna say nostrand) & patrons in nabe's like ocean hill, bed stuy, and here in east f'bush wouldn't ride it past CI av.....

 

As far as your Q35 suggestion, I'm inclined to side with you on that...

No n/b pickups north of that toys r' us & No s/b dropoffs north of kings plz.....

[Q43LTD]

In GC's defense, he's thinking of 95 when the 5 should've merged with the 7, not the 50. Does Brooklyn have too few north south routes or crosstowns?

[B35 via Church]

yeah yes we can what will a linden blvd route do I call it B33 JFK to windsor terr or kensington via linden blvd stopping at

• Eldert la

• postal facility(shift times only limited trips)

• fountain

• Ashford st

• penn ave

• van siclen ave

• mother gaston

• brookdale hospital

• remsen and kings hwy

 

Then via remsen to winthrop then ocean ave to caton ave to church subway ends. Windsor terr trips via prospect park sw to 15th street prospect park subway.

 

Just saw this....

 

Looking at those stops & the areas you're running such a route in, I'd say this route would run pretty dam empty for most of the day (including during rush hrs).... Too indirect.... Also, people like to ignore demographics, but that is a small factor in determining where bus routes should go, too..... Who in kensington or windsor terrace would take this route???

 

 

 

In GC's defense, he's thinking of 95 when the 5 should've merged with the 7, not the 50. Does Brooklyn have too few north south routes or crosstowns?

 

Yes, that part of it I get... a B5 & B7 merger would've meant a route running clear up kings hwy (that is what I didn't/don't agree with; the idea of a route running clear up kings hwy)....

 

As for your question, I'll put it like this... the network in the more northern part of the borough is much less broken than that of the more southern part of the borough..... I'd venture to say brooklyn (in general) could possibly benefit from more east-west routes over more north-south routes though.... IMO though, that would involve re-drawing the entire network....

Edited November 27, 2012 by B35 via Church

[Q43LTD]

I don't think it needs to be redrawn just restructured. Like Queens

[B35 via Church]

I don't think it needs to be redrawn just restructured. Like Queens

 

To me, those are interchangable terms (if I'm restructuring the entire network, I'm redrawing the routes), but nonetheless, you get the idea.....

[Grand Concourse]

When I made the brackets, it was more of an unrelated point, but something I still think could've been done as a sort of north-south crosstown line as Q43 noted. Well, I'm sure a B5-7 merger won't be any different from what the B82 is now, but like the train no person rides the line end to end (I would think most people gets off in Manhattan). So if one part of the line empties out at the midpoint (flatbush av), then so be it. It's just empty and picks up a new batch of riders at FB av and continues as normal. The minor benefit is avoiding the segment where the B82 now has to run on FB av to turn onto Flatlands from Kings Highway. That'd be the only good thing from that split. again, yes, not really a good enough reason, but the B82 as a whole needs to be changed. Flatlands from FB av to Utica is pointless. It runs thru a residential area were at best a handful of people gets off b/w those 2 points. So another reason to change the 'B50' portion of the line.

 

Now when you said for the B5 to go north up to the Junction, your idea made more sense and thus I pretty much dropped the idea of the B5-7 merge and would leave them separate lines. Although, I was wondering if the current B82 could be kept on Kings Highway past FB and merge onto Av H. That way eliminate the entire Flatlands segment b/w Ralph and FB. I just dunno what the ridership is like on Flatlands b/w Utica and Ralph.

Edited November 27, 2012 by Grand Concourse

[qjtransitmaster]

You do know Winthrop ends at Flatbush, right?

it will use albany to clarkson ave Linden it gets fed from other routes. Like a regional.

 

 

@b35 its a faster crosstown than B35 and less delay prone than B35. But you did give me an idea an additional stop at the new lots station and at rockaway ave. Another stop for mother gaston @ new lots for B35.

 

 

This sets up B16 streamlining and B69 extension or B23 return but I am not decided on which yet.

Edited November 27, 2012 by qjtransitmaster

[checkmatechamp13]

Now when you said for the B5 to go north up to the Junction, your idea made more sense and thus I pretty much dropped the idea of the B5-7 merge and would leave them separate lines. Although, I was wondering if the current B82 could be kept on Kings Highway past FB and merge onto Av H. That way eliminate the entire Flatlands segment b/w Ralph and FB. I just dunno what the ridership is like on Flatlands b/w Utica and Ralph.

I think you'd be better off having the B82 take Kings Highway-Avenue N-Flatlands (eastbound) and Flatlands-Avenue M-Kings Highway westbound. While there is a gap over by Avenue J that it would somewhat serve, I think you'd be better off creating a seperate route for that portion.

Though now that I think about it, you could have it take Kings Highway-Avenue J-Flatlands, but I still think you're better off with a seperate route for that area.

[Threxx]

B82 splits huh?

 

Well, in my complete S. Brooklyn bus plan, I combine the B2 and B100 as a new B30 route, and then extend that and the B31 to Coney Island to replace the Western section of the B82, which would be truncated to Midwood.

 

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=213458373195564989412.0004c1f846c76c1e4b05b&msa=0

[B35 via Church]

When I made the brackets, it was more of an unrelated point, but something I still think could've been done as a sort of north-south crosstown line as Q43 noted. Well, I'm sure a B5-7 merger won't be any different from what the B82 is now, but like the train no person rides the line end to end (I would think most people gets off in Manhattan). So if one part of the line empties out at the midpoint (flatbush av), then so be it. It's just empty and picks up a new batch of riders at FB av and continues as normal. The minor benefit is avoiding the segment where the B82 now has to run on FB av to turn onto Flatlands from Kings Highway. That'd be the only good thing from that split. again, yes, not really a good enough reason, but the B82 as a whole needs to be changed. Flatlands from FB av to Utica is pointless. It runs thru a residential area were at best a handful of people gets off b/w those 2 points. So another reason to change the 'B50' portion of the line.

 

Now when you said for the B5 to go north up to the Junction, your idea made more sense and thus I pretty much dropped the idea of the B5-7 merge and would leave them separate lines. Although, I was wondering if the current B82 could be kept on Kings Highway past FB and merge onto Av H. That way eliminate the entire Flatlands segment b/w Ralph and FB. I just dunno what the ridership is like on Flatlands b/w Utica and Ralph.

 

I saw your post last night & was gonna reply specifically to the part in bold when I got back to it in the morning (which would be, right now).... But I see since then, you added that 2nd paragraph - So now that you dropped the idea of merging the old 5 & 7, there's no need for me to say what I was gonna say about that particular part of your post.....

 

While minor, I actually have the "B50" (eastern B82 split) running along kings hwy until Av K, where it would turn off (and parallel the BM1 for a short stint) until it reaches back to flatlands & would continue on from there.... So someone else sees how useless that short stint is along flatlands.... I also think that turn onto flatbush, off flatlands av, to get to kings hwy is a bit of a time waste.... So those are two reasons I considered suggesting such a change.....

 

Having the B82 run on kings hwy. to av H would leave you with too big of a service gap (not to mention paralleling even more of the B6)... The next east-west local bus along Utica, south of 'H, would be all the way down to av N (the B41 veterans branch)..... Flatlands av b/w utica & ralph isn't really utilized all that much either, but it aint any worse than the segment b/w flatbush & utica.... So east of utica, I would retain that portion of the route.....

 

^^ Needless to say, I do see what you're getting at though; you just might attract a couple more riders on the 82 if you had it stop at utica/ 'H, heading towards commercial kings hwy, etc..... of course, utica & H would resemble that EB stop at flatlands/ralph (opposite south shore HS) w/ all them dam ppl. that wait at that stop....

[Grand Concourse]

Interesting, I think Av K could work, as at least people are used to the BM1 and it would be closer if Flatlands were to be dropped. Yeah, I've rode that stretch for a few times and it's almost always the same deal no matter if it's the rush hours or daytime. Handful of people getting off and mainly the main 'crowds' are at the ends: Flatbush and Utica. They can shift the B82 to another street and it'd be the same deal.

I think you'd be better off having the B82 take Kings Highway-Avenue N-Flatlands (eastbound) and Flatlands-Avenue M-Kings Highway westbound. While there is a gap over by Avenue J that it would somewhat serve, I think you'd be better off creating a seperate route for that portion.

Though now that I think about it, you could have it take Kings Highway-Avenue J-Flatlands, but I still think you're better off with a seperate route for that area.

 

I wasn't sure about the eastbound idea, but I always thought the westbound B82 could've done just that, stay on Flatlands and shift onto Av M and then reenter KH at that circle. Of course it sucks for ppl at the FB-KH corners, but the walk is just one big or 2 small blocks away on Flatlands. Cutting out the FB av turn would at least cut out one choke point.

Not too sure about the Av J idea though. I think Av K might be a bit better. (ie: I dunno if the residents on Av J would be happy seeing bus traffic there when there hasn't been any before.)

B82 splits huh?

 

Well, in my complete S. Brooklyn bus plan, I combine the B2 and B100 as a new B30 route, and then extend that and the B31 to Coney Island to replace the Western section of the B82, which would be truncated to Midwood.

 

https://maps.google....6c1e4b05b&msa=0

 

If you combine the B2 and B100, which route would be left in its place? Ie: west of Flatbush, which route would it resemble more. I don't see the need to extend the B31. It's more like a subway 'ferry'. It takes people from Gerritsen av to the subway, similar to the B74 serving Sea Gate. Edited November 27, 2012 by Grand Concourse

[kingal11234]

Yeah I also agree there's no need to send the B5 (in his plan) down to KP since a person has the B2 which would be 'more direct'. That's an interesting idea to send it up to the junction. {I would've figured they could just merge it with the B7 since the B7 runs part time to 16th st. That B5 could then be a 'full length' Kings Highway line.} Q35 should then be drop offs n/b and pickups s/b focusing mainly on the Queens end as opposed to a B41 backup/supplement line.

 

I don't feel like multi quoting, so here goes. I said I was considering breaking up the B43 and 47, but since there's little to no complaints about them, I'll leave them alone. Since the 82 is broken up, I'll cut back the 50 to Starrett and send the 83 back out there. As for my B5, I sent it to Kings Plaza since there's an "untapped market" and probably better than extending the B36 to KP. Your B5 isn't bad either. I don't understand why Gleason has so many routes. I kind of have an idea on how to restructure each Brooklyn division depot. If the B12 or 40 still served eastern Brooklyn, I would've sent one of them to Queens, in the process cutting back the Q7. The B14 to Ozone Park isn't bad either. I like GC's idea of full fledged Kings Highway route. Coney Island to Ocean Hill. Another untapped market. However, I'm kind of on the fence about making the Q35 closed door in Brooklyn.

 

The B82 should be left alone except an extension to Gateway Center Mall. The B14 should be combined with the old B71 route until it gets to court st/smith st from there it should go to lorraine st and end at Ikea. The Q35 route needs to be left alone.

[Threxx]

The B82 should be left alone except an extension to Gateway Center Mall. The B14 should be combined with the old B71 route until it gets to court st/smith st from there it should go to lorraine st and end at Ikea. The Q35 route needs to be left alone.

 

 

Have you been on the B14? That route has reliability issues as is. We don't need to make it an incarnation of the B6, especially with the subway right under Eastern Parkway.

 

If you combine the B2 and B100, which route would be left in its place? Ie: west of Flatbush, which route would it resemble more. I don't see the need to extend the B31. It's more like a subway 'ferry'. It takes people from Gerritsen av to the subway, similar to the B74 serving Sea Gate.

 

 

The map explains that it would be one way on each of the former routes (eastbound on Avenue R, westbound on Fillmore). As for the B31, 3/4 of the riders there would likely support the extension. Gerritsen Beach riders may protest, but they don't make up the majority of ridership, so they could switch to the BM4, which would have improved service as well.

 

As for this Avenue J/K stuff, I had a previous proposal to reroute the current B49 to Rockaway Parkway via Avenue J, and have a new route (w/proper LTD service) run from WBP to Manhattan Beach. However, I think an extended B11 would do the trick, even though it has bunching problems. Maybe a shortturn at the Junction could help to keep things from deteriorating too much, but both are better, IMO than creating a new route, which would be kinda short to be useful.

 

(Just a minor note, since 2013 is coming and this thread isn't likely to die anytime soon, 2012 should be removed from the title)

Edited November 27, 2012 by Threxx

[aemoreira81]

Speaking of the B14---I would propose one minor route change to it...on the westbound trip, buses should use Elderts Lane on the east side of the Pitkin Yard instead of Lincoln Avenue on the west side to maintain a uniform bidirectional service area. Also, the Q8 should remain on Pitkin to Fountain Avenue westbound to Gateway Mall, and then travel down Fountain Avenue, to maintain a uniform coverage area on that route. (The B13 covers the area in between.)

[Threxx]

Speaking of the B14---I would propose one minor route change to it...on the westbound trip, buses should use Elderts Lane on the east side of the Pitkin Yard instead of Lincoln Avenue on the west side to maintain a uniform bidirectional service area. Also, the Q8 should remain on Pitkin to Fountain Avenue westbound to Gateway Mall, and then travel down Fountain Avenue, to maintain a uniform coverage area on that route. (The B13 covers the area in between.)

 

 

The B14 needs to keep that route to maintain that wide coverage area, or else you'd inconvenience riders. I agree on the Q8 portion, though.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The B14 needs to keep that route to maintain that wide coverage area, or else you'd inconvenience riders. I agree on the Q8 portion, though.

 

You and your coverage argument... If we ever have routes providing door to door service I'll thank you.

[checkmatechamp13]

Delete.

Edited November 28, 2012 by checkmatechamp13

[Threxx]

You and your coverage argument... If we ever have routes providing door to door service I'll thank you.

 

 

Very funny... you and your impatience.

[checkmatechamp13]

Not too sure about the Av J idea though. I think Av K might be a bit better. (ie: I dunno if the residents on Av J would be happy seeing bus traffic there when there hasn't been any before.)

 

 

Yeah, you're right. Avenue K is better. Plus, it would shift back onto Flatlands before it hits Utica (I don't know if that really helps with anything, but whatever)

 

If you combine the B2 and B100, which route would be left in its place? Ie: west of Flatbush, which route would it resemble more. I don't see the need to extend the B31. It's more like a subway 'ferry'. It takes people from Gerritsen av to the subway, similar to the B74 serving Sea Gate.

 

 

The thing is that sometimes, subway feeder routes don't get a lot of ridership outside of rush hour (of course, I say "sometimes" because there are a lot of ones that do). Weekend ridership on the B31 is fairly low, and maybe the fact that it would allow people to access more shopping further west would boost ridership.

 

In any case, for Threxx's plan, I don't think all 3 routes are needed on Kings Highway. I would send the B31 across Avenue P, 65th Street, and Bay Ridge Avenue (basically what Threxx's B5 is trying to cover), and leave the B2 (or in this case, B30/31) covering Kings Highway.

 

The map explains that it would be one way on each of the former routes (eastbound on Avenue R, westbound on Fillmore). As for the B31, 3/4 of the riders there would likely support the extension. Gerritsen Beach riders may protest, but they don't make up the majority of ridership, so they could switch to the BM4, which would have improved service as well.

 

 

Remember what BrooklynBus said before about "double feeding". You want to try and get riders from both sides of the route, and the B100 spends a portion of its route on Fillmore alongside a park. You'd be better off having it use the B2 route, because it's more centralized.

 

As for this Avenue J/K stuff, I had a previous proposal to reroute the current B49 to Rockaway Parkway via Avenue J, and have a new route (w/proper LTD service) run from WBP to Manhattan Beach. However, I think an extended B11 would do the trick, even though it has bunching problems. Maybe a shortturn at the Junction could help to keep things from deteriorating too much, but both are better, IMO than creating a new route, which would be kinda short to be useful.

 

 

The reason bunching was brought up was because it would affect the riders you're trying to serve along Avenue J, not because it would really affect reliability in Borough Park. Avenue J isn't that congested, so reliability for westbound passengers wouldn't be affected. The problem is that going eastbound, riders waiting at Flatbush Avenue would have to deal with delays in Borough Park.

 

Speaking of the B14---I would propose one minor route change to it...on the westbound trip, buses should use Elderts Lane on the east side of the Pitkin Yard instead of Lincoln Avenue on the west side to maintain a uniform bidirectional service area. Also, the Q8 should remain on Pitkin to Fountain Avenue westbound to Gateway Mall, and then travel down Fountain Avenue, to maintain a uniform coverage area on that route. (The B13 covers the area in between.)

 

 

Not that it really makes a difference, but why does the B14 use Drew Street instead of Eldert Lane in that area? It adds two extra turns to the route, and takes it down a residential street. Is it to try and serve the Central Brooklyn Medical Center?

[Threxx]

In any case, for Threxx's plan, I don't think all 3 routes are needed on Kings Highway. I would send the B31 across Avenue P, 65th Street, and Bay Ridge Avenue (basically what Threxx's B5 is trying to cover), and leave the B2 (or in this case, B30/31) covering Kings Highway.

 

 

What three routes? It'd be two. The frequencies would be split between the two routes (each with 12-14 minute frequencies, combining to 6-7 minutes.)

 

As for the B11, it would affect Borough Park riders, as buses would take longer to reach Borough Park. That's why shortturns would be implemented. I don't know the history behind the B14 route, probably another historical thing...

 

(Dude, you're double posting)

Edited November 27, 2012 by Threxx