Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I agree with kingjunior34 there should be more route from brooklyn to manhattan we can have buses and train just like the other boroughs. We dont have to be traditional and say brooklyn always had a lot of train so it should just stay how it is forever theres nothing wrong with a change

Q43ltd why dont you see it happening

I support transportation alternatives, but I don't support running services just for the hell of it. There needs to be demand, and the service needs to make sense. You still haven't said who would be using the service, not what sort of headways would exist.

[B35 via Church]

city point and the barclay center is starting to develop more so i thought about the b51 again and i know people gonna say no but i was thinking of the b51 running from barclay center to soho in manhattan last stop would be broadway and houston street.

B51 northbound

.starting point flatbush ave and alantic

.run on flatbush ave to manhattan bridge

.when it get off bridge its will go on chrystie st

.make a left on houston street and left on broadway and terminate at broadway and houston.

B51 southbound

. Drive on broadway make a left on spring st

.make a left on Lafayette st

.right on houston

.right on chrystie st

.right on hester st

.left on bowery st

. Make left on manhattan bridge and take flatbush straight down to barclay center

Yeah, this is a nice route.... for Big Bus Tours.

 

Otherwise, suggesting that a public bus route run up Flatbush from Barclay's into Manhattan is simply not being realistic..... It's not even about ADA issues (like the B39, since you later brought it up) here....

 

Yea but thats in manhattan this bus is coming from brooklyn

Right....

 

So where a Brooklyn-Manhattan interborough route terminates in Manhattan doesn't matter? That's what you're saying with this.....

 

Every 20 mins and see how it turns out the ridership would come from flatbush ave from alantic terminal and since there no bus that runs on flatbush pass livingston this would be the first sometimes you have to experiment and try something theres no bus that goes pass livingston they all turn off its worth a try and houston st in manhattan would gain a lil ridership i think this would do better than the b39 route for sure i get that manhattan bridge has traffic but in my opinion the willamburg bridge is far far worst in terms of traffic and the current b24 route make no sesne it goes from brooklyn to queens back to brooklyn why not just terminate in queens and start at broadway and flushing it would be good since there no bus that runs on bushwick from flushing since the old b13 and there is no bus that runs on mc Guinness blvd.

The ridership would consist of random tourists & venue goers, at best..... No Brooklyn resident's gonna come off of a bus or a train that runs in the vicinity of Barclays to get to a random part of Manhattan at a rate of about a whopping TWO miles an hour..... You're not being realistic with this dude.....

As much I as I would like the B51 to return, I don't see it happening

Same.... And especially not in the fashion that's currently being suggested here.

[Fresh Pond]

Yea but thats in manhattan this bus is coming from brooklyn

Where would you even terminate a bus at Barclays? Your proposal is more or less an train variant and it'll still get you there faster than your proposal over the bridge. Chinatown traffic is suicide, and so is downtown Brooklyn traffic.

[darrianQ60]

I was gonna terminate it wuthe b37 and since you dont like that idea what about b32 and b24 idea

[Interested Rider]

I see that 87th Street has gotten even worse from the time that the B/64 was running on that street. It always had disruptions even at 6 AM with the trucks and I am going back 15 -20 years. I used to dread taking the B/64 and having to transfer to either the S/7 (S/53)  or to the S/79. There was a period where the B/64 ran directly on 86th Street for a short time during the 2000 - 2010 period to 3rd Avenue due to some project that has long been forgotten.

As far as the extension to Shore Road, this should have happened  many years ago when  the B/64 was terminating at 4th Avenue and the S/79 terminated at the B/64 stop on 4th Avenue. When the terminal  of the S/79.was changed to Brooklyn, the ridership took up like a rocket. I did not start taking the route until the 6:30 AM bus which was terminating at Richmond and Hylan began going to the mall. Then it became my bus of choice (along with a lot of other riders) and the headways started to decrease. When I transferred from the S/79 to the B/64 in the late afternoon, it got to the point where there was no room at the terminal for any additional buses so they discharged riders before the terminal. The optimum time to extend the B/1 to Shore Road should have been when the B/1 and the B/64 switched terminals in June 2010. The only reason that I think it did not happen at that time was the presumption that B/1 riders preferred transferring to the S/79 or did not want to cross the street to access the subway.  As far as I am concerned, I wonder why it has taken the TA so long to send all B/1 buses to Shore Road (leave 87th street for the trucks) as obviously it has gotten far worse since I retired at the end of September 2010 and the schedules are not what they are today.

[Future ENY OP]

city point and the barclay center is starting to develop more so i thought about the b51 again and i know people gonna say no but i was thinking of the b51 running from barclay center to soho in manhattan last stop would be broadway and houston street.

B51 northbound

.starting point flatbush ave and alantic

.run on flatbush ave to manhattan bridge

.when it get off bridge its will go on chrystie st

.make a left on houston street and left on broadway and terminate at broadway and houston.

B51 southbound

. Drive on broadway make a left on spring st

.make a left on Lafayette st

.right on houston

.right on chrystie st

.right on hester st

.left on bowery st

. Make left on manhattan bridge and take flatbush straight down to barclay center

 

Seeing this makes me cringe..

I just moved from East New York to Crown Heights/Downtown, and I will tell you this.

Maybe 10+ years ago, this proposal would fly.. However, the way the traffic is set up on Flatbush Avenue.

I don't think you want to implement ANY type of bus service between Barclays Center + Citypoint and Manhattan.

 

I will tell you the following (Through Observations):

1) There are issues already trying to terminate buses on 4th Avenue and Atlantic Ave. The B37 shares a stop with the B103. The B37 you see signed up for the Barclays actually terminates at 4th Ave & Dean Street.

 

2) If there's an accident on the Manhattan Bridge, the headways will snarl. Whether it be northbound or southbound. Yes, now that the lower level is re-open heading towards Manhattan only, this will not solve the problems getting out Canal Street.

 

3) You have the following lines: and the Long Island Railroad that stop within the vicinity of Barclays and Citypoint. Also bus lines, B25/26/37/38/41/45/52/54/57/61/67/69 that all stop within the vicinity and walking distances of Barclays and Citypoint.

 

So adding any additional bus lines Downtown will create more traffic.

 

Although I'd like to see some intraborough bus service b/w Brooklyn and Manhattan. But too many subway lines that will get you downtown manhattan within 20 mins with the fore-mentioned lines.

[checkmatechamp13]

I see that 87th Street has gotten even worse from the time that the B/64 was running on that street. It always had disruptions even at 6 AM with the trucks and I am going back 15 -20 years. I used to dread taking the B/64 and having to transfer to either the S/7 (S/53)  or to the S/79. There was a period where the B/64 ran directly on 86th Street for a short time during the 2000 - 2010 period to 3rd Avenue due to some project that has long been forgotten.

As far as the extension to Shore Road, this should have happened  many years ago when  the B/64 was terminating at 4th Avenue and the S/79 terminated at the B/64 stop on 4th Avenue. When the terminal  of the S/79.was changed to Brooklyn, the ridership took up like a rocket. I did not start taking the route until the 6:30 AM bus which was terminating at Richmond and Hylan began going to the mall. Then it became my bus of choice (along with a lot of other riders) and the headways started to decrease. When I transferred from the S/79 to the B/64 in the late afternoon, it got to the point where there was no room at the terminal for any additional buses so they discharged riders before the terminal. The optimum time to extend the B/1 to Shore Road should have been when the B/1 and the B/64 switched terminals in June 2010. The only reason that I think it did not happen at that time was the presumption that B/1 riders preferred transferring to the S/79 or did not want to cross the street to access the subway.  As far as I am concerned, I wonder why it has taken the TA so long to send all B/1 buses to Shore Road (leave 87th street for the trucks) as obviously it has gotten far worse since I retired at the end of September 2010 and the schedules are not what they are today.

 

The S79 wasn't moved to its present stop until September 6th, 2009. So it only shared that stop with the B64 for about 9 months (until June 2010). At that time, there weren't any short-turns to Hylan & Richmond. In April 2012 the B1 was moved to its current terminal.

 

In any case, the B1/64 were swapped because they wanted the more frequent B1 to run the shorter route to 86th & 4th while the less frequent B64 ran the longer route. So extending the B1 to Shore Road would cut into those savings.

[B35 via Church]

Where would you even terminate a bus at Barclays? Your proposal is more or less an train variant and it'll still get you there faster than your proposal over the bridge. Chinatown traffic is suicide, and so is downtown Brooklyn traffic.ooklyn traffic.

...Which is why I say Darrian isn't being realistic with this proposal.

 

You ask where would a bus even terminate along Barclays... That could be done, but I see a more serious issue..... As soon as I read his proposal, the first thing (well okay, the second... as the first thing was how ridiculous this route is) was, where are you putting stops along....

 

....flatbush pass livingston

 

.....and what is the expectancy of (whatever people he thinks will take this route) getting to these stops safely if they're on opposite sides of Flatbush av. ext.??? Use Dekalb (subway entrance/exit) to cross Flatbush av extension? Nobody's going to do that to catch a bus that takes them to a part of Manhattan that isn't largely being sought after from Brooklyn....

 

I'm not even tryna be funny, I would walk the bridge (because I've done it more times than I can count) than take a bus route that'd run along Flatbush av. extension..... Even the old (real) B51 that took Tillary to the bridge from Cadman Plz. was/would be better than having a bus outright run along Flatbush av. from Barclay's all the way to the bridge.....

 

I don't even see his proposal as one of those "it looks good on paper" deals...... SoHo from Barclays or Downtown Brooklyn?

 

*shrugs*

 

 

I was gonna terminate it with the b37 and since you dont like that idea what about b32 and b24 idea

 

I also had two idea one is to change the b32 route i would have the b32 run from willamburg to woodside queens

B32 northbound

.drive on broadway

.right on kent ave eventually kent turns in franklin

.right on greenpoint ave

.take greenpoint ave (which eventually turns into roosevelt) to 62nd st make left on 62nd st terminate at 62nd st and roosevelt ave and

B32 southbond back to brooklyn

.left on 39 ave

.left on 61 st

.right on roosevelt (which eventually turns into greenpoint ave)

.make a left on franklin

.left on n14 st

.right on wythe ave

Left on broadyway to willamburg bridge plaza

 

 

2nd idea b24 from flushing ave and broadway to court sqaure queens

B24 northbound

.Right on flushing ave

.left on buswick ave (whick eventually turns into woodpoint ave

.left on frost ave

.right on graham ave

.right on meeker ave

.left on mc guniess blvd

.after crossing pulskai bridge drive on 11 st

.right on 44 drive terminate at 44 drive and 21 st

B24 southbound

.right on 21 st

.right on 45 ave

.left on 11 st to pulaski bridge

.drive on mc guniess blvd which turns in humbodlt

.right on summer pl

Terminate at broadway and flushing

 

color formatted for clarity... anyway....

 

* Generally speaking, I don't have a problem w/ extending the B32 into more of Queens.... With that said, I don't think both the B32 & the B62 should be terminating at WBP.... I would cut it back on the Brooklyn end....

 

* As for the B24 idea.... While I don't care much for having a route serve McGuinness, that's all well & good that you want to have it serve Woodhull via Bushwick av, but what would run along Metropolitan av east of the ? That's the most utilized part of the Williamsburg spur of the (real) B24....

[B35 via Church]

...As far as I am concerned, I wonder why it has taken the TA so long to send all B/1 buses to Shore Road (leave 87th street for the trucks) as obviously it has gotten far worse since I retired at the end of September 2010 and the schedules are not what they are today.

Checkmate nailed it.... It would render the savings from the terminal swaps of the B1 & the B64 to be null & void....

 

I can hear the complaints now - Have the B1 extended to Shore road & you will have the masses that take it to/from the 4th av line stating how the route has gotten more unreliable & that it should have been left alone (to end at 86th/4th)..... Funny how unreliability complaints never arose when the B64 got sent up to Zuh-verian (Xaverian)....

 

In any case, the B1/64 were swapped because they wanted the more frequent B1 to run the shorter route to 86th & 4th while the less frequent B64 ran the longer route. So extending the B1 to Shore Road would cut into those savings.

To be honest, while I do miss the B64 running to 86th/4th, it's better off for the majority of B1 riders that the route runs there....

Ideally, the immediate area should be a bus hub (a la Ridgewood Terminal)......

 

At times, I'd laugh at how B1's from the east would tank at 13th before the swap... Literally, I used to see buses that went from having about 40-50 ppl. on it, to about a handful after the fact..... Usually, you see that passenger activity with routes that serve a subway, that doesn't end at the station where said tanking is happening (much like those Jamaica-Flushing routes from the north after they hit the )....

 

Of course, ridership habits had nothing to do with why the swap happened though.....

[Interested Rider]

The reason that the B/64 did not have complaints when it ran to 4th Avenue or you hear any complaints now when it goes to Shore Road can be summed up in the following::" the elevated structures and the business districts which co-exist  on a considerable portion of the B/1 route".. Bath Avenue does not have the elevated structure and it does not have a large business district except around Bay Parkway and 18th Avenue. The route is thus able to keep to a schedule as the only time Bath Avenue gets busy is when the Belt Parkway is tied up.and at Bay Parkway due to the long light there. Bay Ridge Avenue is one lane in each direction but since 65th Street is four blocks away, traffic will go there.. 

The 86th Street shopping center and the fact that the street is virtually one lane in each direction from Stillwell to New Utrecht Avenues is where a lot of time is lost as well as Brighton Beach Avenue Shopping Center where there are more lanes but has the same problems.As far as the B/1 having problems on that section of 86th Street, I can go back to when the route was the B/34 and i took the route during the summers of 1967 - 1969. and I remember the route having the same problems. So it seems that nothing has changed except that if I have to take the B/1 which is quite seldom, I avoid it at all costs.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

1)I don't see what you're saying about "somewhat" more useful; B71's carried air east of the main library.... There is no way in hell that a bus that would, at bare minimum, take some riders from off the B41 - in particular, those that are trying to get from one end of the park to the other (some of which, are coming off the believe it or not)..... Whatever amount of usage that would be accomplished with that alone, significantly trumps the B71 east of the library.... That's just secondary to tertiary usage; as I sincerely believe that those that are looking to get to Park Slope from areas east of the park (the primary reason for that B71 proposal) will take advantage of a route that'd take on such a routing.....

 

2)Of course turning B77's up 7th from the west would garner more riders than the B71 that ran via Union.... If it's not about serving all of 9th st (as a compromise to your (and others' in the past) proposal of running B68's into Park Slope, etc.) with a reverted B77 & a cutback of the B61 to IKEA, I wouldn't bring it (the B77) back - as today's B61 as is, solved a prior issue with 9th st service.... That is, the whole piece-mealing bit with the B75 & the B77....

 

3)Basically, my point in bringing up the talking point of a B77 that'd run to 19th/20th to handle 9th st service, quite frankly, is that it wouldn't involve creating a super-route out of a route whose efficiency IMO has made a stark increase in the past 20 years or so.... One thing I don't miss about taking the B68 to school sometimes (Grady) back in the day, was the maneuvering around &/or being at the mercy of all the dam 18-wheelers & other mini trucks that were notorious for double parking along CI av..... You were subjected to that crap b/w Midwood & Gravesend (or whatever you want to call Av Z/CI av)..... Not for nothing, but CI av isn't bogged down with traffic like it used to be either... It's more free-flowing these days.....

 

See, I never saw (and still don't see) a proposed B68 extension to Methodist back in the day as being a good idea... To me it's (along w/ your running of it all the way to IKEA) akin to the ole Q7 Green Acres, Bx7/10 Yonkers, B68/74 combo (speaking of the B68... Lol), B14 Grand army Plaza, the list goes on.... I don't foresee much of anyone south of Kensington taking buses into Park Slope, and those that are taking B68's to 15th st I can't fathom being mostly those that are taking the the 1-to-3 stops afterwards to as far west as Smith-9th..... You don't see much turnover b/w the B61 & the B68, so it leads me to believe that the masses are taking the subway to at least Downtown Brooklyn..... I can understand wanting to connect different parts of Brooklyn, but demand you would think has  to being some sort of a factor....

 

There's more I wanted to say, but done forgot since I came back from outside.... The post is long enough anyway, so this is gonna have to do for now.... The other reply of yours I'll get to some time this weekend, so take your time in responding....

1) The "somewhat" refers to the new routing proposed by residents compared to the old routing (I don't remember the exact proposed routing, but it doesn't use much of Eastern Parkway east of Grand Army, and IIRC serves Brooklyn Children's Museum as well. Given that it runs closer to the more popular areas in that neighborhood, it may garner more ridership than the old route (that, and the western extension to Brooklyn Bridge Park).

 

2) I personally wouldn't resurrect the B77 either. However, that's how I would run it, because running it to 19/20 Street would bring in little ridership. At least there's more ridership to keep the headways close to the B61 if the B77 along 7th Avenue. 

 

3)The B68 proposal is dependant if the 9 Street portion would be retained as a Red Hook to Windsor Terrace route. If it is, I don't believe that the frequencies would be maintained as it is, and therefore I would have the B68 running to Red Hook instead of creating a new route. Red Hook riders would likely use the route, but with the B57, there will likely be less of them getting on said buses. There also isn't enough ridership along 9 Street itself to sustain the current headways. I know the B68 isn't too unreliable, but I extended it since 9 Street isn't too heavy for the most part, and wouldn't hurt reliability by much. However, if the route is rerouted out of Windsor Terrace, whether to the north, east, south, or whatever direction and to whatever point where ridership would be significantly more, where current headways can be at worst trimmed a bit, then I would agree with leaving with the B68 as it is and having a B77 running across 9 Street.

 

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

You didn't respond to this yet, but I have some modifications to the B16 in the Borough Park/Kensington area, in addition to a rendering of what I would do with the B23 (which affects other routes). All the proposals are under the Southern Brooklyn Restructuring layer.

 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&authuser=0&mid=1XFqE_hL6yPBW4ccBYDuHp1sjicA&ll=40.580395826266866%2C-73.99874039211693&z=13

 

B16: The routing is straightened out onto Fort Hamilton Parkway, serves 12 Avenue, then goes to Church Avenue, before heading towards Prospect Park. 

 

B23: Service runs between Nostrand Avenue and Fort Hamilton High School, daily, via Cortelyou Road, 13/14 Avenues. Service runs every 15 minutes during the rush hour, every 20 minutes during middays and weekend daytimes, every 30 minutes during evenings. Service runs from 5:30 AM-11 PM 

 

B64: Diverted to west of 13 Avenue 86 Street, runs to 86 Street & Ridge Boulevard.

 

B72: Bay Ridge Avenue route, from Xaverian High School to Kings Highway Station. Runs from 5:30 AM to 11 PM, every 15 minutes during the rush, every 20 minutes during middays, Saturday daytime, and Sunday afternoon, every 30 minutes evenings, and Sunday mornings.

 

IDK what these changes will result with regards to B1 service. Since the B23 and the B64 cover the same portion of the B1 west of 13/14 Avenue, perhaps some service may be trimmed (unless B1 service as it is isn't enough).

[B35 via Church]

The reason that the B/64 did not have complaints when it ran to 4th Avenue or you hear any complaints now when it goes to Shore Road can be summed up in the following::" the elevated structures and the business districts which co-exist  on a considerable portion of the B/1 route"..

 

Bath Avenue does not have the elevated structure and it does not have a large business district except around Bay Parkway and 18th Avenue. The route is thus able to keep to a schedule as the only time Bath Avenue gets busy is when the Belt Parkway is tied up.and at Bay Parkway due to the long light there. Bay Ridge Avenue is one lane in each direction but since 65th Street is four blocks away, traffic will go there.. 

 

The 86th Street shopping center and the fact that the street is virtually one lane in each direction from Stillwell to New Utrecht Avenues is where a lot of time is lost as well as Brighton Beach Avenue Shopping Center where there are more lanes but has the same problems.As far as the B/1 having problems on that section of 86th Street, I can go back to when the route was the B/34 and i took the route during the summers of 1967 - 1969. and I remember the route having the same problems. So it seems that nothing has changed except that if I have to take the B/1 which is quite seldom, I avoid it at all costs.

In other words, the demand for Bath av is low.... Low enough to where much of no one gave enough of a shit to want to complain.

 

I wonder if Operations Planning is still considering the idea of extending the B1 to Shore Rd when the elevator at the 86 St/4 Av station begins construction to avoid having too many buses turning onto 86 St from 4 Av.

....and why would buses run all the way to Shore road because of that?

 

 

 

When I initially made the corresponding map, I was thinking about perhaps routing the B32 down via Vanderbilt Avenue, and then turn unto Union. I would still prefer to see the B71 revived, and not just have a merged route, serving more destinations. However, I feel that until it is revived, and/or if it's not going to be revived, the B69 could serve Union Street (so yes, I agree with the idea). Regardless of whether that is done, I would indeed try to eliminate the relationship it has with the B67.

Yeah, I would favor a B69/B71 combo over having the B69 run along 7th...

Concurrently though, I favor a revival of the (western portion of the) B71 over a B69/B71 combo....

 

In saying that, I'd also extend the B71 up Columbia (and away from Van Brunt) to terminate w/ the B63 - now that Brooklyn Bridge Park is a "thing"... This would easily shave minutes off of those in Cobble Hill & Carroll Gardens needing to get to Park Slope by no longer having to take the B61 (unless they specifically need 9th st)..... Carroll Gardens & Park Slope I've always characterized as separate but equal communities; only real difference is that Park Slope's commercial sector are more vivrant/patronized by outsiders.....

 

^^ In saying that (Lol), well, the B69 would have to be cut back to Plaza st/Vanderbilt av (basically, Grand Army Plaza) - as there's no justification for putting buses back along 8th/PPW.... I'd like to have buses layover at the NB plaza st stop, but the sidewalk would have to be narrowed for that to happen.... So as things are right this second, buses would have to layover at that worthless Grand Army Plz/Flatbush av stop on the western side of the traffic circle....

 

To sum all this up, I would:

- Cut back the B69 on the south end to Grand Army Plz & divert-and-extend it to WBP on the northern end...

- Revive the B71 to where it'd run b/w Brooklyn Bridge Park (w/ the B63) & Prospect Park subway..... Sackett/Van Brunt (buses really made their first pickups on Columbia/Union anyway) as a terminal is sorely antiquated here in 2017....

 

So, if the B23 were to serve 13/14 Avenues, where would it terminate on the southern/western end? Terminating in Borough Park would lead to low ridership. Another problem is that Cortelyou west of Ocean Parkway appears to be very "silent". From C I Avenue to Flatbush, it is narrow, susceptible to traffic caused by deliveries, etc. I would look to move the eastern terminal somewhere else other than Flatbush Avenue.

1) Short answer: Ft. Hamilton pkwy/86th st (current B16 NB stop)...

 

__Long answer: I wouldn't have the route terminating in Borough Park, as I believe coverage on 13th should pan south of Borough Park..... I wouldn't have buses ending at Flatbush av either (I've BEEN saying on these parts [before the route's discontinuation] that Flatbush/Cortelyou for the route was too abrupt a terminal)... When I came up w/ my B23 proposal, I took the busiest portions of the old B23 (everything west of McDonald) & proceeded to drum up a useful full-fledged route from that snippet of the old route....

 

Since you're only asking about the southern portion of the proposal....

- south of Flatbush av, buses would go: Cortelyou > McDonald > Church > 36th st > 13th av > 86th st > Ft. Hamilton Pkwy (to stand)...

- towards Flatbush av, buses would go: Ft. Hamilton Pkwy > 81st st > 7th av > 86th st > 13th av > 65th st > 14th av > Church > McDonald > Cortelyou, etc...

 

Of course, I'd like to run it 86th/4th - However, the space isn't available for (buses for) another route in the immediate area

(hence the current shifting around of the last drop-off / first pickup stops of the B1 to what it is now)....

Edited August 13, 2017 by B35 via Church

[Interested Rider]

This is in response to checkmate champ and his statements about the S/79:

1) My reference to the S/79 having a 6:30 AM weekday run to Hylan and Richmond was way before the date of 2012 that he wrote and everyone knows I had retired in 2010 so the reference i was making was to when the S/79 first started running to Brooklyn in the early 1990's and was eliminated a couple of years afterwards as the trip was extended to the Staten Island Mall The bus made a return trip to Brooklyn leaving at about 7:45 AM (I do not have the printed schedules possibly someone who does will verify the information).

2) The B/64 and the S/79 shared the same stop on 86th Street and 4th Avenue long before his date of 2009. In fact I think it was about ten years (give or take a couple) as the S/79 would  begin turning down 5th Avenue from 86th Street (later Fort Hamilton Parkway) to 92nd Street.. When I came down with the B/64 just after the parkway, I watched to see if the S/79 made the turn from 4th Avenue onto 86th Street so I knew where to make my transfer to the S/79 If I missed the S/79, I would take the B/64 to the S/53 to make the connection with the S/74. 

3) I remember the S/79 & S/53 sharing the west side of 4th Avenue at 86th Street and that was in the 1990's as when I took either the S/53 or S/79 in the afternoon, the bus made the turn from Fort Hamilton Parkway into 86th Street. I transferred at 86th Street to either the B/64 or the B/70. The year that I remember was 1996 as the B/70 was using the 9300 RTS Coaches when the MTA sent buses to Atlanta for the Olympics. 

4) I have posted it time and time again as someone has to update the Bernard Linder  articles on the bus system that appeared in Motor Coach Age from the late 1960's through the early 1970's (two of last histories: MABSTOA 10 years later or the Avenue B and East Broadway). Transit history is one of the most neglected areas and the history involving the routes since the late 1960's has been neglected so it is very hard to find out correct dates of operation unless a person has direct access to the source material.

[BrooklynBus]

The reason that the B/64 did not have complaints when it ran to 4th Avenue or you hear any complaints now when it goes to Shore Road can be summed up in the following::" the elevated structures and the business districts which co-exist  on a considerable portion of the B/1 route".. Bath Avenue does not have the elevated structure and it does not have a large business district except around Bay Parkway and 18th Avenue. The route is thus able to keep to a schedule as the only time Bath Avenue gets busy is when the Belt Parkway is tied up.and at Bay Parkway due to the long light there. Bay Ridge Avenue is one lane in each direction but since 65th Street is four blocks away, traffic will go there.. 

The 86th Street shopping center and the fact that the street is virtually one lane in each direction from Stillwell to New Utrecht Avenues is where a lot of time is lost as well as Brighton Beach Avenue Shopping Center where there are more lanes but has the same problems.As far as the B/1 having problems on that section of 86th Street, I can go back to when the route was the B/34 and i took the route during the summers of 1967 - 1969. and I remember the route having the same problems. So it seems that nothing has changed except that if I have to take the B/1 which is quite seldom, I avoid it at all costs.

Isn't it possible that the B64 didn't have complaints when it ran to Fourth Avenue while the B1 does be based on the fact that the B64 runs infrequently while the B1 runs much more often?

[Interested Rider]

I think that Brooklyn Bus is missing the point concerning the B/64  not having any complaints as the route ran very close to schedule and this  was even when the Ulmer Park legend worked the route many, many years ago. It was not a long route having an approximate running time of 30 minutes from one end to the other. The schedule was not bad at all with decent headways during the day and it provided good service.The route was my bridge route from the B/3 to the Staten Island routes and I preferred it over the N/R change at 59th Street as it was faster and more dependable. Both the drivers and the riders cared about the route and the one time that there was a driver that played games, he got the message loud and clear and never picked the route again.

When you have at least three business districts, two major runs under elevated structures and a one lane in each direction under one of them, the route will be subject to delays and sometimes a lot longer than it should be for buses that operate on schedule. When the bus driver takes out his bus for its first run, he has no idea of what the traffic will be so he may be on schedule one day, far off schedule the next, near schedule the next and on and on. With the B/1 you got to expect it just like the occasional truck that fails to read the sign about the height requirement and has to be backed out from the location that delays the route.The last time I took the B/1 was last year was from the Public School in Manhattan Beach to Lincoln High School and it was a total disaster as it took well over  1/2 hour to cover that distance.

Edited August 14, 2017 by Interested Rider

[checkmatechamp13]

Isn't it possible that the B64 didn't have complaints when it ran to Fourth Avenue while the B1 does be based on the fact that the B64 runs infrequently while the B1 runs much more often?

 

B35 is talking about the lack of complaints about unreliability from the route being "extended" to Xavarian High School (while the B1 was "truncated" to 86th & 4th), not any complaints relating to the B64 ending at 86th & 4th.

 

In any case, I don't see how the B64 running less often would result in fewer complaints. Yeah, if ridership was lower then there's fewer riders to complain but for the riders, generally more frequent service is better. The only reason to complain about more frequent service is if you're a NIMBY living on 87th Street, or maybe if you're talking about safety issues with more buses making turns (which is separate from the topic of unreliability).

 

2) The B/64 and the S/79 shared the same stop on 86th Street and 4th Avenue long before his date of 2009. In fact I think it was about ten years (give or take a couple) as the S/79 would  begin turning down 5th Avenue from 86th Street (later Fort Hamilton Parkway) to 92nd Street.. When I came down with the B/64 just after the parkway, I watched to see if the S/79 made the turn from 4th Avenue onto 86th Street so I knew where to make my transfer to the S/79 If I missed the S/79, I would take the B/64 to the S/53 to make the connection with the S/74. 

3) I remember the S/79 & S/53 sharing the west side of 4th Avenue at 86th Street and that was in the 1990's as when I took either the S/53 or S/79 in the afternoon, the bus made the turn from Fort Hamilton Parkway into 86th Street. I transferred at 86th Street to either the B/64 or the B/70. The year that I remember was 1996 as the B/70 was using the 9300 RTS Coaches when the MTA sent buses to Atlanta for the Olympics. 

 

Here's a 2004 bus map . It shows the S79 making a counterclockwise loop through Bay Ridge, which meant it terminated on the west side of 4th Avenue, while the B64 traveled down 87th Street between 5th Avenue & 4th Avenue which meant it terminated on the east side of 4th Avenue.

Edited August 14, 2017 by checkmatechamp13

[BrooklynBus]

Sorry to both Interested Rider and Checkmate. Guess I didn't go far back enough in the discussion to realize what was being said. I mistakenly thought the discussion was about Bay Ridge complaints about too many buses at 4th Avenue and 86 St causing congestion. So I based my comment on that.

 

Incidentally, I am glad you were able to use the B3 to B64 connection. That didn't exist before 1978. I suggested extending the B3 to replace the loss of the B4 and B34 along 25 Avenue. If I didn't suggest that, the MTA was content to keep the B3 terminus at 25 AV and 86 Street. They didn't consider improving Brooklyn Staten Island connections. And it still took them many more years to extend the S53 from 95 St to 86 St which I also suggested in 1978 when it was still the R7.

[Around the Horn]

B64: Diverted to west of 13 Avenue 86 Street, runs to 86 Street & Ridge Boulevard.

 

B72: Bay Ridge Avenue route, from Xaverian High School to Kings Highway Station. Runs from 5:30 AM to 11 PM, every 15 minutes during the rush, every 20 minutes during middays, Saturday daytime, and Sunday afternoon, every 30 minutes evenings, and Sunday mornings.

 

IDK what these changes will result with regards to B1 service. Since the B23 and the B64 cover the same portion of the B1 west of 13/14 Avenue, perhaps some service may be trimmed (unless B1 service as it is isn't enough).

I think you're really underestimating the amount of people using the B64 between the Bay Ridge Av leg, 13th Av leg and Bath Av leg...

[Interested Rider]

Brooklyn Bus: It will be 40 years since your changes to the Brooklyn routes took place and in looking back, this former critic is asking  as to why took  the MTA so long for them to implement it. For those who are not of our generation, the original B/1 ran from 25th Avenue to Manhattan Beach via 86th Street, Avenue X, East 14th Street (return via East 13th Street) Sheepshead Bay Road, Emmons Avenue, West End Avenue and finally Oriental Boulevard. It ran every 20 minutes and 60 minutes at night. It was basically just a feeder route to other routes that were part of the system. The B/34 was a sight improvement over the trolley route that it replaced with a 7 minute headway. when it lost the Staten Island ferry connection, the passenger loads dropped as it (like the B/9) provided connecting service to other routes. The routes should have been combined way back in the 1950's (as I said, I am doing some Monday Morning quarterbacking) as the shopping near the Sea Beach 86th Street Station was next to nothing and the combining of the B/1 and B/34 in the late 1950's and early 1960's would have helped the residents of that part of Gravesend.. This is why I highly recommend the Bernard Linder articles on the bus system as it seems that for the B/1 & B/34 it would have been an opportune time for it to be done.

Oh! Do I remember the S/7 and the many trips that I took on that route with every type of equipment from the Macks to the Orions over the Verrazano Bridge. Again in looking back, it seems that it for the route to be extended to 86th Street took what seems to be an  eternity even though it was the most logical place to terminate it when the Verrazano Bridge opened in November 1964. I spent a total of almost 29 years (on and off 1968 -1970, 1975 - 1979, 1987 - 2010)  commuting to/from Staten Island back to Brooklyn and  I am amazed that, it took about 30 years just to get the S/7 moved from 95th Street. The original route had the route going down 94th Street,3rd Avenue to 95th Street and 4th Avenue to stand on the side of the library. That did not last as when I began taking the S/7 in September 1968, the S /7 stop was in front of the library and the bus route was via 4th Avenue, Marine Avenue, Fort Hamilton Parkway to 92nd Street. where it remained until it was finally extended to 86th Street. I presume that you included the 86th Street move in the Staten Island study that was done in the late 1970's which changed the bus routes and the route numbers..If anything look at the service patterns in the Fort Hamilton/Bay Ridge area today as it indicates a history of missed opportunities and then an attempt to catch up with a sudden swath of changes over the last 20 years. Bay Ridge has always had narrow streets and this impacted (and still impacts) upon bus service as there are very few streets that can handle buses and parking without impacting upon schedules. Let's be honest, this is the reality of the situation and why there will  continue to have problems in that area.

Brooklyn Bus, everyone who writes on this forum, knows your qualifications and they know mine as each of us comes to this forum from a different perspective, so there is no need to restate it here. What I ask all those  is that who read and write on this forum take that into consideration when reading what we write as a rider and Brooklyn Bus as a planner.

[checkmatechamp13]

I think you're really underestimating the amount of people using the B64 between the Bay Ridge Av leg, 13th Av leg and Bath Av leg...

 

But at the same time, a decent amount of people used the B64 between Bath Avenue and the 86th Street commercial district. I think at least this way, it maintains better network coverage and connectivity, since those people would still be able to transfer (e.g from his B72 to the B23 or another route like the B6 for example)

[BrooklynBus]

Brooklyn Bus: It will be 40 years since your changes to the Brooklyn routes took place and in looking back, this former critic is asking  as to why took  the MTA so long for them to implement it. For those who are not of our generation, the original B/1 ran from 25th Avenue to Manhattan Beach via 86th Street, Avenue X, East 14th Street (return via East 13th Street) Sheepshead Bay Road, Emmons Avenue, West End Avenue and finally Oriental Boulevard. It ran every 20 minutes and 60 minutes at night. It was basically just a feeder route to other routes that were part of the system. The B/34 was a sight improvement over the trolley route that it replaced with a 7 minute headway. when it lost the Staten Island ferry connection, the passenger loads dropped as it (like the B/9) provided connecting service to other routes. The routes should have been combined way back in the 1950's (as I said, I am doing some Monday Morning quarterbacking) as the shopping near the Sea Beach 86th Street Station was next to nothing and the combining of the B/1 and B/34 in the late 1950's and early 1960's would have helped the residents of that part of Gravesend.. This is why I highly recommend the Bernard Linder articles on the bus system as it seems that for the B/1 & B/34 it would have been an opportune time for it to be done.

 

Oh! Do I remember the S/7 and the many trips that I took on that route with every type of equipment from the Macks to the Orions over the Verrazano Bridge. Again in looking back, it seems that it for the route to be extended to 86th Street took what seems to be an  eternity even though it was the most logical place to terminate it when the Verrazano Bridge opened in November 1964. I spent a total of almost 29 years (on and off 1968 -1970, 1975 - 1979, 1987 - 2010)  commuting to/from Staten Island back to Brooklyn and  I am amazed that, it took about 30 years just to get the S/7 moved from 95th Street. The original route had the route going down 94th Street,3rd Avenue to 95th Street and 4th Avenue to stand on the side of the library. That did not last as when I began taking the S/7 in September 1968, the S /7 stop was in front of the library and the bus route was via 4th Avenue, Marine Avenue, Fort Hamilton Parkway to 92nd Street. where it remained until it was finally extended to 86th Street. I presume that you included the 86th Street move in the Staten Island study that was done in the late 1970's which changed the bus routes and the route numbers..If anything look at the service patterns in the Fort Hamilton/Bay Ridge area today as it indicates a history of missed opportunities and then an attempt to catch up with a sudden swath of changes over the last 20 years. Bay Ridge has always had narrow streets and this impacted (and still impacts) upon bus service as there are very few streets that can handle buses and parking without impacting upon schedules. Let's be honest, this is the reality of the situation and why there will  continue to have problems in that area.

Brooklyn Bus, everyone who writes on this forum, knows your qualifications and they know mine as each of us comes to this forum from a different perspective, so there is no need to restate it here. What I ask all those  is that who read and write on this forum take that into consideration when reading what we write as a rider and Brooklyn Bus as a planner.

Yes, this November will be 39 years. Let me fill you in on some background you may not know to answer some of your questions.

 

You ask why it took so long to implement the changes. The simple reason is there never has been anyone other than myself who is qualified at NYCT to understand the way people use buses and why they don't use buses. It is not as simple as looking at data with the answers popping out at you. You need to first have some theories. Then you can use the data to study if your ideas are good or not. Although I know Brooklyn well, my knowledge in the other boroughs is limited. But I can still apply what I know happens in Brooklyn to routes in the other boroughs. I can tell you for sure that B35 via Church knows more about passenger and route usage around the city than the entire MTA combined.

 

That is not to say the MTA is incompetent. When there were bus dispatchers for each route, they were all the experts on their particular route. But the MTA never had the mechanisms in place to harness all that knowledge and put it in one place so that multiple routes could be studied at the same time like I did.

 

When I wrote my Masters Thesis in 1972, I simply proposed combining the B1 and B34 as well as extending it to Shore Road and separate 13 Av and Fort Hamilton Parkway routes. It just seemed obvious to me. I also combined the B40 and B78, ended the duplication between the B75 and the F train by extending the B57 to Smith 9th and combining the 9th Street portion with the B77. I also proposed combining the old B47 with the old B62 as well as many other changes which the MTA finally made over the following 45 years. I also proposed extending the B9 to Bergen Beach to takeover the B41 Bergen Beach branch which the MTA is now considering as part of their proposed B41 SBS.

 

In other words, just because many changes are obvious to you and me and others, they are not obvious to the "experts" at the MTA which also lacks the desire to improve bus routes.

 

Now when I was doing my study from 1974 to 1978, after collecting data, I thought of a better idea than simply combining the B1 and B34 because I also wanted to straighten the B36 and get rid of the useless B21. That's when I thought up the existing B1.

 

In 1977 when we were describing the ideas to the community boards, they told us they were asking for a single 86 Street route since the early 1960s and no one was listening. I didn't know that when I came to them with a similar proposal.

 

The MTA stalled us for two years and still refused to name any changes until they were sued by the Natural Resources Defense Council. So no changes would have ever been made if not for that lawsuit. That's what it took although the community had been requesting the changes for 15 years.

 

In 1978, I also proposed extending the R7 to 86 Street, the B68 to Coney Island, and the B5 to Coney Island. (They might have also been in my masters thesis too.) Those changes also were made many years later.

 

In my opinion it is the arrogance of the MTA and the agencies that preceded it that prevents it from listening to and acting on good ideas.

 

When I proposed extending the B11 to east of 18 Avenue, which was an obvious need, I didn't know that the BMT also wanted to extend it, but the idea was put on hold because of World War II. Of course once it became operated by the city, the idea died.

 

During my Masters thesis research I learned that when the B21 started in 1946, there were protesters in front of Coney Island Hospital the first day saying the route was poor and didn't meet their needs. That's why it was always lightly utilized as was the "original B1" which wasn't its original route.

 

My B1 is now the 7th most utilized route in the borough while the MTA's new 30 minute headway routes are all on the bottom.

[B22viaAtlanticAv]

@BrooklynBus  What is your opinion on the current B84 situation? Between the 30 minutes headways and the lack of advisement; the route is wasteful at best and in my experience it gets most of its ridership from the segment it shares with the B6. Quite frankly very few people consider the B84 when the Q8, B13 & B83 all travel to both sides of Gateway and at better frequencies too.

Edited August 16, 2017 by B102 LTD

[Kingjunior34]

When will Brooklyn depots get articulated buses

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[BrooklynBus]

@BrooklynBus  What is your opinion on the current B84 situation? Between the 30 minutes headways and the lack of advisement; the route is wasteful at best and in my experience it gets most of its ridership from the segment it shares with the B6. Quite frankly very few people consider the B84 when the Q8, B13 & B83 all travel to both sides of Gateway and at better frequencies too.

I fully agree with you. Why should you consider the B84 when you can take the B83? That is why I believe those in charge at Operations Planning know absolutely nothing about planning bus routes and how to get them to work. OP believes that 30 minute headways is sufficient for all new routes since you now have BusTime. What they fail to consider is that when you are transferring from a subway, you can't predict when you will arrive at the subway station, so BusTime isn't that helpful in that regard.

 

They have zero good ideas on their own. I was the one who suggested the B83 extension to them. It took them three full years to study that simple change involving only one bus route and they implemented it exactly as I suggested after first rejecting it.

 

The only good idea they have had for a new bus route was the Q70 which should have been done 30 years earlier. I would t be surprised if someone suggested it to them. And making it SBS rather than just making it free was just dumb when you consider 85 percent of the people were transferring from the subway and the fact it has so few stops. Is the cost of enforcement less than the fares received? I highly doubt it.

[Fresh Pond]

When will Brooklyn depots get articulated buses?

Gleason will get theirs when the first XN60s show up early next year or whenever.

 

ENY will get theirs whenever they figure out if they getting new XD60s or the used Bronx ones lol.

 

Grand Av is getting some eventually, bottom of the totem pole.

 

Flatbush already has artics.

 

Fresh Pond and Ulmer Park aren't getting any.