Future ENY OP Posted December 24, 2016 Share #4301 Posted December 24, 2016 Let's all just leave the B35 as is... Now back to our B80 LTD again. If the route eventually comes to life, about how many daily riders would it serve? (Just give a rough estimate) If marketed correctly. Ridership could be as similar as the B41/B44/B82. If we talking #'s 25K and better to start off. The service needs to be outstanding so that it can represent it's counterparts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 24, 2016 Share #4302 Posted December 24, 2016 Essentially, I could take up a B47 discussion to Ridgewood. Now the question is where do your terminate or possibly would be a Grand Avenue vs Fresh Pond all depending on the terminal. I'm all for a Ridgewood Terminal with this line. As much as we talked about JFK within the last 2 weeks. However, it is noted that we brought an important issue in Brooklyn especially in Central, Southeast Brooklyn into East New York. The other bus lines formentioned carry a decent amount. However, at the end of everything things just simply need to connect with the Brooklyn Transportation Network. I like the idea of possibly extending the B20 to Lefferts Boulevard- Airtrain. - A split of the B47 (where the northern portion would run to Ridgewood) would end with the B52.... As far as depot assignments, run the southern portion of the B47 out of FLA & the northern portion to Ridgewood, out of Grand.... - With the B20, I never cared for how "secondary" that route is, after it serves the Penn-Wortman houses due east.... Also never really cared for the Brooklyn GMF being a terminal (which is one of a few reasons I have the B14 running to Rockaway Blvd )... Couple that with the fact that I believe the B15 needs a bit more service to JFK, and there you go..... Things are so bad with the B20 (and on the up & up with the B83), that you have some in this community that think the 20 should be axed outright for a B83 Penn av route via the length of Penn... I wouldn't go that far with it (although I do think the B83 should run via the length of Penn)..... Cutting the B20 outright would have that (population) dense area around the Pink Houses & Cypress Houses much too dependent on the B15... That would actually give the MTA reason to run even more Drew st short turns (which in turn, meaning run less service to JFK) than they do now.... My gripe with the B20 though is moreso one of uselessness on the Ridgewood end than on the Spring Creek end..... The B13 got Fresh Pond (rd) on lock up there (in terms of service to Brooklyn); the 20 is virtually useless north of Myrtle; the B13 doesn't need help b/w Myrtle & Forest , that's for sure)..... To be perfectly honest, if it weren't for coverage (b/w Myrtle & Broadway), I would cut the B20 back to B'way Junction in its entirety - either that, or end it w/ the B7..... So as it goes, I have the B20 running b/w Myrtle/Decatur & Lefferts AIRTrain.... - and finally.... Yes, the aforementioned lines carry a decent amount, but I value specificity over vagueness when I'm trying to analyze something..... Yes, things need to connect better within the bus network - and a large part of the problem is the lack of progressive thinking... Having a mature (stealing Jubai's term for a second) network is no excuse for maintaining status quo; there eventually comes a point & time when antiquation becomes a factor - Especially when you have neighborhoods (and neighborhoods carved from neighborhoods) & the people that reside in them, ever so changing.... Yes, increasing traffic is a problem throughout the city, but by no means should that hinder progression.... Some would call it living in a time warp.... However you slice it, this disparate treatment of the buses & subways better stop, and fast.... Can't keep hiding behind the coattails of being a 24/7 public transportation system for too long, before you have outsiders really start honing in on just how bad/mismanaged our system really is.... Us natives already know what's up; some more than others..... .....And then there's naivete/MTA apologists, and staunch anti's (public transportation) that could give two fux, around & about..... Hell, I'll stop here for now.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 24, 2016 Share #4303 Posted December 24, 2016 If marketed correctly. Ridership could be as similar as the B41/B44/B82. If we talking #'s 25K and better to start off. The service needs to be outstanding so that it can represent it's counterparts. Even if marketed correctly, all ducks put in their rows, and all cylinders fired, 25k is still a tall order for (one) market that's already established (B82 usage b/w Canarsie & Midwood).... You would practically have to have every single person abandon the B82/LTD, on top of considering the newfound latent ridership that would come from any sect of patrons along/around the route (and xfers from off the Brighton) wishing to take it to Spring Creek or JFK, to see 25k/day..... If the market the old B50 (now B82) never existed, then we could talk about 25, maybe even 30k/day..... To start, I'd say M60 level ridership (which is damn good for an inaugural route).... After like 10-15 years, maybe it'd see 25k.... Max. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future ENY OP Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4304 Posted December 25, 2016 Even if marketed correctly, all ducks put in their rows, and all cylinders fired, 25k is still a tall order for (one) market that's already established (B82 usage b/w Canarsie & Midwood).... You would practically have to have every single person abandon the B82/LTD, on top of considering the newfound latent ridership that would come from any sect of patrons along/around the route (and xfers from off the Brighton) wishing to take it to Spring Creek or JFK, to see 25k/day..... If the market the old B50 (now B82) never existed, then we could talk about 25, maybe even 30k/day..... To start, I'd say M60 level ridership (which is damn good for an inaugural route).... After like 10-15 years, maybe it'd see 25k.... Max. You definitely got me there B35. I was kinda over reaching. In full agreement with the M60 levels with 10K +. Yes, 10-15 years down the line for a 25K ridership. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4305 Posted December 25, 2016 Good... So the implication I'm taking from this is that you really want the entire B35 running to JFK, not just from McDonald..... How do you figure that? I never said that at all. My first proposal was to extend McDonald B35s to JFK which would have allowed two bus access to JFK for those boarding the B35 between 1st Av and McDonald. Then you complained about all the traffic on Church and how unreliable the B35 is and that the B35 should be left alone. So I said okay and revised the proposal to leave the B35 out of it entirely and instead create a new route along Clarkson Avenue which would have the same western terminus at McDonald and Church to still allow B35 riders two bus access to JFK as with the first proposal. So what is the problem with that if any? (As an aside, crazy thing just happened with autocorrect. I tried to type "B35" and autocorrect changed it to "Utica." Good thing I proofread it.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armandito Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4306 Posted December 25, 2016 How do you figure that? I never said that at all. My first proposal was to extend McDonald B35s to JFK which would have allowed two bus access to JFK for those boarding the B35 between 1st Av and McDonald. Then you complained about all the traffic on Church and how unreliable the B35 is and that the B35 should be left alone. So I said okay and revised the proposal to leave the B35 out of it entirely and instead create a new route along Clarkson Avenue which would have the same western terminus at McDonald and Church to still allow B35 riders two bus access to JFK as with the first proposal. So what is the problem with that if any? (As an aside, crazy thing just happened with autocorrect. I tried to type "B35" and autocorrect changed it to "Utica." Good thing I proofread it.) With four routes serving JFK (including the hypothetical B80 LTD), I doubt if there will be any room left for a fifth route to Brooklyn... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bstar1 Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4307 Posted December 25, 2016 B20 should serve JFK second Brooklyn route. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4308 Posted December 25, 2016 (edited) How do you figure that? I never said that at all. My first proposal was to extend McDonald B35s to JFK which would have allowed two bus access to JFK for those boarding the B35 between 1st Av and McDonald. Then you complained about all the traffic on Church and how unreliable the B35 is and that the B35 should be left alone. So I said okay and revised the proposal to leave the B35 out of it entirely and instead create a new route along Clarkson Avenue which would have the same western terminus at McDonald and Church to still allow B35 riders two bus access to JFK as with the first proposal. So what is the problem with that if any? The real question is, why are you pandering to my complaints? Stand by your original B35 to JFK suggestion, instead of belittling my critiques about it & coming up with a revision afterwards (that's a sign of guilt by the way)..... I'll answer your two questions though: 1) Very simple... You're making Sunset Park a focal point. The part about having the connection to the be a side benefit within it all definitely raises flags - or did you not say that also? Since when is a connection to a subway station for a newly proposed route a side benefit.... This is leading to me to believe that you really want to have the B35 (from Sunset Park) to run to JFK..... I'm putting two & two together with that.... You don't have to say it (more importantly, nor were you accused of saying it) when I explicitly said implication... 2) If you're asking me what's wrong with putting a route on Parkside/Clarkson instead of Church, the answer to that is also simple.... You instantly lose whatever amount of ridership you could have possibly gotten from running buses on Church, by diverting/revising/whatever them on Clarkson... I partially answered this when I mentioned how useless the revised route would be b/w the & the .... In any case, that is the catch-22 I see with having a bus run to JFK around here.... A bus to JFK from around here would be absolutely stymied along Church, and as for Clarkson, even though it's no where as delay prone as Church is, quite honestly, I see taking the B12 to the to Sutphin over taking a bus all the way to JFK... It's akin to the reason why you don't have much of anyone taking the B15 from Broadway all the way to JFK.... So, I see sustainable ridership as an issue with that revised version.... Revising the B12 to have ppl. shift on over to that revised JFK route of yours won't help matters either, because then you'd be screwing the masses of folks trying to get to/from the with that route.... So, I am most certainly not advocating f***ing up the B12 to have a bus run to JFK around here.... I mean, you ask that last question as if shifting it off Church & onto Clarkson wouldn't come with issues of its own.... So instead of trying to make like my complaining is the issue (nice try with that by the way), maybe you should engage in a little self-reflection with this B35 to JFK bit & realize it isn't one of your better suggestions... And that's not just my opinion either, if you want to resort to playing that card..... Edited December 25, 2016 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4309 Posted December 25, 2016 (edited) With four routes serving JFK (including the hypothetical B80 LTD), I doubt if there will be any room left for a fifth route to Brooklyn... Lol..... He isn't considering any B80 I understand it's a "B80" idea that you finally got to "stick" (you remember that Brooklyn-LGA you conjured up a while back....), but ease up with the zealousness a little.... You say hypothetical here, but in your last string of posts on this forum, you are seriously acting like this route is realistically going to come to fruition or something..... B20 should serve JFK second Brooklyn route. All terminals? Nah, that's taking it too far... That would loom too supplementary to the B15; A B20 extension in that direction doesn't have to run past the airtrain station (Lefferts) IMO... Edited December 25, 2016 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4310 Posted December 25, 2016 The real question is, why are you pandering to my complaints? Stand by your original B35 to JFK suggestion, instead of belittling my critiques about it & coming up with a revision afterwards (that's a sign of guilt by the way)..... I'll answer your two questions though: 1) Very simple... You're making Sunset Park a focal point. The part about having the connection to the be a side benefit within it all definitely raises flags - or did you not say that also? Since when is a connection to a subway station for a newly proposed route a side benefit.... This is leading to me to believe that you really want to have the B35 (from Sunset Park) to run to JFK..... I'm putting two & two together with that.... You don't have to say it (more importantly, nor were you accused of saying it) when I explicitly said implication... 2) If you're asking me what's wrong with putting a route on Parkside/Clarkson instead of Church, the answer to that is also simple.... You instantly lose whatever amount of ridership you could have possibly gotten from running buses on Church, by diverting/revising/whatever them on Clarkson... I partially answered this when I mentioned how useless the revised route would be b/w the & the .... In any case, that is the catch-22 I see with having a bus run to JFK around here.... A bus to JFK from around here would be absolutely stymied along Church, and as for Clarkson, even though it's no where as delay prone as Church is, quite honestly, I see taking the B12 to the to Sutphin over taking a bus all the way to JFK... It's akin to the reason why you don't have much of anyone taking the B15 from Broadway all the way to JFK.... So, I see sustainable ridership as an issue with that revised version.... Revising the B12 to have ppl. shift on over to that revised JFK route of yours won't help matters either, because then you'd be screwing the masses of folks trying to get to/from the with that route.... So, I am most certainly not advocating f***ing up the B12 to have a bus run to JFK around here.... I mean, you ask that last question as if shifting it off Church & onto Clarkson wouldn't come with issues of its own.... So instead of trying to make like my complaining is the issue (nice try with that by the way), maybe you should engage in a little self-reflection with this B35 to JFK bit & realize it isn't one of your better suggestions... And that's not just my opinion either, if you want to resort to playing that card..... First of all I never made Sunset Park a focal point. What I am saying is that I believe it is important to have one or two bus access to JFK or for that matter anywhere there is significant demand, and I do believe there is significant demand from all parts of Brooklyn to JFK, or there would be demand if it were accessible. I believe there would be little demand for a bus or two two buses and a train as you propose with the J. So all that adding Sunset Park would do would be to add a new service area to two bus access which would also include the north part of Borough Park. It has nothing to do with any hidden agenda for the B35 to operate from Sunset Park to JFK which I never proposed and would never want. You also make it seem that there would be much more of a demand for JFK from Church than from Clarkson. I do not believe that would be the case. The importance of using either street is that they cut across the borough and provide transfers to many north south routes thereby providing two bus access to JFK from many parts of Brooklyn unlike the B15 which doesn't do that. I respect your opinion so I changed my proposal to not involve the B35, and for that I get accused of "pandering" to you. And to keep things simpler (but more expensive) I decided not to involve the B12, and you accuse me of screwing up the B12. It seems to me that you have your mind made up that you do not want a route along Church or Clarkson to serve JFK. I don't even know if you want any service to JFK from Brooklyn other than the B15, the A train and the LIRR which are totally useless for those coming from southern Brooklyn. As I said before there needs to be three new services to JFK, not one. There needs to be the one along Church or Ckarkson, one from Brooklyn College along Glenwood and Foster and one from Bay Ridge using the Belt Parkway and Belt Parkway service Road making a few entrances and exits to serve additional neighborhoods. It should also be allowed to use the shoulder (where one exists) as an exclusive bus lane. These routes would be to serve workers and potential workers at JFK as well as travelers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armandito Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4311 Posted December 25, 2016 (edited) First of all I never made Sunset Park a focal point. What I am saying is that I believe it is important to have one or two bus access to JFK or for that matter anywhere there is significant demand, and I do believe there is significant demand from all parts of Brooklyn to JFK, or there would be demand if it were accessible. I believe there would be little demand for a bus or two two buses and a train as you propose with the J. So all that adding Sunset Park would do would be to add a new service area to two bus access which would also include the north part of Borough Park. It has nothing to do with any hidden agenda for the B35 to operate from Sunset Park to JFK which I never proposed and would never want. You also make it seem that there would be much more of a demand for JFK from Church than from Clarkson. I do not believe that would be the case. The importance of using either street is that they cut across the borough and provide transfers to many north south routes thereby providing two bus access to JFK from many parts of Brooklyn unlike the B15 which doesn't do that. I respect your opinion so I changed my proposal to not involve the B35, and for that I get accused of "pandering" to you. And to keep things simpler (but more expensive) I decided not to involve the B12, and you accuse me of screwing up the B12. It seems to me that you have your mind made up that you do not want a route along Church or Clarkson to serve JFK. I don't even know if you want any service to JFK from Brooklyn other than the B15, the A train and the LIRR which are totally useless for those coming from southern Brooklyn. As I said before there needs to be three new services to JFK, not one. There needs to be the one along Church or Ckarkson, one from Brooklyn College along Glenwood and Foster and one from Bay Ridge using the Belt Parkway and Belt Parkway service Road making a few entrances and exits to serve additional neighborhoods. It should also be allowed to use the shoulder (where one exists) as an exclusive bus lane. These routes would be to serve workers and potential workers at JFK as well as travelers. Foster Avenue, Linden Boulevard, and Kings Highway east of the Brighton are excellent streets for bus lanes, and their benefit could be further improved with transit signal priority. Edited December 25, 2016 by Q44SBS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4312 Posted December 25, 2016 Foster Avenue, Linden Boulevard, and Kings Highway east of the Brighton are excellent streets for bus lanes, and their benefit could be further improved with transit signal priority.Linden Blvd is the WORST street to put a bus lane on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4313 Posted December 25, 2016 (edited) First of all I never made Sunset Park a focal point. What I am saying is that I believe it is important to have one or two bus access to JFK or for that matter anywhere there is significant demand, and I do believe there is significant demand from all parts of Brooklyn to JFK, or there would be demand if it were accessible. I believe there would be little demand for a bus or two two buses and a train as you propose with the J. So all that adding Sunset Park would do would be to add a new service area to two bus access which would also include the north part of Borough Park. It has nothing to do with any hidden agenda for the B35 to operate from Sunset Park to JFK which I never proposed and would never want. You also make it seem that there would be much more of a demand for JFK from Church than from Clarkson. I do not believe that would be the case. The importance of using either street is that they cut across the borough and provide transfers to many north south routes thereby providing two bus access to JFK from many parts of Brooklyn unlike the B15 which doesn't do that. I respect your opinion so I changed my proposal to not involve the B35, and for that I get accused of "pandering" to you. And to keep things simpler (but more expensive) I decided not to involve the B12, and you accuse me of screwing up the B12. It seems to me that you have your mind made up that you do not want a route along Church or Clarkson to serve JFK. I don't even know if you want any service to JFK from Brooklyn other than the B15, the A train and the LIRR which are totally useless for those coming from southern Brooklyn. As I said before there needs to be three new services to JFK, not one. There needs to be the one along Church or Ckarkson, one from Brooklyn College along Glenwood and Foster and one from Bay Ridge using the Belt Parkway and Belt Parkway service Road making a few entrances and exits to serve additional neighborhoods. It should also be allowed to use the shoulder (where one exists) as an exclusive bus lane. These routes would be to serve workers and potential workers at JFK as well as travelers. You did make Sunset Park a focal point... You mentioned a providing of an xfer to a B35 (to JFK) for some Sunset Park residents... Let's see... what's less preposterous than having B35's from Sunset Park run to JFK.... Hmm, so you gave yourself some time to think.... Then came to the revelation - yes, yes, McDonald av... That doesn't sound as bad.... Or so you thought..... ...And what was proposed with the ?... What's going on with the masses taking the B12 to the to Sutphin isn't a proposal, what are you talking about.... The second paragraph.... What I was getting at, is that there would be more ridership on a route running b/w McDonald & JFK via Church, than a route running via Parkside/Clarkson... Church is simply a bigger draw.... If you're insinuating that there wouldn't be more ridership along Church than along Parkside/Clarkson, I have nothing else to tell you in that regard..... Yes, of course... You respect my opinions enough to not only try to originally minimize them (about 2 weeks ago) by saying, nothing I've stated indicates a reason why the route proposal would be a poor idea, this & that..... But now I'm met with a, (since) I'm complaining about traffic on Church, and since - BrooklynBus respects what B35 has to say, let me, BrooklynBus revise my proposal .... Way to cover your bases with that one.... You decided not to involve the B12???? Explain this: There needs to be an east west route along Clarkson Avenue to take some of the load off the B35. I would restructure the B12 and other routes to accomplish that. But if you don't want to get that complicated, you can superimpose a new JFK route using Clarkson instead of Church until Rockaway Parkway and then to Linden Blvd with one stop at Cross Bay Blvd. Would you be in favor of that instead? I know, I know... I'm pulling that out of my ass, I made that all up - Stephen Glass style.... Those weren't your words, I have it out for you, you're the innocent victim, all that good stuff.... --------------------- I thought having my mind made up was obvious, but apparently not (at least to you anyway).... You're not going to see me come up with any proposals for a Brooklyn-JFK route - Nope... And I know that this next bit eats at your pride (since you respect my opinion & all), but I still favor the recently proposed B80 than any B35 extension to the airport... And that's what this whole dissentation is all about, not any of that about you not remembering what my objections were to your proposed extension of this B35 to JFK..... 4 Brooklyn-JFK routes (the B15 + THREE new services you claim are needed) huh.... Outright & undeniably ridiculous.... The Bay Ridge one we've argued about years ago, I'm not going down that road again..... We just got through butting heads with this Church (or Clarkson) one.... And one from the Junction/Brooklyn College area now? Good grief, even if I were to believe that the Church (or Clarkson) one was necessary, you would not need one from the Junction/Brooklyn College area - when the Nostrand (or Brighton) line to even your Church (or Clarkson) JFK route would be apparent.... That is overkill for the sake of being overkill..... Now I agree that the MTA is being frugal when it comes to buses, but I'm not co-signing excessive new services either.... You say 4, I say 2 (at the absolute most)..... That's it. Edited December 25, 2016 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armandito Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4314 Posted December 25, 2016 (edited) Linden Blvd is the WORST street to put a bus lane on.I'm only planning to run a Midwood-JFK bus route on Linden east of Van Sinderen Avenue, and the B20 aleady has stpos along Linden between Ashford Street and Eldert Lane. How is it the worst street? Edited December 25, 2016 by Q44SBS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4315 Posted December 25, 2016 (edited) I'm only planning to run a Midwood-JFK bus route on Linden east of Van Sinderen Avenue, and the B20 aleady has stpos along Linden between Ashford Street and Eldert Lane. How is it the worst street? You mentioned Linden Blvd (Caton Av) past the Brighton line is good for a bus lane but Linden Blvd between Flatbush/Caton Avs and Kings Hwy/Remsen Av is only 1 lane in each direction. Wasn't this explained already Edited December 25, 2016 by Turtle 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future ENY OP Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4316 Posted December 25, 2016 Foster Avenue, Linden Boulevard, and Kings Highway east of the Brighton are excellent streets for bus lanes, and their benefit could be further improved with transit signal priority. No bus lane in Linden Boulevard. Absolutely NOT. What the buses would do is get on the main road. Bus stops would be located on the service roads so that traffic can flowly move on the boulevard. You mentioned Linden Blvd (Caton Av) past the Brighton line is good for a bus lane but Linden Blvd between Flatbush/Caton Avs and Kings Hwy/Remsen Av is only 1 lane in each direction. Wasn't this explained already I don't think he mentioned it. It was BrooklynBus that did. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4317 Posted December 25, 2016 There is no need for a bus lane on Linden Blvd... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armandito Posted December 25, 2016 Share #4318 Posted December 25, 2016 No bus lane in Linden Boulevard. Absolutely NOT. What the buses would do is get on the main road. Bus stops would be located on the service roads so that traffic can flowly move on the boulevard. I don't think he mentioned it. It was BrooklynBus that did. And having the bus stops on the service roads was exactly what I had in mind. But if the B80 LTD ever gets SBS treatment, how would buses move faster along the segment where it travels via Linden Boulevard? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted December 26, 2016 Share #4319 Posted December 26, 2016 Foster Avenue, Linden Boulevard, and Kings Highway east of the Brighton are excellent streets for bus lanes, and their benefit could be further improved with transit signal priority. You can't state any street is excellent for bus lanes without first discussing bus frequency and looking at existing traffic volumes as well as alternative routes. There are no alternatives to using Kings Highway without significantly increasing travel distances so it would be a poor choice under any circumstances. My personal feeling that any street where bus headways exceeds every five minutes makes it unworthy for an exclusive bus lane, and I would prefer every three minutes or more frequent. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armandito Posted January 2, 2017 Share #4320 Posted January 2, 2017 You can't state any street is excellent for bus lanes without first discussing bus frequency and looking at existing traffic volumes as well as alternative routes. There are no alternatives to using Kings Highway without significantly increasing travel distances so it would be a poor choice under any circumstances. My personal feeling that any street where bus headways exceeds every five minutes makes it unworthy for an exclusive bus lane, and I would prefer every three minutes or more frequent. If that's the case, what else would help SBS treatment work on a Midwood-JFK bus route? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted January 3, 2017 Share #4321 Posted January 3, 2017 If that's the case, what else would help SBS treatment work on a Midwood-JFK bus route? I don't see why every new route has to be SBS or why you need exclusive bus lanes for SBS to work in most cases. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future ENY OP Posted January 3, 2017 Share #4322 Posted January 3, 2017 If that's the case, what else would help SBS treatment work on a Midwood-JFK bus route? On this one I agree with BrooklynBus.. No need for SBS. Every route to be created doesn't need SBS treatment. Leave the route as a Limited. The notion of bus lanes on Kings Highway and Linden Blvd.. Forget it. Bus stops on service roads with exception of Kings Highway stops. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
collagedchen300 Posted January 18, 2017 Share #4323 Posted January 18, 2017 I had looked over my transit app, and I had not found any bus routes plying along Bushwick Avenue. Also, B39, currently serving Manhattan stops, needs an extension to grow our business bigger. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted January 18, 2017 Share #4324 Posted January 18, 2017 I had looked over my transit app, and I had not found any bus routes plying along Bushwick Avenue. Also, B39, currently serving Manhattan stops, needs an extension to grow our business bigger. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Why would Bushwick Avenue need a bus route when numerous routes and the Broadway el run parallel to it for most of it's length? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
collagedchen300 Posted January 18, 2017 Share #4325 Posted January 18, 2017 (edited) Why would Bushwick Avenue need a bus route when numerous routes and the Broadway el run parallel to it for most of it's length?Just a suggestion to take care of crowds, mostly on buses heading towards and from Downtown Brooklyn/Manhattan, during peak hours... via B39 extension. If you think this is still unnecessary, how so? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited January 18, 2017 by collagedchen300 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.