Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

BreeddekalbL · April 10, 2017

it would have been dumb as hell to elimnate the b25 say the subway fouls up, you have a perfect alternative

Q43LTD · April 11, 2017

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/

Unfortunately for the B7, 48, 57, 65, M22 and 50 overnight service was never restored. However for the M50, weekend service was restored under the stipulation that it no longer served the UN

BM5 via Woodhaven · April 11, 2017

Unfortunately for the B7, 48, 57, 65, M22 and 50 overnight service was never restored. However for the M50, weekend service was restored under the stipulation that it no longer served the UN

The B48 runs during overnight periods, and has always had overnight service.

As for the B65, riders have the option of the B25 (or the subway) a few blocks to the north, so it isn't shouldn't have had a drastic effect for customers (compared to say, the Q30 overnight elimination).

Q43LTD · April 11, 2017

The B48 runs during overnight periods, and has always had overnight service.

As for the B65, riders have the option of the B25 (or the subway) a few blocks to the north, so it shouldn't have had a drastic effect for customers (compared to say, the Q30 overnight elimination).

I forgot about that. I was thinking of when the B48 had service south of Fulton eliminated. I feel the Q30 should have had its owl service retained (no service west of Merrick)

MysteriousBtrain · April 21, 2017

Idea for some bus swaps (assuming Fresh Pond isn't trained for artics by 2019):

Q58 to Grand Avenue

All B38s to Fresh Pond

B13 to Fresh Pond

BreeddekalbL · April 22, 2017

Idea for some bus swaps (assuming Fresh Pond isn't trained for artics by 2019):

Q58 to Grand Avenue

All B38s to Fresh Pond

B13 to Fresh Pond

but the b38 metro branch is closer to Grand then FP

i can see the B13 going back to fresh pond

Edited April 22, 2017 by BreeddekalbL

B35 via Church · April 24, 2017

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.

1) Quite honestly, I'd leave that immediate area binding Broadway, Kent, Grand, and Bedford with nothing other than the current NB B62 (on Bedford).... Already stated what I'd do w/ the B32.... The Q59 on the Brooklyn end, I'm somewhat torn between having it parallel the Q54 to get to/from WBP & turning Q59's on Bushwick av to have it basically replace that part of the B24..... Realistically, I want the former, but at the same time, I don't want to leave Metropolitan east of the (G) with nothing - nor do I want to run the B32 that far east within Brooklyn......

To try to phase out the (Williamsburg segment of the) B24, I already have the B48 split to run b/w Meeker/Stewart (current terminal) & 46th st (7) ... Only thing is, patrons of the Cooper Park houses would be left with a walk to Metropolitan.....

2) For now, nothing (else would happen); the Q100 would still serve it.

When they close Rikers though, that'll be another discussion for another time....

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?

Haven't thought about it (not serving the tilden & the [lower segment of the] van dyke houses).... But since you bring it up, I don't see why not; as nothing would be taken away from the B14 either way....

BM5 via Woodhaven · July 12, 2017

I have made a map denoting some of the changes I would make to the Brooklyn bus system. Although most of these routes changes are focus in the waterfront areas, there are some other changes that I have in mind. Some of these are my proposals, some are combinations of other proposals infused with my edits. Questions, comments?

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&hl=en&authuser=0&authuser=0&mid=1XFqE_hL6yPBW4ccBYDuHp1sjicA&ll=40.645673270159946%2C-73.98138020636287&z=15

I'll go through the details of each of the changes, including alternatives to said proposal:

B16

1. Service will be rerouted to serve Church Avenue (F) (G) Station . Service will operate between Bay Ridge and Church Avenue/E. 3 Street

2. Eliminate segment of Shore Road south of 92 Street. Buses will terminate on Shore Road & 92 Street, and originate at Shore Road & 91 Street

Alternative Options:

a) Retain Shore Road portion of route south of 92 Street

B24, Q59

1. Eliminate B24 completely. Resources will be used accordingly on respective routes

2. Reroute Q59 to cover some parts of the B24 route along Metropolitan Avenue

Alternative Options:

a) Run the Q59 via the Cooper Houses before going to Queens (only if B48/B58 options a, b, or c are preferred)

B33 (NEW), B43

1. Branch the B43, and create a variant operating to Sunnyside, Queens, via Greenpoint Avenue (essentially, every other bus), labeled B33

2. B33 will operate from approximately 4:30 AM to 11 PM (to Sunnyside), 5:20 AM to 12:00 AM (to Prospect-Lefferts Gardens)

3. Decrease the combined headway on the B33/B43 on weekday midday and evening from every 20 minutes to every 15 minutes

4. All late night service will be B43 service

5. Decrease combined headway on B33/43 on Sunday (daytime) from every 20 minutes to every 15 minutes

Alternative Options:

a) Send all B43 buses to Sunnyside, while short-turning some buses at Greenpoint Avenue & Manhattan Avenue

b) Have the B33 operate hourly overnight instead of the B43 every 45 minutes

c) Do Nothing (eliminates Greenpoint Avenue segment)

B36

1. Extend some B36 buses from Nostrand Avenue to Kings Plaza, via Avenue U from 7 AM to 10 PM

2. Every 2 or 3 buses during the rush hour, every other bus middays and early evenings, and every bus during the later hours will be extended to Kings Plaza. Every bus on Saturdays and Sundays will be extended during this time period to Kings Plaza

Alternative Options:

a) Reduce the timespan of service, to 7 AM to 8 PM on weekdays, 9 AM to 10 PM on Saturdays, 9 AM to 9 PM on Sundays

b) Keep service as it is

B48, B58 (NEW)

1. Extend the B48 to Church Avenue (F) (G) station via Parkside Avenue (replaces the B16 segment east of McDonald Avenue)

2. Increase the B48 headways. The B48 will now operate every 20 minutes during the rush, every 30 minutes during middays and weekend daytime hours, and every hour evenings, overnight hours, and early AM weekends.

3. Create a variant of the B48, which originates in Prospect-Lefferts Gardens, and branches off from the B48 at Metropolitan Avenue & Lorimer Street, replacing the B24 segment along 48 Street, and the Q104 segment between Sunnyside & Woodside. This route, labeled B58, would terminate at the Newtown Houses.

4. The B58 would operate approximately from 4:15 AM-1:15 AM to Woodside, and 4:15 AM to 12:20 AM to Prospect Lefferts Gardens. This service will operate every 20 minutes during the rush hour, every 30 minutes during middays, and hourly during evening hours and early AM weekends

5. The combined portion (Prospect Park (B) (Q) (S) to Lorimer/Metropolitan) will run every 10 minutes rush hour, every 15 minutes middays and weekend daytimes, every 30 minutes evenings, and hourly during overnight hours.

Alternative Options:

a) Run the B58 with the B48 as far north as Nassau Avenue, then split off at McGuiness Boulevard, Taking Meeker Avenue from McGuiness, and then running into Woodside

b) Run all B48 buses to Woodside via B58 routing in option a with no enhancements to the current headways

c) Eliminate the current B48 portion east of Kingsland Avenue, and reroute it to Meeker Avenue and into Woodside

d) Run all B48 buses via B58 route displayed on map

aa, ba, ca, da) Run buses to Sunnyside only

ab, bb, cb, db) Run buses to 61 Street station

e) Do not extend the B48 south of Prospect Lefferts Gardens (will retain 45 minute overnight headways)

B57

1. Terminate in Downtown Brooklyn

2. Extend further into Maspeth in order to stop having people from transferring to/from the Grand Avenue routes to the B57 and so on. Buses would terminate at Grand Avenue & 69 Place.

Alternative Options

a) Keep bus running to Red Hook (only if B62 option a is preferred)

b) Run bus to Brooklyn Bridge Park from Downtown Brooklyn

c) Do not extend further into Maspeth

B61

1. Eliminate segment between Red Hook IKEA and Park Slope (see B68)

2. Extend service to Williamsburg Bridge Plaza, replacing B67 service. Every other bus from 5:00 AM to 9 PM on weekdays will run via the B7 route, then via Division Avenue to WBP

Alternative Options:

a) Retain B61 routing east of Red Hook (towards Park Slope; ONLY if B62 option a is preferred)

b) Do not extend route north of Downtown Brooklyn on weekdays (leaves Brooklyn Navy Yard with no service unless B67 option e is preferred)

B62

1. Extend the bus to Red Hook via B57 route daily from 4 AM-11:35 PM (To Red Hook), 5:00 AM-1:00 AM (To Queens Plaza)

Alternative Options:

a) Do not extend B62 to Red Hook (retains B57 service)

B67, B69

1. Buses would originate from the south on 20 Street & Prospect Park South. All service between Cortelyou Road and Propsect Park West would be eliminated.

2. Extend service from Sands Street & Jay Street to Old Front Street in DUMBO, via Water Street and Front Street

3. (B67 only) Eliminate service Sands & Jay Street to Williamsburg

Alternative options

a) Eliminate all B67 service, adjust B69 headways to match demand on 7 Avenue

b, ab) Do not serve DUMBO

c, ac) Retain service to Cortelyou Road

d, ad) Retain service along McDonald Avenue until Church Avenue

e) Retain service to Williamsburg (B67 only)

B68

1. Reroute north of Church Avenue. Buses would take Church Avenue, McDonald Avenue, and Prospect Park West instead of Prospect Park Southwest between Church Avenue and Windsor Terrace

2. Extend route via 9 Street, replacing the B61, to Red Hook IKEA

3. Overnight headways will be every 60 minutes instead of every 40 minutes

Alternative Options:

a) Run B68 to Red Hook, but do not reroute in Kensington (leaves McDonald Avenue with limited B103 service)

b) Reroute B68 in Kensington, but do not extend north of Bartel Square (only if option a is preferred)

c) Infuse the 9 Street portion into a new route, keeps B68 running regular route

Other proposals not listed on the map

B4: Service originate/terminates at 3 Avenue

B71: Restored, operating between Brooklyn Bridge Park and Crown Heights, via Union Street & Eastern Parkway

BM1 & BM2: All SB buses reroute off Caton (during the weekdays, it can be very traffic prone, which is one cause of the delays caused on the BM's). Buses will continue on McDonald Avenue, turn left on Cortelyou Road, and continue down Cortelyou Road from there.

Edited July 12, 2017 by BM5 via Woodhaven Bl

Around the Horn · July 12, 2017

Can I ask why everyone has this obsession with terminating the B4 at 3rd Avenue and cutting the Shore Road portion of the B16?

I mean any advantages get cancelled out by the absurd turnarounds you would have to do, and the traffic on those streets.

Although I will say I like the B57/B61/B67 idea however I would bring back the B75 and B77 instead of extending the B68 and B62.

BM5 via Woodhaven · July 12, 2017

Can I ask why everyone has this obsession with terminating the B4 at 3rd Avenue and cutting the Shore Road portion of the B16?

I mean any advantages get cancelled out by the absurd turnarounds you would have to do, and the traffic on those streets.

Although I will say I like the B57/B61/B67 idea however I would bring back the B75 and B77 instead of extending the B68 and B62.

The B4 stop at 3 Avenue can be moved to the opposite side. Originally I planned to just terminate it at the 77 Street (R)

Station.

The B16 turnaround would take just as long as the turnaround over by Shore Road & 3 Avenue, if not less.

As far as the B77, that route can stay dead, lol. I felt it was a waste.

I used to think the B75 should be brought back, but I don't think so anymore. Ridership has changed over the years, and I believe the B75 would not serve residents adequately anymore. The extension of the B57 was probably not enough, but the B57 extension to IKEA was well though out. You have people using the B57 instead of the B61 because it's more direct. People from the Red Hook houses still use the B61, but the B57 is also used there. I've seen decent loads from on buses just from Red Hook. Some of them ride past Downtown Brooklyn (most of them past the Farragut Houses), which is why I prefered having the B62 go to Red Hook. The B62 would be more frequent than the B57, and would appeal to people out of the Red Hook Houses, instead of walking to the B61.

IDK how Gowanus-Park Slope ridership was on the B75, but with the B61, it's not too big outside of certain weekday hours. Disregarding the (F) and (G) , it doesn't help that the B103, B63, B67, and B69 serve parts of Downtown Brooklyn (and adjacent) area that the B75 used to pass by (and even areas the B75 missed which are more popular these days).

Edited July 12, 2017 by BM5 via Woodhaven Bl

B35 via Church · July 12, 2017

I have made a map denoting some of the changes I would make to the Brooklyn bus system. Although most of these routes changes are focus in the waterfront areas, there are some other changes that I have in mind. Some of these are my proposals, some are combinations of other proposals infused with my edits. Questions, comments?

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&hl=en&authuser=0&authuser=0&mid=1XFqE_hL6yPBW4ccBYDuHp1sjicA&ll=40.645673270159946%2C-73.98138020636287&z=15

I'll go through the details of each of the changes, including alternatives to said proposal....

B16: Don't like what you're doing to the route on either end.... You want to truncate this route for the sake of extending the B48 on that end to Church av (F) ??? Sorry, but one of the problems with the (real) B48 isn't that those folks want service west of Prospect Park subway..... This rendition of a B16 would lose more riders than an extended B48 of sorts to Church av (F) would remotely come close to gaining - ponder that thought.... I mean, I'd say everything you're doing b/w Parkside (Q) & Church av (F) is simply - off..... You are severely butchering up bus service in Kensington.....

Yes, there's turnover from the NB B16 to the EB B35, but what's funny is, there's very little for the opposite commute (SB B16 from the WB B35).... I'd go as far as to say that ending the B16 at the (F) would have more people xferring for the EB B35 than they would for the (F) ..... IMO, that's not worth cutting the connection to the (Q) train... If the thinking is that "The B35 is a block away, so service on Caton is wasteful/can be dispensable", my retort to that is Caton & Church are worlds apart - B16 usage & B35 is NOT interchangeable in that immediate area....

B33: A renamed B43 that runs over the Greenpoint portion of the B24.... I personally wouldn't bother; there's not much wrong with the B43 route; it's one of the mergers (of the old B47 Lefferts Gdns.-WBP & the old B62 Downtown-Greenpoint) that made sense back then.... If you're going to do this, you're definitely going to need a short-turn that ends in Brooklyn somewhere... I'd keep the B24 as a standalone Greenpoint av route & call it a day....

B36: Old school idea I never liked from day one... In 2017, the last thing this route needs is an extension to Kings Plaza....

B48: Bi-directional service on that part of Ft. Hamilton pkwy. is impossible.... To get back to Parkside from Park Circle, buses are going to have to take Caton anyway.... IMO, the routing b/w Church av & Ocean av is wasteful anyway.... Again, the service area of the (real) B48 b/w Prospect Park subway & Met. av definitely does not need a supplement....

B57: Agree with cutting it back to Downtown.... I don't think anything should be running along Smith/Court; It's too much about the (F) (and less about a bus) in Carroll Gardens than there is in Park Slope - which is saying a lot!!! The extension on the other end would definitely spur more ridership (I'll admit it even beats my idea of cutting it back to Met av) - nice way to fill that void there.... Either way, the current terminal in Maspeth is much ado about nothing....

B58: My B48 idea, extended to Woodside... If 48th wasn't cut off the way it is, the B48 to Northern Blvd (M) (R) would've been the idea instead.... But to have to do all that meandering IMO isn't worth it... So, I have the (full) B48 running to the (7) (with the short turns doing the current B48 to Meeker/Stewart)...

I'll get to the rest of these later on in the day.... Feel free to reply to this post in the meantime.

BM5 via Woodhaven · July 12, 2017

B16: Don't like what you're doing to the route on either end.... You want to truncate this route for the sake of extending the B48 on that end to Church av ??? Sorry, but one of the problems with the (real) B48 isn't that those folks want service west of Prospect Park subway..... This rendition of a B16 would lose more riders than an extended B48 of sorts to Church av would remotely come close to gaining - ponder that thought.... I mean, I'd say everything you're doing b/w Parkside & Church av is simply - off..... You are severely butchering up bus service in Kensington.....

Yes, there's turnover from the NB B16 to the EB B35, but what's funny is, there's very little for the opposite commute (SB B16 from the WB B35).... I'd go as far as to say that ending the B16 at the would have more people xferring for the EB B35 than they would for the ..... IMO, that's not worth cutting the connection to the train... If the thinking is that "The B35 is a block away, so service on Caton is wasteful/can be dispensable", my retort to that is Caton & Church are worlds apart - B16 usage & B35 is NOT interchangeable in that immediate area....

B33: A renamed B43 that runs over the Greenpoint portion of the B24.... I personally wouldn't bother; there's not much wrong with the B43 route; it's one of the mergers (of the old B47 Lefferts Gdns.-WBP & the old B62 Downtown-Greenpoint) that made sense back then.... If you're going to do this, you're definitely going to need a short-turn that ends in Brooklyn somewhere... I'd keep the B24 as a standalone Greenpoint av route & call it a day....

B36: Old school idea I never liked from day one... In 2017, the last thing this route needs is an extension to Kings Plaza....

B48: Bi-directional service on that part of Ft. Hamilton pkwy. is impossible.... To get back to Parkside from Park Circle, buses are going to have to take Caton anyway.... IMO, the routing b/w Church av & Ocean av is wasteful anyway.... Again, the service area of the (real) B48 b/w Prospect Park subway & Met. av definitely does not need a supplement....

B57: Agree with cutting it back to Downtown.... I don't think anything should be running along Smith/Court; It's too much about the (and less about a bus) in Carroll Gardens than there is in Park Slope - which is saying a lot!!! The extension on the other end would definitely spur more ridership (I'll admit it even beats my idea of cutting it back to Met av) - nice way to fill that void there.... Either way, the current terminal in Maspeth is much ado about nothing....

B58: My B48 idea, extended to Woodside... If 48th wasn't cut off the way it is, the B48 to Northern Blvd would've been the idea instead.... But to have to do all that meandering IMO isn't worth it... So, I have the (full) B48 running to the (with the short turns doing the current B48 to Meeker/Stewart)...

I'll get to the rest of these later on in the day.... Feel free to reply to this post in the meantime.

B16: I felt that the proposal was a bit too harsh on the Kensington side (and originally, I was not going to even bother extending the B48, but it was to just fill the gap), but I wouldn't have service using Caton Avenue. Yes, the B16 does rather poor on Caton Avenue outside of daytime hours on weekdays, but I'm not attributing it to the B35 on Church Avenue. During weekday hours, reliability is terrible, especially during the rush hour. Caton Avenue is not very wide anyways, so the truck traffic throws the B16 schedule out the window. It's taken up to 30 minutes between Coney island Avenue and Prospect Park Subway (which is also why I'm rerouting the BM1 and BM2 to not use Caton Avenue and use the less-transited portion of Cortelyou Road to get to Coney Island Avenue).

I can agree to keeping the B16 to Prospect Park station if the route is taken off Caton Avenue entirely (although I still would have buses serving Church Avenue station). EB buses would take one of the three options:

1. Church, Coney Island, Parkside, and then Ocean Avenue (and continue on the current route).

2. McDonald Avenue, Seeley Street, Prospect Park SW, Park Circle and then Parkside Avenue.

3. Church, Ocean Parkway Service Road, Park Circle, Parkside

WB buses would take Parkside, Park Circle, Ft. Hamilton Parkway, McDonald Avenue, Church Avenue, 39 Street, 13 Avenue, and the continue on the current B16 route.

B24, B33, B43: I'm concerned about having the B24 just doing the Greenpoint Avenue segment, because it would get prone to "service adjustments". That would be too risky, and considering the current frequencies, I don't want to do that. I feel that something should run on that portion of the B24 instead, Service to the stops north of Greenpoint Avenue on the B43 would still have a bus every 14-30 minutes, and the Greenpoint Avenue segment would see slightly more frequent service (except when the branching occurs towards the late evenings, where the headways are 40 minutes or so).

I see what you mean about short-turns (especially since Greenpoint Avenue is not very easy to traverse at times. However, that would mean infrequent service along Empire Boulevard. Unlike the B48, I'm not enhancing the frequencies much, because the B43 is fairly frequent. I would just add the extra buses needed on the B33/43.

B48, B58: I wouldn't have a supplement if I could just extend the B48 to Sunnyside while serving Cooper Houses. However, it wouldn't, and that's the problem (I don't think the Q59 should be all those people should get). That's why I have the B58 serving the Cooper Houses and going into Sunnyside. Rerouting all B48's via the B58 would leave too much of a gap over there (I don't know how B48 service on Nassau Avenue is utilized, but I would still keep buses running along that part, and on Lorimer north of Grand.

The B48 and B58 would be relatively 20-30 minute headway routes for the day, so the service would be resemble today's service levels, with a little more frequent service (per hour). Like the B33/43, the B24 resources would be redistributed on this route.

B36:

I thought of this because of what BrooklynBus mentioned regarding the lack of connectivity between Sheepshead Bay and the Rockaways. I don't agree with having a bus route going from Sheepshead Bay to the Rockaways directly, so that's why I extended the B36 (and not every bus either on weekdays). Otherwise, I would have left it as it is.

B57:

I don't mind having a bus along Court/Smith Streets, but I agree with what you're saying regarding activity on those streets; they're almost non-existent. Service from Red Hook and southern parts of Carroll Gardens is utilized though, which is what virtually keeps that portion afloat.

I definitely wouldn't cut the B57 to Metropolitan Avenue, because there are a considerable amount of riders getting on from that stop on 61 Street anyways. I've been on a few later evening buses on weekends with 8 or so riders heading up to Fresh Pond Road. I was on a bus on Saturday morning that got 20 riders from the first stop alone. With the exception of weekday evenings towards Red Hook, I haven't been on a bus where 5 or less people were getting on at the first stop / getting off near or on Grand Avenue. I don't think that everyone getting on in Maspeth lives in that area (I know I don't). I have seen some walking up Grand Avenue, and taking Q59's east as well, so it makes me wonder where they exactly come from. I was thinking that extending to 69 Street would eliminate some of those transfers.

Via Garibaldi 8 · July 12, 2017

B16: I felt that the proposal was a bit too harsh on the Kensington side (and originally, I was not going to even bother extending the B48, but it was to just fill the gap), but I wouldn't have service using Caton Avenue. Yes, the B16 does rather poor on Caton Avenue outside of daytime hours on weekdays, but I'm not attributing it to the B35 on Church Avenue. During weekday hours, reliability is terrible, especially during the rush hour. Caton Avenue is not very wide anyways, so the truck traffic throws the B16 schedule out the window. It's taken up to 30 minutes between Coney island Avenue and Prospect Park Subway (which is also why I'm rerouting the BM1 and BM2 to not use Caton Avenue and use the less-transited portion of Cortelyou Road to get to Coney Island Avenue).

I can agree to keeping the B16 to Prospect Park station if the route is taken off Caton Avenue entirely (although I still would have buses serving Church Avenue station). EB buses would take one of the three options:

1. Church, Coney Island, Parkside, and then Ocean Avenue (and continue on the current route).

2. McDonald Avenue, Seeley Street, Prospect Park SW, Park Circle and then Parkside Avenue.

3. Church, Ocean Parkway Service Road, Park Circle, Parkside

WB buses would take Parkside, Park Circle, Ft. Hamilton Parkway, McDonald Avenue, Church Avenue, 39 Street, 13 Avenue, and the continue on the current B16 route.

B36:

I thought of this because of what BrooklynBus mentioned regarding the lack of connectivity between Sheepshead Bay and the Rockaways. I don't agree with having a bus route going from Sheepshead Bay to the Rockaways directly, so that's why I extended the B36 (and not every bus either on weekdays). Otherwise, I would have left it as it is.

The B36 doesn't need to be extended anywhere. It's been a mess for as longas I can remember going back to my teen years when I lived in the Sheepshead Bay/Manhattan Beach area.

The BM1 BM2 re-route... Doesn't make a difference either way. It's not like the BM3 or BM4 move much better in that area. The real issue is the lights. Just takes far too long, and it seems to be more of a Southbound problem than Northbound.

Gotham Bus Co. · July 12, 2017

I have made a map denoting some of the changes I would make to the Brooklyn bus system. Although most of these routes changes are focus in the waterfront areas, there are some other changes that I have in mind. Some of these are my proposals, some are combinations of other proposals infused with my edits. Questions, comments?

What specific service problems are you trying to solve? Maybe it would be better to identify the problems and then try to solve them, instead of offering solutions first.

Edited July 12, 2017 by Gotham Bus Co.

B35 via Church · July 13, 2017

I have made a map denoting some of the changes I would make to the Brooklyn bus system. Although most of these routes changes are focus in the waterfront areas, there are some other changes that I have in mind. Some of these are my proposals, some are combinations of other proposals infused with my edits. Questions, comments?

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&hl=en&authuser=0&authuser=0&mid=1XFqE_hL6yPBW4ccBYDuHp1sjicA&ll=40.645673270159946%2C-73.98138020636287&z=15

I'll go through the details of each of the changes, including alternatives to said proposal:

* part 1: B16 - B58 (post# 4390)

* part 2: Below.....

B61: Nah, I can't agree with cutting it back to IKEA to run it through the Navy Yard... To be perfectly honest, IDK what route should run through there (as I abhor the B67 doing it).....

As far as Red Hook, you're recreating the problem of rider confusion at IKEA - While I don't know much it actually factored into the MTA extending the route eastward, that was actually a major complaint of CB6 & its patrons... Gleason ops that did the B61 & the B77 back then'll tell you all about it... Riders getting on the wrong buses, fifty million people asking questions, delaying the boarding process.... Something had to be done about that, it was a mess.... Now here you (BM5) have the B61 truncated to terminate there, B68's extended to terminate there, and B62's extended to terminate there..... Don't know if you were privy to that issue, but it was a big issue.....

While I never cared for the split of the original B61 (Red Hook - Queens Plz.), the MTA got it right when they went ahead w/ combining the southern portion of said split (which was the B61 that ran b/w IKEA & Downtown) with the B77 & the B75 along 9th, en route to (the now defunct) Bishop Ford HS.... Park Slope bound usage tends to die around 5th (more folks take the (B) (Q) to 7th av for the B67/B69 on the way back, it seems), but Downtown bound usage picks up the second it hits 7th av.... It sees even better usage at 5th, and 4th is even better than that.... 4th/9th & Smith/9th are about a wash.... Basically, I would leave this route as is.

B62: Lol, bringing back a different version of a Red Hook - Queens Plz. route.... While I personally wouldn't run anything along Smith/Court, I can side with having the B62 do it over the B57..... The B62 could use w/e usage the current B57 gets up there, because it is losing usage fast within & north of Greenpoint (to the B32).....

B67: Agree with taking it out of the Navy Yard, disagree with the cutback, inclined to agree on having it venture into DUMBO... Yes, the nabe' is far removed from Grimaldi's being the only reason for anyone to venture into the neighborhood, but to have both the B67/B69 & the B25 is too ambitious.... I get giving riders two ways to get Downtown (via Cadman plz & via Jay st) - and for this reason, I would side with choosing the B67 over the B69....

B68: IDK what's the rationale for doing this to the B68, but it has all sorts of wrong written all over it.... Cutting runtime from off the B67/B69 & adding it to a route like the B68 would loom counter-productive.... At minimum, you would have to split a route like this up; otherwise, you're using the route here from start to finish as a one-size fits all solution; filling voids that didn't need to be created to begin with.... Basically, you got it doing too much.... Never mind how meandrous it would now be on the northern end on the route (which also defines the routing on the very southern end).... Lastly, I wouldn't be so quick to remove service along PPK SW....

B69: See B67 & B68 comments above.... Only thing I'd add is, I'm more inclined to disagree on having it venture into DUMBO; the B69 from the south tends to die at Myrtle.... You got stragglers (extremely low) to low ridership along Flushing..... Project heads more or less shun the route (does tend to get schoolkids, but that's about it)..... Not seeing much promise there.....

Q59: See how wasteful Kent/Wythe is for the route huh... Lol.....

That's more or less what I would do w/ the Brooklyn end of the route....

=====================

Jigsaw puzzles can be tough.... But you don't get to physically alter the puzzle pieces & force them to fit....

Analogously speaking, that's how I see these ideas of yours.... A large portion of the whole plan here entails fixing what isn't broken....

What specific service problems are you trying to solve.....

I have the same question, quite honestly.....

Edited July 13, 2017 by B35 via Church

BM5 via Woodhaven · July 13, 2017

What specific service problems are you trying to solve? Maybe it would be better to identify the problems and then try to solve them, instead of offering solutions first.

Jigsaw puzzles can be tough.... But you don't get to physically alter the puzzle pieces & force them to fit....

Analogously speaking, that's how I see these ideas of yours.... A large portion of the whole plan here entails fixing what isn't broken....

I have the same question, quite honestly.....

Most of the service changes I proposed above are in response to what I think are issues within the Brooklyn bus network. Most of the changes fall under more than one reason, but here are the reasons below (and respective route changes with relation to this).

1. Low Ridership Inefficiency (B16, B33, B58, B61, B67, B68, B69)

2. Connectivity Issues (B24, B33, B36, B57, B58, B67, B69)

3. Opportunity to offer faster alternatives (B33, B58, B62)

4. Improve Reliability (B16, B57, B61, B67, B69)

5. Increase Ridership (B24, B33, B58, B67, B69)

I have explained my rationale behind some of these changes on my earlier post, and I will address some of the others below:

* part 1: B16 - B58 (post# 4390)

* part 2: Below.....

B61: Nah, I can't agree with cutting it back to IKEA to run it through the Navy Yard... To be perfectly honest, IDK what route should run through there (as I abhor the B67 doing it).....

As far as Red Hook, you're recreating the problem of rider confusion at IKEA - While I don't know much it actually factored into the MTA extending the route eastward, that was actually a major complaint of CB6 & its patrons... Gleason ops that did the B61 & the B77 back then'll tell you all about it... Riders getting on the wrong buses, fifty million people asking questions, delaying the boarding process.... Something had to be done about that, it was a mess.... Now here you (BM5) have the B61 truncated to terminate there, B68's extended to terminate there, and B62's extended to terminate there..... Don't know if you were privy to that issue, but it was a big issue.....

While I never cared for the split of the original B61 (Red Hook - Queens Plz.), the MTA got it right when they went ahead w/ combining the southern portion of said split (which was the B61 that ran b/w IKEA & Downtown) with the B77 & the B75 along 9th, en route to (the now defunct) Bishop Ford HS.... Park Slope bound usage tends to die around 5th (more folks take the to 7th av for the B67/B69 on the way back, it seems), but Downtown bound usage picks up the second it hits 7th av.... It sees even better usage at 5th, and 4th is even better than that.... 4th/9th & Smith/9th are about a wash.... Basically, I would leave this route as is.

B62: Lol, bringing back a different version of a Red Hook - Queens Plz. route.... While I personally wouldn't run anything along Smith/Court, I can side with having the B62 do it over the B57..... The B62 could use w/e usage the current B57 gets up there, because it is losing usage fast within & north of Greenpoint (to the B32).....

B67: Agree with taking it out of the Navy Yard, disagree with the cutback, inclined to agree on having it venture into DUMBO... Yes, the nabe' is far removed from Grimaldi's being the only reason for anyone to venture into the neighborhood, but to have both the B67/B69 & the B25 is too ambitious.... I get giving riders two ways to get Downtown (via Cadman plz & via Jay st) - and for this reason, I would side with choosing the B67 over the B69....

B68: IDK what's the rationale for doing this to the B68, but it has all sorts of wrong written all over it.... Cutting runtime from off the B67/B69 & adding it to a route like the B68 would loom counter-productive.... At minimum, you would have to split a route like this up; otherwise, you're using the route here from start to finish as a one-size fits all solution; filling voids that didn't need to be created to begin with.... Basically, you got it doing too much.... Never mind how meandrous it would now be on the northern end on the route (which also defines the routing on the very southern end).... Lastly, I wouldn't be so quick to remove service along PPK SW....

B69: See B67 & B68 comments above.... Only thing I'd add is, I'm more inclined to disagree on having it venture into DUMBO; the B69 from the south tends to die at Myrtle.... You got stragglers (extremely low) to low ridership along Flushing..... Project heads more or less shun the route (does tend to get schoolkids, but that's about it)..... Not seeing much promise there.....

Q59: See how wasteful Kent/Wythe is for the route huh... Lol.....

That's more or less what I would do w/ the Brooklyn end of the route....

B61: I only chose the B61 because it was the only route which I believed would be reliable from Downtown Brooklyn. All the other routes would either double back, become more unreliable, or both. From the Williamsburg side, the Q59 is unreliable, the B44 local intersects plenty of routes going to Downtown anyways, the B60 is unreliable, the B24 would get split up.

There is the B32 though :rolleyes:

I was not aware of the issues at Red Hook IKEA, but I have to ask, why was this an issue in the first place? It's no different than other areas with multiple bus routes terminating there.

As far as 9 Street, I have actually seen those ridership loads that you described more or less, but I don't think service should continue on as it is. Perhaps keep it as a 9 Street Crosstown, but the farthest I would have the B61 pickup & dropoff is at Prospect Park West & 14 Street. There's definitely no need to run it south of Bartel-Pritchard Square. You could probably save a bus (at least) or two, depending on the time of day, and use those resources on other lines where needed.

B62: Basically, this proposal would attempt to get more people off the B61 and taking B62's into Downtown Brooklyn instead (more specifically, from Red Hook) in addition to the B57. I wasn't thinking about the B62's ridership when I was making it, but more in relation to the extension of the B57 on the Maspeth side. As it is, the B57 is quite lengthy. Not a workhorse, but it deals with a lot of traffic-prone areas (the area south of Downtown Brooklyn along the (F) and (G) are one example (the other being Flushing Avenue the closer you get to the (J) .

B67/B69: The thing is, I extended both routes for two reasons. The first one is to keep interlining on weekdays, as they currently do on the northern end (when the B67 doesn't run to Williamsburg). On weekends, it is a non-issue, because they interline on the Cortelyou Road side only (which would become the 20 Street end with regards to my proposal). The second reason though, is to connect more of the gentrified neighborhoods (and certain parts of said neighborhoods) which the B25 does not serve. The B69 extension into DUMBO was in an effort to increase ridership north & west of Clinton Hill.

The cutback to Park Slope... I don't know if it's just me, but I've only been on a B67 (or B69) which had a considerable amount of riders along the McDonald Avenue portion (ironically enough, during the evening hours). However, the stop at McDonald Avenue & Albemarle is where the most activity occurs (pick ups & drop offs; It's true on every B67 or B69 ride I've been on). Maybe it's because too much service is provided along there, but in that case, perhaps short-turning some buses at Park Slope would be sufficient enough (on weekdays only).

B68: The B68 is not getting any runtime increases from the B67/B69. Essentially, the B68 to Windsor Terrace gets the same amount of time as the (current) B68 to 15 Street via PPSW. The rest of the time comes from the B61 service which was cut. The cutbacks made on the B67 & B69 were in order to keep runtime the same on the evening and weekend B67 & B69, so they can still interline. The B68 would essentially be the B67/B69 alternative up to 9 Street & 7 Avenue (and the area within a 5 minute walking radius).

The rationale for this route was related to the B61. So this would become a 9 Street Crosstown, become the southern portion of the B67/B69 (which I think it could handle), and run it's own route. While Coney Island Avenue is a hassle at times, 9 Street is not much of a problem. PPSW is relatively low in terms of ridership levels. If the B61 remains running along 9 Street, I would just have a part-time B68 branch to 9 Street & 7 Avenue via the route I have (running during evenings, weekends, and overnight hours.

The B36 doesn't need to be extended anywhere. It's been a mess for as longas I can remember going back to my teen years when I lived in the Sheepshead Bay/Manhattan Beach area.

The BM1 BM2 re-route... Doesn't make a difference either way. It's not like the BM3 or BM4 move much better in that area. The real issue is the lights. Just takes far too long, and it seems to be more of a Southbound problem than Northbound.

Caton Avenue is traffic-prone, and it indeed affects the BM1 & BM2 the closer it gets to Coney Island Avenue. Cortelyou Road between McDonald Avenue & Coney Island Avenue is virtually a cruise compared to Caton.

Edited July 13, 2017 by BM5 via Woodhaven Bl

BM5 via Woodhaven · July 13, 2017

B67/B69: The thing is, I extended both routes for two reasons. The first one is to keep interlining on weekdays, as they currently do on the northern end (when the B67 doesn't run to Williamsburg). On weekends, it is a non-issue, because they interline on the Cortelyou Road side only (which would become the 20 Street end with regards to my proposal). The second reason though, is to connect more of the gentrified neighborhoods (and certain parts of said neighborhoods) which the B25 does not serve. The B69 extension into DUMBO was in an effort to increase ridership north & west of Clinton Hill.

The cutback to Park Slope... I don't know if it's just me, but I've only been on a B67 (or B69) which had a considerable amount of riders along the McDonald Avenue portion (ironically enough, during the evening hours). However, the stop at McDonald Avenue & Albemarle is where the most activity occurs (pick ups & drop offs; It's true on every B67 or B69 ride I've been on). Maybe it's because too much service is provided along there, but in that case, perhaps short-turning some buses at Park Slope would be sufficient enough (on weekdays only).

B68: The B68 is not getting any runtime increases from the B67/B69. Essentially, the B68 to Windsor Terrace gets the same amount of time as the (current) B68 to 15 Street via PPSW. The rest of the time comes from the B61 service which was cut. The cutbacks made on the B67 & B69 were in order to keep runtime the same on the evening and weekend B67 & B69, so they can still interline. The B68 would essentially be the B67/B69 alternative up to 9 Street & 7 Avenue (and the area within a 5 minute walking radius).

The rationale for this route was related to the B61. So this would become a 9 Street Crosstown, become the southern portion of the B67/B69 (which I think it could handle), and run it's own route. While Coney Island Avenue is a hassle at times, 9 Street is not much of a problem. PPSW is relatively low in terms of ridership levels. If the B61 remains running along 9 Street, I would just have a part-time B68 branch to 9 Street & 7 Avenue via the route I have (running during evenings, weekends, and overnight hours.

I would like to revise the B67, B68, and B69 proposal, since that would create quite a change with the branch. So the service on the B67 & B69 would terminate instead at Church Avenue, with short-turns originating at 20 Street. The westbound routing in DUMBO would also change.

Westbound B67/B69 buses would take Sands, Adams, and then Water Street. It would make it easier to give enough runtime using exisiting resources on the trip towards Kensington, which in turn makes it easy to keep all the McDonald Avenue stops (at and north of Church).

What does this mean, for the B68? It wpild just continue using PPSW.

Edited July 13, 2017 by BM5 via Woodhaven Bl

checkmatechamp13 · July 13, 2017

B61: Nah, I can't agree with cutting it back to IKEA to run it through the Navy Yard... To be perfectly honest, IDK what route should run through there (as I abhor the B67 doing it).....

I remember a while ago, we had this discussion, and the ideas we were tossing around went something like this:

Create a WBP-IKEA route via the Navy Yard & Court/Smith Street (Obviously the B57 would be cut back)

Run the B57 through the Navy Yard.

Run the B69 through the Navy Yard to WBP (basically, it's a little harder to reach from Manhattan, but easier to get to from southern/eastern Brooklyn)

Extend the B32 to Downtown Brooklyn via the Navy Yard.

My preference would be to either run the B69 through there or just create a WBP-IKEA route through there (or maybe both. Have the B69 serve a destination that the B67 doesn't, and also help solve some of the reliability issues on the B57 and giving Court/Smith Streets a less frequent route more suited to the lower ridership). Also, it might possibly be a more reliable (albeit less frequent) alternative to the B62 around that Navy Street loop that would allow it to be straightened out.

Question: How is traffic along Prospect Avenue (or 20th Street)? I've always felt there was a lack of connectivity between that part of Park Slope (I guess South Slope/Greenwood Heights) and areas on the other side of the cemetery. Another idea that sounds good in terms of B68 extensions is one to 7th Avenue/9th Street for Methodist Hospital.

Future ENY OP · July 15, 2017

Question: How is traffic along Prospect Avenue (or 20th Street)? I've always felt there was a lack of connectivity between that part of Park Slope (I guess South Slope/Greenwood Heights) and areas on the other side of the cemetery. Another idea that sounds good in terms of B68 extensions is one to 7th Avenue/9th Street for Methodist Hospital.

Traffic in the area is pretty moderate. However, it can get congested at times with the Prospect Expressway.

The B68 already travels along way to Coney Island. Unless if there's a limited. I cannot see this extending to 7th Avenue and 9th street. Don't get me wrong. I like the extension plus it's a direct transfer to the (F) train plus travel down Prospect Park West.

The B32 extension to Downtown? I'm on the total fence with that. Unless it is terminating either at Cadman Plaza, Dumbo with the B25 and former B41 I don't see it happening. My next question would be is how bad is the B62 servicing Downtown?

B35 via Church · July 15, 2017

B16: I felt that the proposal was a bit too harsh on the Kensington side (and originally, I was not going to even bother extending the B48, but it was to just fill the gap), but I wouldn't have service using Caton Avenue. Yes, the B16 does rather poor on Caton Avenue outside of daytime hours on weekdays, but I'm not attributing it to the B35 on Church Avenue. During weekday hours, reliability is terrible, especially during the rush hour. Caton Avenue is not very wide anyways, so the truck traffic throws the B16 schedule out the window. It's taken up to 30 minutes between Coney island Avenue and Prospect Park Subway (which is also why I'm rerouting the BM1 and BM2 to not use Caton Avenue and use the less-transited portion of Cortelyou Road to get to Coney Island Avenue).

I can agree to keeping the B16 to Prospect Park station if the route is taken off Caton Avenue entirely (although I still would have buses serving Church Avenue station). EB buses would take one of the three options:

1. Church, Coney Island, Parkside, and then Ocean Avenue (and continue on the current route).

2. McDonald Avenue, Seeley Street, Prospect Park SW, Park Circle and then Parkside Avenue.

3. Church, Ocean Parkway Service Road, Park Circle, Parkside

WB buses would take Parkside, Park Circle, Ft. Hamilton Parkway, McDonald Avenue, Church Avenue, 39 Street, 13 Avenue, and the continue on the current B16 route.

I’m not doubting the problem that plague the route while it’s along Caton (I’ve even specifically stated that a large part of the problem amounts to parents [or whoever] double parking, exacerbating traffic flow to pick up/drop off schoolkids in another discussion)….NY27 is also a truck route, so that doesn’t help anything either….

Okay, so you don’t attribute anything to the B35 on Church…. Regardless, what I take issue with is such a drastic solution that completely fails to consider how the route is used, after the connection to the B35..... Since that part of the route is problematic (Caton), well let’s do away with it & cut the route back to McDonald… What the B16 deals with on Caton doesn’t come close to being enough to cut the route back to Church (even if it would now directly connect to the (F) )… You are solving nothing by having the B48 run over to McDonald as some sort of compromise or something - as the vast majority of SW bound B16 riders embarking east of McDonald (not inclusive) ride well past McDonald….

The only real quirk I have with the B16 east of McDonald is that I don’t believe it necessarily has to run to Prospect Park subway…. Outside of leaving it be, I would be content with having the route continuing along Caton to F’bush & then run up F’bush to Parkside, to end right in front of the subway station…

B24, B33, B43: I'm concerned about having the B24 just doing the Greenpoint Avenue segment, because it would get prone to "service adjustments". That would be too risky, and considering the current frequencies, I don't want to do that. I feel that something should run on that portion of the B24 instead, Service to the stops north of Greenpoint Avenue on the B43 would still have a bus every 14-30 minutes, and the Greenpoint Avenue segment would see slightly more frequent service (except when the branching occurs towards the late evenings, where the headways are 40 minutes or so).

I see what you mean about short-turns (especially since Greenpoint Avenue is not very easy to traverse at times. However, that would mean infrequent service along Empire Boulevard. Unlike the B48, I'm not enhancing the frequencies much, because the B43 is fairly frequent. I would just add the extra buses needed on the B33/43.

I don’t see the MTA leaving Greenpoint av w/ nothing, nor providing service with anything worse than 30 min headways…. I wouldn’t worry about any risk in that regard - but if that’s your concern, perhaps you can run the Greenpoint spur of the B24 on up to the 48^th St. mall (instead of having your B58 or w/e do that)…. That would easily warrant headways better than 30….

When I mentioned short turns, I was referring to the northern end/terminal of the route (in other words, having buses run w/i Brooklyn)…. Where would you even justifiably short turn B43’s from the north anyway? Having NB buses begin at Empire/Brooklyn (or Kingston) would be a terrible idea…. There was the old idea by some people back in the day on these transit boards that entailed running it to KCH, but I see that making the route much less useful than it is now....

I’d run the B48 (as a means of also phasing out the B24) to Sunnyside to aid in its abysmal overall usage…. The B43 OTOH already has potent riderbases (plural) along the route from end to end…. I guess you can adhere to the mindset of more is better, but you have to also discern when/where is enough, enough…. The B43 (or a variant of it) serving the Greenpoint spur of the B24 crosses that line for me…..

B48, B58: I wouldn't have a supplement if I could just extend the B48 to Sunnyside while serving Cooper Houses. However, it wouldn't, and that's the problem (I don't think the Q59 should be all those people should get). That's why I have the B58 serving the Cooper Houses and going into Sunnyside. Rerouting all B48's via the B58 would leave too much of a gap over there (I don't know how B48 service on Nassau Avenue is utilized, but I would still keep buses running along that part, and on Lorimer north of Grand.

The B48 and B58 would be relatively 20-30 minute headway routes for the day, so the service would be resemble today's service levels, with a little more frequent service (per hour). Like the B33/43, the B24 resources would be redistributed on this route.

You don't think the Q59 should be all they get & I don't think those projects should be a sticking point as to why the B48 gets branched - funny how that works.....

When I came up w/ the B48 idea (the Sunnyside branch), overall usage of the route was by far & large the main concern.... If the B48 had B43 ridership, I would have left it alone.... But as it is, the route has never really been much of a draw at all in Bed Stuy', and of course, it running to a heavy industrial area (where sadly, there's not much demand for bus usage out there [unlike industrial Maspeth])....

Anyway, the portion of the B24 b/w Sunnyside & WBP I would've likely altered & extended somewhere (instead of involving the B48 as a means of phasing out the current B24)... I would still have the Greenpoint av leg as a standalone route b/w the (G) & the (7) - this is solely thanks to the way 48th is blocked off at QB...

I see more walking & biking these days over on that end of the B48, so I don't think Nassau's doing too hot right now.... I seriously doubt it ever recovered from the losses that occurred due to that road construction along Nassau some years back....

I don't mind having a bus along Court/Smith Streets, but I agree with what you're saying regarding activity on those streets; they're almost non-existent. Service from Red Hook and southern parts of Carroll Gardens is utilized though, which is what virtually keeps that portion afloat.

I definitely wouldn't cut the B57 to Metropolitan Avenue, because there are a considerable amount of riders getting on from that stop on 61 Street anyways. I've been on a few later evening buses on weekends with 8 or so riders heading up to Fresh Pond Road. I was on a bus on Saturday morning that got 20 riders from the first stop alone. With the exception of weekday evenings towards Red Hook, I haven't been on a bus where 5 or less people were getting on at the first stop / getting off near or on Grand Avenue. I don't think that everyone getting on in Maspeth lives in that area (I know I don't). I have seen some walking up Grand Avenue, and taking Q59's east as well, so it makes me wonder where they exactly come from. I was thinking that extending to 69 Street would eliminate some of those transfers.

That's not normal.... I've also experienced about that many people waiting for B57's at the first stop on a couple occasions - and every single time, buses were significantly late... I'm not just talking 5-10 mins. either.... Worse, the first bus that had pulled up to the stop, dropped off pax & went OOS.... Next bus came not too long afterwards, but went on layover & eventually picked up us crowds..... This is one of the problems I have with the B57 (it's the same shit the B62 on the Queens end is notorious for) - buses arriving late as f*** then going OOS... That was going on before the extension to Red Hook & after the extension, it compounded the duration of how late buses were arriving.... My rule of thumb was (outside the rush anyway), if saw anymore than 5 people waiting for a B57 anywhere north of Met. av, the shit's late.... Ended up walking if it was a nice brisk day out.....

Funny that you doubt every B57 user on that end are residents of Maspeth.... Hell, I'll go as far as to say, 85-90% of the people you see getting on B57's at the first stop are largely coming off other buses (that includes those walking from Hamilton).... My guess might be a little off w/ the %-ages, but the riding patterns of the route on that end is something I picked up on that quick when I started fanning the B57 like mad, back in the day...

Your idea of extending it to connect w/ the Q18 (that general part of the neighborhood) fills the palpable void in that area.... I knew the void existed, but I was reluctant to extending the B57 because I didn't (and to a small extent, still don't) think Maspeth in general is all too reliant on the route..... The vibe I've long felt, is that it's utilized out of convenience moreso than out of necessity.... There's been numerous occasions where I've taken (or observed) the B57 & buses were carrying next to (or literally) nothing past Met. - to the point where when I'd be waiting for a WB bus at Met, I would say to myself (or even out loud in frustration), why won't they cut this f***in route back already.... But I'll give you credit for trying to spur ridership on that end..... On the Brooklyn end though, I strongly believe it would get more usage on Park instead of Flushing, west of Woodhull... So that's another change I'd make to the route....

Side note: I wonder if Livingston/Court (current B45 terminal) could handle having B45's, B62's, and B57's ending there....

B35 via Church · July 15, 2017

I remember a while ago, we had this discussion, and the ideas we were tossing around went something like this:

Create a WBP-IKEA route via the Navy Yard & Court/Smith Street (Obviously the B57 would be cut back)

Run the B57 through the Navy Yard.

Run the B69 through the Navy Yard to WBP (basically, it's a little harder to reach from Manhattan, but easier to get to from southern/eastern Brooklyn)

Extend the B32 to Downtown Brooklyn via the Navy Yard.

My preference would be to either run the B69 through there or just create a WBP-IKEA route through there (or maybe both. Have the B69 serve a destination that the B67 doesn't, and also help solve some of the reliability issues on the B57 and giving Court/Smith Streets a less frequent route more suited to the lower ridership). Also, it might possibly be a more reliable (albeit less frequent) alternative to the B62 around that Navy Street loop that would allow it to be straightened out.

Question: How is traffic along Prospect Avenue (or 20th Street)? I've always felt there was a lack of connectivity between that part of Park Slope (I guess South Slope/Greenwood Heights) and areas on the other side of the cemetery. Another idea that sounds good in terms of B68 extensions is one to 7th Avenue/9th Street for Methodist Hospital.

I also remember said discussion.... Still flustered as to how to serve the Navy Yard though

Where McDonald merges into 20th st, sees moderate to heavy traffic on up to 7th (which is where the vast majority of people turn off).... That traffic is a combination of said McDonald av traffic from the south & those coming off the SB Prospect (expwy) at 10th av tryna get to the heart of Park slope & what not.... Basically, 20th st west of 7th is rather dead; mostly residential with pockets of light industry sprinkled in the mix.... Not sure if bidirectional bus service would be suitable, since 20th is more narrow than say, 39th at its narrowest....

While I think "South Slope" is nothing more than a marketing ploy used by realtors, Greenwood Heights I've always categorized as the area that Park Slopers nor Sunset Park-ers (lol) wanted to claim (basically, that area b/w 20th & 39th b/w the cemetery & the bay)....

There's a tangible void in terms of bus service, but not necessarily a palpable one.... What I mean by that is - although one physically exists, there isn't a real clamoring (that I'm aware of anyway) to physically have it filled..... Greenwood Heights patrons, much like Windsor Terrace patrons, tend to want to be insular (which is why I don't buy into the whole South Slope shtick; Greenwood Heights folks don't align themselves w/ Park Slope - they use (them for) their amenities because much of none exists w/i Greenwood Heights!!).... When folks think of Park Slope, they're not really thinking of anything south of 15th - so to try to stretch the mold (or w/e you wanna call it) all the way down to the early 20's streets I find comical as hell.....

I'm not sure what the blueprint would even be for a 20th st route... IDK, have the B69 turned around to where it would use 20th west of 7th (instead of 19th/20th east of it) on over to 4th or something, to eventually end w/ the B35/B70?

B68 to Methodist is another one of those old ideas I never liked from day one... A compromise was brought up by whoever it was back then, to split the B68 at Kings Hwy, to have the northern spur run over to Methodist.... While that's obviously better than running the B68 from Coney Island to Methodist, I'm not all too fond of said compromise either..... The ridership patterns support a split of the B68 there, but at the same time, that area is congested enough to want to end 2 more bus routes in what I call "commercial Kings Highway".... Not to mention that I think a continuous connection of/along CI av should remain intact.... B68's running past 15th st (F) on that end, I would dub as SNAFU - it satisfies the park goers & those that want the (F) (G) .....

Edited July 15, 2017 by B35 via Church

B35 via Church · July 15, 2017

The B68 already travels along way to Coney Island. Unless if there's a limited. I cannot see this extending to 7th Avenue and 9th street. Don't get me wrong. I like the extension plus it's a direct transfer to the train plus travel down Prospect Park West.

The B32 extension to Downtown? I'm on the total fence with that. Unless it is terminating either at Cadman Plaza, Dumbo with the B25 and former B41 I don't see it happening. My next question would be is how bad is the B62 servicing Downtown?

Overall, I find things have gotten better w/ the B68 in terms of service.... For whatever the reason, I find that CI av isn't as congested as it used to be, say back in the early 2000's & prior to it.... I don't have that hesitation to want to use the route as I used to..... Don't know if that they made the lights more in sync or something, but traffic tends to move better... Also, MUCH less double parking along along CI av these days.... I don't think a B68 LTD is necessary at all & I would not use that to justify an extension into the heart of Park Slope....

I happen to think more should be made of portions of the the B32 on the Queens end (I would remove the B32 from WBP & run it over to Met (G) instead)... The B62 is the interborough route that connects more of Brooklyn to Queens..... I'd like to see the B32 connect more of Queens to Brooklyn.....

A B32 running downtown via the Navy Yard would take the "distance" riders from off the B62 (by that I mean, those that are riding from Downtown to WBP at minimum)..... I personally hate the way the B62 crawls within Jewish Williamsburg, but to their credit, they do use it (within their neighborhood anyway) - so that's all you can really ask for.... But again, I would look to expand the footprint of the fairly new route to other areas, rather than it being (more of) an alternative to the B62....

To opine on the question at the end there, I don't think it's a question of how bad the B62 serves Downtown (enough to where the B32 should run downtown anyway)... The problem on that end of that route, I find, is that things are too hit or miss in terms of how prompt service is.... It's a reason why you have those project heads (Farragut) taking B57's interchangeably w/ B62's...... Apparently folks are taking both routes interchangeably as far as the northern part of Clinton Hill now.... That never used to be the case.

checkmatechamp13 · July 16, 2017

Traffic in the area is pretty moderate. However, it can get congested at times with the Prospect Expressway.

That's basically what I'm saying: How often does the Prospect Expressway back up to the point where you have enough traffic on 20th Street or Prospect Avenue to severely delay a bus route through there?

I also remember said discussion.... Still flustered as to how to serve the Navy Yard though

Where McDonald merges into 20th st, sees moderate to heavy traffic on up to 7th (which is where the vast majority of people turn off).... That traffic is a combination of said McDonald av traffic from the south & those coming off the SB Prospect (expwy) at 10th av tryna get to the heart of Park slope & what not.... Basically, 20th st west of 7th is rather dead; mostly residential with pockets of light industry sprinkled in the mix.... Not sure if bidirectional bus service would be suitable, since 20th is more narrow than say, 39th at its narrowest....

While I think "South Slope" is nothing more than a marketing ploy used by realtors, Greenwood Heights I've always categorized as the area that Park Slopers nor Sunset Park-ers (lol) wanted to claim (basically, that area b/w 20th & 39th b/w the cemetery & the bay)....

There's a tangible void in terms of bus service, but not necessarily a palpable one.... What I mean by that is - although one physically exists, there isn't a real clamoring (that I'm aware of anyway) to physically have it filled..... Greenwood Heights patrons, much like Windsor Terrace patrons, tend to want to be insular (which is why I don't buy into the whole South Slope shtick; Greenwood Heights folks don't align themselves w/ Park Slope - they use (them for) their amenities because much of none exists w/i Greenwood Heights!!).... When folks think of Park Slope, they're not really thinking of anything south of 15th - so to try to stretch the mold (or w/e you wanna call it) all the way down to the early 20's streets I find comical as hell.....

I'm not sure what the blueprint would even be for a 20th st route... IDK, have the B69 turned around to where it would use 20th west of 7th (instead of 19th/20th east of it) on over to 4th or something, to eventually end w/ the B35/B70?

B68 to Methodist is another one of those old ideas I never liked from day one... A compromise was brought up by whoever it was back then, to split the B68 at Kings Hwy, to have the northern spur run over to Methodist.... While that's obviously better than running the B68 from Coney Island to Methodist, I'm not all too fond of said compromise either..... The ridership patterns support a split of the B68 there, but at the same time, that area is congested enough to want to end 2 more bus routes in what I call "commercial Kings Highway".... Not to mention that I think a continuous connection of/along CI av should remain intact.... B68's running past 15th st on that end, I would dub as SNAFU - it satisfies the park goers & those that want the .....

Hmmm, how heavy is ridership on the B67/69 in Windsor Terrace? I remember reading somewhere that there were complaints that when schools were in session, you would start seeing flagging heading northbound at Albemarle Road. I don't know if it's something that could be solved with a few AM trippers or something, or if you really do need both the B67/69 through there.

I remember BrooklynBus had an idea to have the northern part of a B68 split ending at Kings Highway, and the southern part ending at (I believe) Church Avenue (not sure exactly, but I know he designed it so there was some overlap). He might've had the northern portion continue to Methodist, but I'm not sure.

B35 via Church · July 16, 2017

That's basically what I'm saying: How often does the Prospect Expressway back up to the point where you have enough traffic on 20th Street or Prospect Avenue to severely delay a bus route through there?

That happens very, very rarely... That would be the least of my concerns if I were to drum up a 20th st route....

Hmmm, how heavy is ridership on the B67/69 in Windsor Terrace? I remember reading somewhere that there were complaints that when schools were in session, you would start seeing flagging heading northbound at Albemarle Road. I don't know if it's something that could be solved with a few AM trippers or something, or if you really do need both the B67/69 through there.

I remember BrooklynBus had an idea to have the northern part of a B68 split ending at Kings Highway, and the southern part ending at (I believe) Church Avenue (not sure exactly, but I know he designed it so there was some overlap). He might've had the northern portion continue to Methodist, but I'm not sure.

McDonald av usage is seriously low north of Caton (this includes where McDonald spills into 20th st) & south of Church.... So B67 usage in Windsor Terrace falls into that category - especially since Bishop Ford closed down.... So low to where B67's (from the north) have a short turn terminal at the 18th st stop on 7th... Don't know if these are still done since the B69 got diverted to 7th av though....

Nah, it wasn't BrooklynBus.... He had the B68 phased out by having the B67 diverted to run over the northern portion of the B68 on down to Kings Hwy (via 20th, PPW, current B68).... The southern portion was the B11 from Maimonides to 18th av, the B8 to CI av, en route to CI (called a "B10")..... The person I'm thinking of simply had both splits ending at Kings Hwy, w/ the northern split running to Methodist...

BM5 via Woodhaven · July 16, 2017

McDonald av usage is seriously low north of Caton (this includes where McDonald spills into 20th st) & south of Church.... So B67 usage in Windsor Terrace falls into that category - especially since Bishop Ford closed down.... So low to where B67's (from the north) have a short turn terminal at the 18th st stop on 7th... Don't know if these are still done since the B69 got diverted to 7th av though....

They do have short-turns at 7 Avenue & 18 Street (except summer periods)...

The only thing is, those buses originate from Cortelyou Road.

1)I’m not doubting the problem that plague the route while it’s along Caton (I’ve even specifically stated that a large part of the problem amounts to parents [or whoever] double parking, exacerbating traffic flow to pick up/drop off schoolkids in another discussion)….NY27 is also a truck route, so that doesn’t help anything either….

Okay, so you don’t attribute anything to the B35 on Church…. Regardless, what I take issue with is such a drastic solution that completely fails to consider how the route is used, after the connection to the B35..... Since that part of the route is problematic (Caton), well let’s do away with it & cut the route back to McDonald… What the B16 deals with on Caton doesn’t come close to being enough to cut the route back to Church (even if it would now directly connect to the )… You are solving nothing by having the B48 run over to McDonald as some sort of compromise or something - as the vast majority of SW bound B16 riders embarking east of McDonald (not inclusive) ride well past McDonald….

The only real quirk I have with the B16 east of McDonald is that I don’t believe it necessarily has to run to Prospect Park subway…. Outside of leaving it be, I would be content with having the route continuing along Caton to F’bush & then run up F’bush to Parkside, to end right in front of the subway station…

2)I don’t see the MTA leaving Greenpoint av w/ nothing, nor providing service with anything worse than 30 min headways…. I wouldn’t worry about any risk in that regard - but if that’s your concern, perhaps you can run the Greenpoint spur of the B24 on up to the 48^th St. mall (instead of having your B58 or w/e do that)…. That would easily warrant headways better than 30….

When I mentioned short turns, I was referring to the northern end/terminal of the route (in other words, having buses run w/i Brooklyn)…. Where would you even justifiably short turn B43’s from the north anyway? Having NB buses begin at Empire/Brooklyn (or Kingston) would be a terrible idea…. There was the old idea by some people back in the day on these transit boards that entailed running it to KCH, but I see that making the route much less useful than it is now....

I’d run the B48 (as a means of also phasing out the B24) to Sunnyside to aid in its abysmal overall usage…. The B43 OTOH already has potent riderbases (plural) along the route from end to end…. I guess you can adhere to the mindset of more is better, but you have to also discern when/where is enough, enough…. The B43 (or a variant of it) serving the Greenpoint spur of the B24 crosses that line for me…..

3)You don't think the Q59 should be all they get & I don't think those projects should be a sticking point as to why the B48 gets branched - funny how that works.....

When I came up w/ the B48 idea (the Sunnyside branch), overall usage of the route was by far & large the main concern.... If the B48 had B43 ridership, I would have left it alone.... But as it is, the route has never really been much of a draw at all in Bed Stuy', and of course, it running to a heavy industrial area (where sadly, there's not much demand for bus usage out there [unlike industrial Maspeth])....

Anyway, the portion of the B24 b/w Sunnyside & WBP I would've likely altered & extended somewhere (instead of involving the B48 as a means of phasing out the current B24)... I would still have the Greenpoint av leg as a standalone route b/w the & the - this is solely thanks to the way 48th is blocked off at QB...

I see more walking & biking these days over on that end of the B48, so I don't think Nassau's doing too hot right now.... I seriously doubt it ever recovered from the losses that occurred due to that road construction along Nassau some years back....

4)That's not normal.... I've also experienced about that many people waiting for B57's at the first stop on a couple occasions - and every single time, buses were significantly late... I'm not just talking 5-10 mins. either.... Worse, the first bus that had pulled up to the stop, dropped off pax & went OOS.... Next bus came not too long afterwards, but went on layover & eventually picked up us crowds..... This is one of the problems I have with the B57 (it's the same shit the B62 on the Queens end is notorious for) - buses arriving late as f*** then going OOS... That was going on before the extension to Red Hook & after the extension, it compounded the duration of how late buses were arriving.... My rule of thumb was (outside the rush anyway), if saw anymore than 5 people waiting for a B57 anywhere north of Met. av, the shit's late.... Ended up walking if it was a nice brisk day out.....

Funny that you doubt every B57 user on that end are residents of Maspeth.... Hell, I'll go as far as to say, 85-90% of the people you see getting on B57's at the first stop are largely coming off other buses (that includes those walking from Hamilton).... My guess might be a little off w/ the %-ages, but the riding patterns of the route on that end is something I picked up on that quick when I started fanning the B57 like mad, back in the day...

Your idea of extending it to connect w/ the Q18 (that general part of the neighborhood) fills the palpable void in that area.... I knew the void existed, but I was reluctant to extending the B57 because I didn't (and to a small extent, still don't) think Maspeth in general is all too reliant on the route..... The vibe I've long felt, is that it's utilized out of convenience moreso than out of necessity.... There's been numerous occasions where I've taken (or observed) the B57 & buses were carrying next to (or literally) nothing past Met. - to the point where when I'd be waiting for a WB bus at Met, I would say to myself (or even out loud in frustration), why won't they cut this f***in route back already.... But I'll give you credit for trying to spur ridership on that end..... On the Brooklyn end though, I strongly believe it would get more usage on Park instead of Flushing, west of Woodhull... So that's another change I'd make to the route....

Side note: I wonder if Livingston/Court (current B45 terminal) could handle having B45's, B62's, and B57's ending there....

1) With regards to the B16, perhaps the route should utilize Parkside instead of Caton Avenue, in order to increase reliability. As for terminating the route at Prospect Park, I'm indifferent about that. I wouldn't leave the route as it is though.

2) I don't believe the MTA would leave it with nothing, but knowing them, they would reduce service to run every 20 minutes at least during the AM rush, and every 30 minutes all other times, in addition to reducing the span of service on the route. The B33 would serve for more destinations than either B24 leg, and would have roughly the same frequencies as the current B24 (service would be a tad more frequent during shoulder periods and the PM rush), however it would less frequent (40 minute headways) during late evenings instead of the current coverage headways. At the very least, it would allow riders to take the bus instead of the subway to/from those areas the B43 serves.

There would be no short-turn in the north, because it would be infeasible to do so. If you look it, the B33 is the full route, while the B43 is the short-turn (going towards Box Street instead of terminating at Greenpoint Avenue). If service was more frequent than what it is, then maybe it would work out. On weekdays and Saturdays, every other B43 during daytime and evening hours would become the B33, with a boost during weekday midday periods and saturday mornings on the combined route to not have 40 minute headways during the day on either route). The route wouldn't be much frequent to begin with for short-turns. It's not like I'm adding B33 service on top of existing B43 service.

3) Well, the combined B48/B58 frequencies would be more frequent throughout the day over the current B48 route, so perhaps that would entice riders to utilize the route more than it currently does. If the Nassau Avenue portion doesn't do too well, then the B48 would suffice with the proposed headways. I have only serving the B58 serving the projects in my proposal, but if it was rerouted via someway where it didn't serve the projects, the Q59 would serve it instead. I don't necessarily agree with having the Q59 serving it though. The B58 would serve more areas where riders would likely go compared to that leg of the B24, while providing a one-seat ride. The route also resembles B24 frequencies, with the exception of evening headways.

4) I never had buses so late like that, so it's likely more people are indeed taking the B57 from Maspeth then compared when you frequented the B57. I was on a bus yesterday towards Maspeth during the afternoon which had 12 (includes me) riding past Metropolitan Avenue. 7 of those riders got off at 61 Street (Fresh Pond Road), and there were 4 which continued to the last stop. It was fairly on time, a few minutes late though (like 2-3 minutes). The morning bus I took was lighter though (6 riders from 61 Street, with one getting off at Metropolitan Avenue).

Not saying that all the increases are due to riders getting from Maspeth, but the B57 has had continuous increases from 2011 in ridership. Weekday ridership increases spiked when service was extended to Red Hook (January 2013), and still continued to grow every year following that. Weekend ridership follows a similar trend, but increased at a greater rate than weekday ridership during the same periods.

Regarding the B57 onto Park Avenue, would that mean the B62 runs along Flushing Avenue instead? IDK about the section between Broadway & Classon Avenue, but the section within Clinton Hill I would support having the B57 via Park Avenue (while having the B62 running via Flushing Avenue).

Regarding the B45 terminal, perhaps on the weekend (since all three routes aren't too frequent to begin with during those periods), although IDK about weekdays (more specifically, rush hours). Even though service isn't insanely frequent on the B45 or B57, the B62 is a little more frequent, so that may be an issue regarding the turnaround.

Edited July 16, 2017 by BM5 via Woodhaven Bl

Sign In

Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Important Information