Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Future ENY OP]

All this talk of extending the B39, I think the only place that it could possibly work is to extend it to either Bed-Stuy or somewhere else along the that doesn't have an immediate connection to NYC.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

The B39 is just fine as it is. No need to extend the line. Bad enough the Willy B is traffic prone. Any extension of the route will result in delays.

[BreeddekalbL]

The B39 is just fine as it is. No need to extend the line. Bad enough the Willy B is traffic prone. Any extension of the route will result in delays.

 

correct the main purpose of the route is to make it over the bridge since Marcy and Essex streets are not ADA

[checkmatechamp13]

correct the main purpose of the route is to make it over the bridge since Marcy and Essex streets are not ADA

 

Marcy is ADA accessible.

 

And technically, an rider requiring ADA-accessibility could take the to Chambers Street and then take the M9. 

[Fresh Pond]

Marcy is ADA accessible.

 

And technically, an rider requiring ADA-accessibility could take the to Chambers Street and then take the M9.

Chambers St isn't ADA accessible. Fulton St is the only station in Manhattan that is.

[BreeddekalbL]

Marcy is ADA accessible.

 

And technically, an rider requiring ADA-accessibility could take the to Chambers Street and then take the M9. 

 

Marcy is? 

i never seen an elevator on either platform etc

[Future ENY OP]

Marcy is?

i never seen an elevator on either platform etc

Marcy is NOT ADA compliant as of yet.

[Around the Horn]

Interesting. I don't remember seeing elevators there either... but the latest map has a wheelchair symbol there...

[B22viaAtlanticAv]

Marcy is? 

i never seen an elevator on either platform etc

Marcy is NOT ADA compliant as of yet.

Interesting. I don't remember seeing elevators there either... but the latest map has a wheelchair symbol there...

Stop it!!! Really guys.... A simple Google Maps Street View of the area shows Elevators on both sides of Broadway on Macy Ave. If i could've posted the image I would've but, a link is good enough...https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7083831,-73.9577437,3a,75y,299.88h,78.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swVvZ0zEvbUym7Eg5n7gLFg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Edited March 18, 2017 by B102 LTD

[Fresh Pond]

The wheelchair accessible stations on the are...

 

-Fulton St

-Marcy Av

-Flushing Av

-Sutphin Blvd

-Jamaica Center

[BreeddekalbL]

when did Marcy Become ADA Then?

[Eric B]

Several years ago when they redid the fare control areas and added the elevators.

[CDTA]

I think the B32 and B39 should be merged. They have identical frequencies and service hours and thanks to the B39's absurd layover times, it wouldn't require any extra buses. Plus, an LES-Williamsburg (with LIC as an added bonus) route seems to have much more potential than the two routes have right now. (Although such a route would probably have the most potential running until 2-3 for all the bar-goers, we can only go one step at a time)

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I think the B32 and B39 should be merged. They have identical frequencies and service hours and thanks to the B39's absurd layover times, it wouldn't require any extra buses. Plus, an LES-Williamsburg (with LIC as an added bonus) route seems to have much more potential than the two routes have right now. (Although such a route would probably have the most potential running until 2-3 for all the bar-goers, we can only go one step at a time)

The B39 often runs behind schedule because the runtime is just so damn time (how you expect to go from end to end in 5 minutes is beyond me, but whatever). They frequent arrive Allen Street by the time they are suppose to go back to WBP. The layover isn't as long at WBP, so the delays kick in after a certain amount of time. Extending the route would just create more problems than solve. The delays would now increase to areas along the B32 route (Williamsburg Waterfront). Given how the B32 is not very frequent, it is best to not combine them. The delays on the B39 can be significant, despite it being a relatively short route. 

 

Additionally, while it is a good thing to encourage bus travel over the subway, I don't see much of anyone using such a combo for "through-service" at WBP, especially since both routes run every 30 minutes (and the merged route would have 30 minute frequencies as well). If anyone wants LIC, they'll likely continue taking the (or the to the ). 

While the market for the B39 is slim, the B32 could have definitely be improved. Nobody wants to be waiting 30 minutes for a bus during the weekday rush hour. That's just unreasonable. All of these new routes always start off with those 30 minute headways, and it's not very attractive. The B37 was the only exception, which received 15 minute headways during the rush, and 20 minute headways outside of the rush on weekdays. All the new routes should be getting those frequencies, at the very least, not the 30 minute headway nonsense they've been implementing. Another thing is that these buses should have been running from 6 AM to 11 PM on weekdays (and a little less on weekends) from the beginning. People are still going to work, spending time outside by themselves or with others, or going home after 9 PM. 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now that we're talking about this (in the Brooklyn bus thread), I was just thinking of something, which I don't know if work out, but would essentially attempt to make the B84 somewhat more useful.

 

I was thinking of having the B84 run from Broadway Junction to Gateway Mall, via Atlantic Avenue, Ashford/Jerome Streets, and Flatlands Avenue. Basically, north of New Lots, the B84 would run on Ashford Street (NB) or Jerome Street (SB), and Atlantic Avenue, to get to/from Broadway Junction. It provides coverage in the North-to-South direction (currently nothing exists between Pennsylvania Avenue and Crescent Street. If it maintains its current headways, you might need an extra bus because it may be too tight to run during the rush where it takes 30 minutes from end to end. That's why I would increase the span and headway to operate from 6 AM to 11 PM on weekdays, every 15 minutes during the rush, every 20 minutes during the midday, and every 30 minutes during the weekend. On Saturdays, the route would run from 7 AM to 11 PM, every 20 minutes up to 7 PM (then run every 30 minutes until 11 PM). On Sundays, the route would run from 8 AM to 9 PM, running every 20 minutes until 6 PM (then every 30 minutes until 9 PM). 

 

This would be the routing (in more detail): https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en&hl=en&authuser=0&authuser=0&mid=1Q_bIM9YJVOL5qe1esyfMfphhMvE&ll=40.676020969126746%2C-73.88942260429081&z=16

 

Additionally, you could truncate the B20 at ENY, and have the B84 continue past ENY to Ridgewood.

Edited April 5, 2017 by BM5 via Woodhaven Bl

[B35 via Church]

I think the B32 and B39 should be merged. They have identical frequencies and service hours and thanks to the B39's absurd layover times, it wouldn't require any extra buses. Plus, an LES-Williamsburg (with LIC as an added bonus) route seems to have much more potential than the two routes have right now. (Although such a route would probably have the most potential running until 2-3 for all the bar-goers, we can only go one step at a time)

I think portions of the B32 & portions of the Q69 should be merged..... The Q100 is far too short to be running LTD & the Q69 is too delay prone & runs like molasses for no real good reason.... I would look to create a LTD route running b/w [Astoria or Steinway (the neighborhood)] & [Williamsburg (no further south than Metropolitan ].....

 

The B32 (as predicted by a # of people on here) has successfully stolen a wad of ridership from off the B62 & there's has always been a bit of a demand for (north) Brooklyn to Astoria.... Quiet is as kept, most of the B62 riders boarding at the first stop (QBP area) are actually coming off other buses & not the subway.... Same goes for the Q100 btw.....

 

But yeah, the overall aim is to still have a 21st st local & a 21st st LTD route - however, with the LTD going into Brooklyn & the local carrying Queens riders b/w Astoria & QBP..... You do not need both the Q69 & the Q100 serving QBP & you do not need the B32 & the B62 serving WBP...... 21st st IMO is overserved, which is something else I'd look into as far as determining frequencies of the suggestion in question... I already have the Q66 truncated to run b/w Northern blvd & Flushing, so that would go towards addressing the issue of too many BPH along 21st a bit....

 

As for your suggestion, B39 riders don't xfer to the B32/B62, they're xferring to B46's/B60's..... Most the people I find taking B39's from the Manhattan end are either folks on street level that don't want to take the for w/e reason, or those coming off the .... To sum it up, there's no real market for the B39.... It virtually does nothing for Manhattan residents & comes pretty close to the same for Brooklyn residents....

 

As for the B32, riders are content with taking the or the into Manhattan & rightfully so.... I don't think you're going to get those folks to want to 1] deal with Delancey/Willy' B traffic & 2] xferring to the to get to the same general areas in Manhattan, from the LES.... Furthermore, some riders out of WBP tend to take the B32 over the B62 if it comes before the B62.... The demand is still for the B62 in Williamsburg.... In Greenpoint however, is where the demand for the B32 is growing.... The demand for the B62 & the B43 I'd say is split evenly b/w the respective points where they both serve the & Manhattan and Freeman/Green....

 

The B39 often runs behind schedule because the runtime is just so damn time (how you expect to go from end to end in 5 minutes is beyond me, but whatever). They frequent arrive Allen Street by the time they are suppose to go back to WBP. The layover isn't as long at WBP, so the delays kick in after a certain amount of time. Extending the route would just create more problems than solve. The delays would now increase to areas along the B32 route (Williamsburg Waterfront). Given how the B32 is not very frequent, it is best to not combine them. The delays on the B39 can be significant, despite it being a relatively short route. 

 

Additionally, while it is a good thing to encourage bus travel over the subway, I don't see much of anyone using such a combo for "through-service" at WBP, especially since both routes run every 30 minutes (and the merged route would have 30 minute frequencies as well). If anyone wants LIC, they'll likely continue taking the (or the to the ). 

While the market for the B39 is slim, the B32 could have definitely be improved. Nobody wants to be waiting 30 minutes for a bus during the weekday rush hour. That's just unreasonable. All of these new routes always start off with those 30 minute headways, and it's not very attractive. The B37 was the only exception, which received 15 minute headways during the rush, and 20 minute headways outside of the rush on weekdays. All the new routes should be getting those frequencies, at the very least, not the 30 minute headway nonsense they've been implementing. Another thing is that these buses should have been running from 6 AM to 11 PM on weekdays (and a little less on weekends) from the beginning. People are still going to work, spending time outside by themselves or with others, or going home after 9 PM.

See above... Basically we're in agreeance.

 

My thing with the B32 is that, out of WBP, it's utilized over the B62 as a bypass of the parts of the B62 where the demand is still stronger (in other words, anyone out of WBP that wants to get to Queens quicker are taking B32's).... Again, I'm of the belief that the B32 & the B62 doesn't both need to serve WBP....

 

Anyway, I haven't done it in a while (thanks to the f**king up of the B46 local), but I ended up figuring out that it's worth trekking from 21st to 21st/44th to catch the B32, over catching the B62: 1] because the walk is actually shorter & 2] because the B32 is actually more reliable - Which is embarrassing for the B62 that a route w/ half-hourly headways all day is more reliable than a route that's (supposed) to leave every 8 during peak times.... Waiting for a B62 on the QBP end will have you seeing more grand av (the depot) buses going OOS than buses heading towards Downtown Brooklyn... It has been like that with the B62 long well before the creation of the B32 too....

 

I haven't figured out headways, but routing-wise, I would truncate the B32 on the Brooklyn end & run it up to Astoria or Steinway & turn it into a LTD via 21st (the Q100 would turn into the local).... The consensus of people that comment about the B32 agrees that the route should be extended northward towards QBP/QP.... I'm taking that a step further & using the route to address a separate issue..... I tell you right now that said LTD route would run a lot better than every 1/2 hour ! That's how I would improve the route.... I'm not big on route re-namings, so even though it would serve more of Queens, I would still keep it as the "B32"....

 

I'd say that the B39's usage is slim & the market for it is non-existent.... I'm not sure what you could even do to the route to attract Manhattan residents (if anything), but as far as Brooklyn residents go, it's used out of convenience more than anything (save for the handicapped or the elderly).... I know that running it up to Greenpoint & eventually Queens, aint it....

[B35 via Church]

...Now that we're talking about this (in the Brooklyn bus thread), I was just thinking of something, which I don't know if work out, but would essentially attempt to make the B84 somewhat more useful.

 

I was thinking of having the B84 run from Broadway Junction to Gateway Mall, via Atlantic Avenue, Ashford/Jerome Streets, and Flatlands Avenue. Basically, north of New Lots, the B84 would run on Ashford Street (NB) or Jerome Street (SB), and Atlantic Avenue, to get to/from Broadway Junction. It provides coverage in the North-to-South direction (currently nothing exists between Pennsylvania Avenue and Crescent Street. If it maintains its current headways, you might need an extra bus because it may be too tight to run during the rush where it takes 30 minutes from end to end. That's why I would increase the span and headway to operate from 6 AM to 11 PM on weekdays, every 15 minutes during the rush, every 20 minutes during the midday, and every 30 minutes during the weekend. On Saturdays, the route would run from 7 AM to 11 PM, every 20 minutes up to 7 PM (then run every 30 minutes until 11 PM). On Sundays, the route would run from 8 AM to 9 PM, running every 20 minutes until 6 PM (then every 30 minutes until 9 PM). 

 

This would be the routing (in more detail): https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en&hl=en&authuser=0&authuser=0&mid=1Q_bIM9YJVOL5qe1esyfMfphhMvE&ll=40.676020969126746%2C-73.88942260429081&z=16

 

Additionally, you could truncate the B20 at ENY, and have the B84 continue past ENY to Ridgewood.

For all I care, short of getting rid of the thing, I would try my hand at turning the B84 into a branch of the B14..... Even if you increase the amt of BPH by 1 bus b/w Utica & Penn at the very least, would help the B14..... Believe it or not, running the B84 to Sutter by itself would help out a lot, since there is a ton of walking from the north & from the south being done to get to the 14 as it is..... This would make the B84 more than just a "coverage" route....

 

Anybody north of Sutter is likely taking the subway, or the Q24/Q56 to get to Broadway Junction, so I don't think it's too necessary to have the B84 running to Broadway Junction.....

 

Basically, I partially agree with what you want to do here....

[BrooklynBus]

For all I care, short of getting rid of the thing, I would try my hand at turning the B84 into a branch of the B14..... Even if you increase the amt of BPH by 1 bus b/w Utica & Penn at the very least, would help the B14..... Believe it or not, running the B84 to Sutter by itself would help out a lot, since there is a ton of walking from the north & from the south being done to get to the 14 as it is..... This would make the B84 more than just a "coverage" route....

 

Anybody north of Sutter is likely taking the subway, or the Q24/Q56 to get to Broadway Junction, so I don't think it's too necessary to have the B84 running to Broadway Junction.....

 

Basically, I partially agree with what you want to do here....

The B84 is just another example of the MTA being pennywise and pound foolish and their lack of willingness to invest in the system.

 

They also combined the B13 and B18 just to save one bus. Then when they extended the B13 to Gateway, it ended up costing them more money in the long run so they ended up just getting rid of the B18.

 

They have no imagination whatsoever with their entire emphasis on keeping costs low and no emphasis on what to do to attract riders.

[B35 via Church]

The B84 is just another example of the MTA being pennywise and pound foolish and their lack of willingness to invest in the system.

 

They also combined the B13 and B18 just to save one bus. Then when they extended the B13 to Gateway, it ended up costing them more money in the long run so they ended up just getting rid of the B18.

 

They have no imagination whatsoever with their entire emphasis on keeping costs low and no emphasis on what to do to attract riders.

...as with all these dinky shuttles.

 

I've said it multiple times, injecting these dinky shuttles into a system-wide bus network that is broken & antiquated, does not amount to fixing it.... Flu shots does not cure the flu !

 

What gets me miffed is that this hyper-focus on cost-cutting is far too conspicuous when it comes to the buses.... Not only do they have no imagination/creativity when it comes to tapping into demand or otherwise spurring bus ridership, they choose to wallow in ignorance...

 

There is clearly an agenda being pushed, and the conversion (or w/e you wanna call it) of these bus routes to glorified LTD service with bus "stations" is no example that they really care about bus riders either..... Nope - I'm not convinced, especially when there's a blatant side effect of f**king up local service that comes with the kung fu grip.... Every single freakin SBS route with a local counterpart.

 

...And then there's the proverbial ringing around the rosie just to get a minor (let alone a major) change done to some route.... The fact that it took this long to get the B83 to run across the Belt to get to Gateway is a case in point..... Now if they will only take that route off Van Siclen (at least full time anyway) & run the majority of service clear along Penn ..... IMO, the B83 can be right up there w/ the B74 in terms of efficiency.... Be there as it may, this is just one example of the ultimate point we're making.....

[BreeddekalbL]

idk if there was an idea to propose say split the dumbo section off the B25 and just give it's own route, how is the dumbo section of the route is the traffic bad?

[BrooklynBus]

...as with all these dinky shuttles.

 

I've said it multiple times, injecting these dinky shuttles into a system-wide bus network that is broken & antiquated, does not amount to fixing it.... Flu shots does not cure the flu !

 

What gets me miffed is that this hyper-focus on cost-cutting is far too conspicuous when it comes to the buses.... Not only do they have no imagination/creativity when it comes to tapping into demand or otherwise spurring bus ridership, they choose to wallow in ignorance...

 

There is clearly an agenda being pushed, and the conversion (or w/e you wanna call it) of these bus routes to glorified LTD service with bus "stations" is no example that they really care about bus riders either..... Nope - I'm not convinced, especially when there's a blatant side effect of f**king up local service that comes with the kung fu grip.... Every single freakin SBS route with a local counterpart.

 

...And then there's the proverbial ringing around the rosie just to get a minor (let alone a major) change done to some route.... The fact that it took this long to get the B83 to run across the Belt to get to Gateway is a case in point..... Now if they will only take that route off Van Siclen (at least full time anyway) & run the majority of service clear along Penn ..... IMO, the B83 can be right up there w/ the B74 in terms of efficiency.... Be there as it may, this is just one example of the ultimate point we're making.....

The emphasis is and has always been cost cutting, not serving the passenger better or better connecting neighborhoods. That is the agenda. Since they lose money with every passenger they carry, they actually want to carry fewer passengers. That's why they we'll come dollar bans and Uber because less MTA service is required.

 

I was involved with the B83 negotiations in the 70s. ENY wanted a new north south route between Penn and Fountain. The MTA refused because they didn't want to spend the money so they offered to move the B83 from Penn to Van Siclen. ENY didn't like it but was given the choice of that or nothing. So reluctantly they agreed.

[checkmatechamp13]

idk if there was an idea to propose say split the dumbo section off the B25 and just give it's own route, how is the dumbo section of the route is the traffic bad?

 

When the B25 was proposed to be eliminated, they planned to replace the DUMBO section with a B67 extension.

[B35 via Church]

idk if there was an idea to propose say split the dumbo section off the B25 and just give it's own route, how is the dumbo section of the route is the traffic bad?

You won't see any real traffic until you hit old Fulton, and during most times of the day it's rather light (although it is increasing/worsening).... The thing that plagues the B25 in DUMBO is not vehicular traffic per se, but double-parked taxis & delivery vehicles on those narrow 1-way streets.... You have to be more cognizant of pedestrian traffic throughout DUMBO; heavily touristy, with people walking around & about with a certain disregard for vehicles.... Strangely enough, this includes delivery guys....

[MysteriousBtrain]

When the B25 was proposed to be eliminated, they planned to replace the DUMBO section with a B67 extension.

Was this part of the "original" 2010 budget cuts?

[BreeddekalbL]

what do you mean elimnate the b25 as in total elimnation?

Edited April 10, 2017 by BreeddekalbL

[MysteriousBtrain]

what do you mean elimnate the b25 as in total elimnation?

Was this part of the "original" 2010 budget cuts?

I did some research and yep. It was part of the original budget cuts. Other routes that were endangered according to NY1 back in 2008:

 

Local Routes That Face Elimination: B23, B25, B37, B39, B51, B75; Bx4, Bx14 (as Bx24), Bx20, Bx34; M6, M8, M10, M18, M27, M30; Q26, Q56, Q74, Q75, Q84

Express Routes That Face Elimination: X25, X32, QM22, QM23 and BxM7B

Local Routes That Will Lose Both Weekend And Overnight Service:

B7, B48, B57, B65, M22 and M50

 

(Bold is routes that were saved/later restored)

 

Here's another article that was a bit more recent and showed the B25 elimination as well:

http://abc7ny.com/archive/7233590/

Edited April 10, 2017 by ShadeJay

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

1) I think portions of the B32 & portions of the Q69 should be merged..... The Q100 is far too short to be running LTD & the Q69 is too delay prone & runs like molasses for no real good reason.... I would look to create a LTD route running b/w [Astoria or Steinway (the neighborhood)] & [Williamsburg (no further south than Metropolitan ].....

 

The B32 (as predicted by a # of people on here) has successfully stolen a wad of ridership from off the B62 & there's has always been a bit of a demand for (north) Brooklyn to Astoria.... Quiet is as kept, most of the B62 riders boarding at the first stop (QBP area) are actually coming off other buses & not the subway.... Same goes for the Q100 btw.....

 

But yeah, the overall aim is to still have a 21st st local & a 21st st LTD route - however, with the LTD going into Brooklyn & the local carrying Queens riders b/w Astoria & QBP..... You do not need both the Q69 & the Q100 serving QBP & you do not need the B32 & the B62 serving WBP...... 21st st IMO is overserved, which is something else I'd look into as far as determining frequencies of the suggestion in question... I already have the Q66 truncated to run b/w Northern blvd & Flushing, so that would go towards addressing the issue of too many BPH along 21st a bit....

 

 

2) See above... Basically we're in agreeance.

 

My thing with the B32 is that, out of WBP, it's utilized over the B62 as a bypass of the parts of the B62 where the demand is still stronger (in other words, anyone out of WBP that wants to get to Queens quicker are taking B32's).... Again, I'm of the belief that the B32 & the B62 doesn't both need to serve WBP....

 

Anyway, I haven't done it in a while (thanks to the f**king up of the B46 local), but I ended up figuring out that it's worth trekking from 21st to 21st/44th to catch the B32, over catching the B62: 1] because the walk is actually shorter & 2] because the B32 is actually more reliable - Which is embarrassing for the B62 that a route w/ half-hourly headways all day is more reliable than a route that's (supposed) to leave every 8 during peak times.... Waiting for a B62 on the QBP end will have you seeing more grand av (the depot) buses going OOS than buses heading towards Downtown Brooklyn... It has been like that with the B62 long well before the creation of the B32 too....

 

I haven't figured out headways, but routing-wise, I would truncate the B32 on the Brooklyn end & run it up to Astoria or Steinway & turn it into a LTD via 21st (the Q100 would turn into the local).... The consensus of people that comment about the B32 agrees that the route should be extended northward towards QBP/QP.... I'm taking that a step further & using the route to address a separate issue..... I tell you right now that said LTD route would run a lot better than every 1/2 hour ! That's how I would improve the route.... I'm not big on route re-namings, so even though it would serve more of Queens, I would still keep it as the "B32"....

 

I'd say that the B39's usage is slim & the market for it is non-existent.... I'm not sure what you could even do to the route to attract Manhattan residents (if anything), but as far as Brooklyn residents go, it's used out of convenience more than anything (save for the handicapped or the elderly).... I know that running it up to Greenpoint & eventually Queens, aint it....

 

1) I don't have much of a problem with the Q100 itself being a Limited, but I see what you're saying with the Q69. I looked at bustime, and well, there's two buses bunching right now (and the buses run every 30 minutes at this time). Those people waiting for a bus from LIC are gonna have to hold on for quite a while until their bus shows up. That leads me ask why can't they allow the leader to DH back to Queens Plaza and pick up riders, but we'll never know.

 

I don't see many people using the B32 south of Metropolitan anyway, but I don't wanna leave that area with only the Q59, which can be quite painful to ride (and wait). Yesterday, it took 45 minutes alone to get out of Brooklyn from WBP (mainly due to traffic on Metropolitan Avenue, near the BQE, and the BO just going real slow while two other Q59's were alongside us for most of the trip after). I was thinking of maybe flipping the Q59 and B24 routings west of Union & Metropolitan Avenue, but the B24 is another delay prone route.

 

2) Yeah, I can't stand waiting for the B62 with all those buses that go NIS after pulling in. And then, the BO's take a longer break on the QBP than they're suppose to, which is annoying, especially during periods where its really hot (or cold) outside (even after the pull in at the time they're suppose to). The B32 without a doubt is faster to Queens, and more reliable.

 

As for the 21 Street Limited, well yeah, I wouldn't have the LTD run every half-hour either. I agree with extending the B32 past Court Square. I know they have looked into a streetcar to serve those areas, but I feel a bus could be more efficient. Alternatively, you could look at the whole thing as a Q69/100 extension to Williamsburg. It could run every 15 minutes throughout the day, and perhaps 30 minute headways after a certain hour (no earlier than 9 PM). The local would basically retain the current Q69 headways. However, after a certain hour, this LTD service would start running local (there's no reason the Q100 should run LTD during the overnight hours, with no local service being provided on 21 Street). Preferably, I would start running the Brooklyn bus local during the evening when the "local" bus from QBP starts running every 30 minutes (which is when I would also start having the Brooklyn bus every 30 minutes).  

 

What would happen to service to Rikers Island, BTW?

 

Sidenote: I just realized how "infrequent" the Q100 is throughout the day on weekdays. I thought it was more frequent than that. 

 

 

For all I care, short of getting rid of the thing, I would try my hand at turning the B84 into a branch of the B14..... Even if you increase the amt of BPH by 1 bus b/w Utica & Penn at the very least, would help the B14..... Believe it or not, running the B84 to Sutter by itself would help out a lot, since there is a ton of walking from the north & from the south being done to get to the 14 as it is..... This would make the B84 more than just a "coverage" route....

 

Anybody north of Sutter is likely taking the subway, or the Q24/Q56 to get to Broadway Junction, so I don't think it's too necessary to have the B84 running to Broadway Junction.....

 

Basically, I partially agree with what you want to do here....

 

I figured that might have been the case (with the B84 to Broadway Junction), and given that ENY/Brownsville doesn't have another direct route to the Commercial portion of Crown Heights, that might also be another benefit (I mean, the is also there, but that only helps if you live near it). The other bus routes in East New York pass through the "outskirts", if they go through Crown Heights. The B84 to Crown Heights would have a 45-52 minute runtime if it runs along the exact same routing as the B14 past Sutter & Jerome/Ashford Streets. I saw some of the B14 buses pulling into Utica Avenue yesterday, and they were pretty full, given the headways (every 15 or so).

 

Now, the question is, would/should the B84 make the same deviation as the B14 does around the NYCHA complex over there between Mother Gaston and Junius , or rather have it run straight across Sutter, then up Mother Gaston? 

Edited April 10, 2017 by BM5 via Woodhaven Bl