Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Fresh Pond]

Today I saw a artic from grand st depot

Grand Av has several for the shuttle

[Kingjunior34]

Grand Av has several for the shuttle

 

What route will get them after the M shuttle is replaced

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Fresh Pond]

What route will get them after the M shuttle is replaced

They're gonna get shipped off to another depot, I think Quill

[Kingjunior34]

They're gonna get shipped off to another depot, I think Quill

Why can't Grand st keep articulated buses Brooklyn need them too

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Future ENY OP]

Why can't Grand st keep articulated buses Brooklyn need them too

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

 

Right now those buses are for rental for the shuttle. After that it makes a trip over to Manhattan for Quill, and possibly some of those buses will make way to East New York and possibly Flatbush.. If the crosstown SBS were to be implemented sometime in 2018 or 2019, than Grand Avenue will get it's share of artics. The only line I could think of right now Grand can place artics is the B38, but that's shared with Fresh Pond, and they don't have both branches.

[Fresh Pond]

Right now those buses are for rental for the shuttle. After that it makes a trip over to Manhattan for Quill, and possibly some of those buses will make way to East New York and possibly Flatbush.. If the crosstown SBS were to be implemented sometime in 2018 or 2019, than Grand Avenue will get it's share of artics. The only line I could think of right now Grand can place artics is the B38, but that's shared with Fresh Pond, and they don't have both branches.

It's still a huge toss-up on which artics ENY is gonna get. They're still deciding between the Bronx 4700s, or just a piece of the XD60 pie itself.

[Future ENY OP]

It's still a huge toss-up on which artics ENY is gonna get. They're still deciding between the Bronx 4700s, or just a piece of the XD60 pie itself.

That's the million dollar question. Where to send 4700's. Kinda wish Manhattan was in the mix for this.

 

IMO and honestly [WE] as in Brooklyn shouldn't have to inherit The Bronx inefficiency of their equipment. It's one thing to send new buses to The Bronx. It's another thing if they can maintain them effectively to send over to other places.

 

East New York deserves new equipment just like its counterparts from The Bronx. Bronx need to keep their 4700's or send to Manhattan.

[B22viaAtlanticAv]

That's the million dollar question. Where to send 4700's. Kinda wish Manhattan was in the mix for this.

 

IMO and honestly [WE] as in Brooklyn shouldn't have to inherit The Bronx inefficiency of their equipment. It's one thing to send new buses to The Bronx. It's another thing if they can maintain them effectively to send over to other places.

 

East New York deserves new equipment just like its counterparts from The Bronx. Bronx need to keep their 4700's or send to Manhattan.

 

I hate to say it but sending Brooklyn the 4700's isn't a bad idea. Similarly to how they sent JFK D60s before they got there XD60's I think it's just history repeating itself.

[Future ENY OP]

I hate to say it but sending Brooklyn the 4700's isn't a bad idea. Similarly to how they sent JFK D60s before they got there XD60's I think it's just history repeating itself.

 

You might just be right 102.

[B35 via Church]

....Anyways, I'm looking at your proposal, and it has the route taking Foster to Rockaway Parkway . Since you say that you would cut it to Canarsie Plaza (and regardless of whether it terminated there or continued on to Rockaway Parkway ), the only thing I would change is to serve Canarsie Plaza more directly. The route does serve Canarsie Plaza, but still somewhat far from the most stores (besides Petsmart). I would have it use Avenue D between Foster/Avenue D and Remsen

What made you think I wouldn't have buses ending directly at Canarsie Plaza if I'd cut it back there?

 

There would be no point in stopping buses dead at Foster/Remsen, if that's what you may have been thinking....

In any case, (I'd have) buses heading in that direction would continue along Foster, to Remsen, to Av. D, to stand.... It'd be the first pick-up & the last drop-off stop....

 

You say you would have it use 'D b/w Foster & Remsen, but in which direction?

If you're talking about having buses go Foster > Av. D > Remsen, I would agree with that - if there weren't any of those auto shops (and worse, a gas station) on that side of the block.... Since that's the case, no dice....

 

The B8 is too long for its own good, IMO. It is well used on both segment of the route, and the 18 Avenue segment does see a fair amount of traffic buildups (either because of heavy traffic, or trucks, or whatever else it may be). There are some service level inconsistencies (mainly on weekdays), so that can remedied by having B23 buses serve Avenue D. If that's the case though, I would get rid or redistribute of those B8 short-turns in the PM originating at Nostrand Avenue (which are the source of the inconsistencies during those time periods). 

 

I wouldn't necessarily advocate for splitting the route, but I guess, the route needs to be shortened or something. Ridership tends to dwindle below 86 Street, and once it's on Cropsey Avenue. Don't know what can be done regarding that.

Yeah, there is quite a bit of distance riding on the B8, and the sluggishness of the 18th av portion doesn't help.... Unlike the B6 (at Nostrand), the line of demarcation (so to speak) b/w the 18th av. portion & the east-of-Nostrand portion of the route isn't as prominent at Nostrand... Another way of putting that is, there is more overlap between both those general riderbases (riding through nostrand)....

[P3F]

The B8 is too long for its own good, IMO.

Coming to Brooklyn in 2020... The "new" B88.

[Kingjunior34]

It's still a huge toss-up on which artics ENY is gonna get. They're still deciding between the Bronx 4700s, or just a piece of the XD60 pie itself.

Can't they do half and half ? Get some from the Bronx and order new ones

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Can't they do half and half ? Get some from the Bronx and order new ones

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

As some love to say here, "anything is possible, so we have to just sit back and wait". 

[Jdog14]

Can't they do half and half ? Get some from the Bronx and order new ones

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

 

Best to keep as many like buses in as little batches possible. 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

What made you think I wouldn't have buses ending directly at Canarsie Plaza if I'd cut it back there?

 

There would be no point in stopping buses dead at Foster/Remsen, if that's what you may have been thinking....

In any case, (I'd have) buses heading in that direction would continue along Foster, to Remsen, to Av. D, to stand.... It'd be the first pick-up & the last drop-off stop....

 

You say you would have it use 'D b/w Foster & Remsen, but in which direction?

If you're talking about having buses go Foster > Av. D > Remsen, I would agree with that - if there weren't any of those auto shops (and worse, a gas station) on that side of the block.... Since that's the case, no dice....

I didn't think you would terminate buses at Remsen Ave like that, I was saying that I would have had it use Avenue D between Foster and Remsen, regardless of the terminal, in order to place it closer to Canarsie Plaza.

 

Now as far as the Canarsie Plaza turnaround, I never really specified, and I don't really mind what direction the route does the turnaround. However, since you do mention it of the gas stations and and auto shops on that side (and the potential for riders waiting at a stop to be hit by a vehicle or something), then the reverse would make sense.

 

Don't know if there is enough demand for service to Canarsie Plaza from Canarsie and surrounding neighborhoods, but maybe some B42's can run up to Canarsie Plaza. However, the B42 can be erratic despite the short routing, so probably best to keep the route as it is. All the other routes are through-services (btw, how is B60 ridership between the and the projects). 

[B35 via Church]

Don't know if there is enough demand for service to Canarsie Plaza from Canarsie and surrounding neighborhoods, but maybe some B42's can run up to Canarsie Plaza. However, the B42 can be erratic despite the short routing, so probably best to keep the route as it is. All the other routes are through-services (btw, how is B60 ridership between the and the projects). 

If Canarsie Plaza rivaled, say, Bay Plaza, I might agree... But as is, I don't see it as being near that big a draw to have the B17 & (an extended) B42 serve it.....

 

As far as B60 usage from the Breukelen houses to the subway, it's always been light (even before they had the B6 & the B82 run inside that designated area for the buses, for the subway).... It's secondary to the B6 & the B82.... I find that there's more of a demand for the from off the B60 from down there....

[Kingjunior34]

What are the top 5 bus routes

(by ridership ) of each Brooklyn bus depot

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What are the top 5 bus routes

(by ridership ) of each Brooklyn bus depot

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

That information is available here:

 

http://web.mta.info/nyct/facts/ridership/

[aemoreira81]

Not sure if it belongs here or in SI, but once the full Regional Bus scheme is in full effect, I would suggest that it seriously be considered whether or not the S93 should be moved from Staten Island Division to Brooklyn Division (Gleason being the obvious choice), possibly sharing an articulated fleet with the B35 (once that route is upgraded to artics). The rationale behind this is that the major traffic flow is to CSI in the AM and from CSI in the evening, but the runs start and end in the opposite fashion. The idea for artics on at least some runs, especially scheduled during class change times, is to handle the crowds.

[B35 via Church]

3 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

Not sure if it belongs here or in SI, but once the full Regional Bus scheme is in full effect, I would suggest that it seriously be considered whether or not the S93 should be moved from Staten Island Division to Brooklyn Division (Gleason being the obvious choice), possibly sharing an articulated fleet with the B35 (once that route is upgraded to artics). The rationale behind this is that the major traffic flow is to CSI in the AM and from CSI in the evening, but the runs start and end in the opposite fashion. The idea for artics on at least some runs, especially scheduled during class change times, is to handle the crowds.

None of those SI-Brooklyn routes should be subjected to deadheading to/from anywhere near as far north as Sunset Park in any "capacity".....

I don't know why there's been this (and apparently still ongoing) predisposition to want to underestimate the distance b/w Gleason & Bay Ridge/86th; it's not exactly a hop, skip, and a jump away.... Ironic from you, in that you tend to like to talk about quelling deadhead distances - so to want have OOS S93's head up to the 30's for some benefit (which is something else I question) for throwing artics on some trips is out of character.... LOL!

Problem I've always found w/ that route is that service has been very spotty for quite a long time; to the point where I felt there was intent behind it.... Way I see it, artics on (some trips on) the S93, regardless of what depot it'd run out of, is too representative of a poor attempt at a band aid solution.....

For what you're suggesting, we may as well turn the S93 into a reverse peak route only & call it a day....

[Future ENY OP]

6 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

Not sure if it belongs here or in SI, but once the full Regional Bus scheme is in full effect, I would suggest that it seriously be considered whether or not the S93 should be moved from Staten Island Division to Brooklyn Division (Gleason being the obvious choice), possibly sharing an articulated fleet with the B35 (once that route is upgraded to artics). The rationale behind this is that the major traffic flow is to CSI in the AM and from CSI in the evening, but the runs start and end in the opposite fashion. The idea for artics on at least some runs, especially scheduled during class change times, is to handle the crowds.

First off. Let's not bring Staten Island's problem to the Brooklyn Division.  I wouldn't want any part of the S53/79/93 over to Gleason or Ulmer Park. Reason being because of the schedules and where these buses are based at and the type of deadhead it requires plus traffic to and from the Island  

For Gleason. Sunset Park to Bay Ridge is not the easiest cake walk. On a good day you talking 1/2 hour, 45 mins for instance.  The B63 already goes end to end between Downtown and Bay Ridge and that's over 1:30 on a good day. 

Realistically, would you want the S93 to suffer to longer waits in lieu to the traffic on the VZ? 

A while ago I mentioned here about possibly having the B4 based out of FB only because of the 20 min headway from the depot to Knapp Street-Sheepshead Bay. The way that schedule is set up it simply belongs to Gleason although the decent headway from the depot to bay ridge. I dunno if the B4 has short turns to where FB can provide coverage. 

[checkmatechamp13]

10 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

Not sure if it belongs here or in SI, but once the full Regional Bus scheme is in full effect, I would suggest that it seriously be considered whether or not the S93 should be moved from Staten Island Division to Brooklyn Division (Gleason being the obvious choice), possibly sharing an articulated fleet with the B35 (once that route is upgraded to artics). The rationale behind this is that the major traffic flow is to CSI in the AM and from CSI in the evening, but the runs start and end in the opposite fashion. The idea for artics on at least some runs, especially scheduled during class change times, is to handle the crowds.

The S93 is interlined with the S53, which has its heavy traffic flows in the opposite direction. So doing that would just end up resulting in more deadheading (what would you do with all those extra S53s?). Aside from that, it's not as if the S93 is "carrying air" in those directions at those times. I've taken the very first trip at 5:45am, and it often had standees by the time I got off at Targee Street. And at Hylan Blvd & Fingerboard Road, a lot of people use it because they can't fit onto the S79....the S93 may be SRO but at least you can fit on it.

As far as artics go, there should be extra trips first before we consider adding artics to the S93. I've always thought there should be an S93X around the busy arrival and dismissal times. Make both CSI stops (well, one now due to the construction at the terminal) and then get on the SIE and go directly to 92nd Street. Same thing in the AM rush hour for students coming from Brooklyn. This would be in addition to the regular trips via Victory, since you do need something for intra-island riders (including CSI students) and regular riders heading to/from Brooklyn.

5 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

None of those SI-Brooklyn routes should be subjected to deadheading to/from anywhere near as far north as Sunset Park in any "capacity".....

I don't know why there's been this (and apparently still ongoing) predisposition to want to underestimate the distance b/w Gleason & Bay Ridge/86th; it's not exactly a hop, skip, and a jump away.... Ironic from you, in that you tend to like to talk about quelling deadhead distances - so to want have OOS S93's head up to the 30's for some benefit (which is something else I question) for throwing artics on some trips is out of character.... LOL!

Problem I've always found w/ that route is that service has been very spotty for quite a long time; to the point where I felt there was intent behind it.... Way I see it, artics on (some trips on) the S93, regardless of what depot it'd run out of, is too representative of a poor attempt at a band aid solution.....

For what you're suggesting, we may as well turn the S93 into a reverse peak route only & call it a day....

I remember when the S93 first got midday service running every 30 minutes, those trips would always be late and jam-packed (I even remember seeing a rider being flagged. To be fair, there was still space in the back, but you shouldn't be getting to that point on a route running every 30 minutes). Then I saw they were boosting service to run every 20 minutes in the midday....except if you look at the schedule, they're so cheap it's not even funny. The buses still run every 30 minutes between 10:30AM & 12 noon eastbound and 11PM & 3PM westbound (but yet the bus map somehow has the S93 listed as running every 10 minutes during middays SMH: http://web.mta.info/nyct/maps/bussi2.pdf )

Believe it or not, the S93 is the quickest-growing route in the city, but you wouldn't know it with how stingy they are about adding service.

[B35 via Church]

4 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Aside from that, it's not as if the S93 is "carrying air" in those directions at those times....

As far as artics go, there should be extra trips first before we consider adding artics to the S93

Check.... Mate.

That is the exact problem I have with that suggestion & what it's implying.... I don't care for centering a point around (demand in one direction vs. the other), in comparison to (how the runs are structured).... On top of it, the failure to consider why S93's are crushloaded during the times that they are.... Nah, let's just have the thing housed in Brooklyn & throw artics on some trips with the wildly inconsistent service it has

4 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I remember when the S93 first got midday service running every 30 minutes, those trips would always be late and jam-packed (I even remember seeing a rider being flagged. To be fair, there was still space in the back, but you shouldn't be getting to that point on a route running every 30 minutes). Then I saw they were boosting service to run every 20 minutes in the midday....except if you look at the schedule, they're so cheap it's not even funny. The buses still run every 30 minutes between 10:30AM & 12 noon eastbound and 11PM & 3PM westbound (but yet the bus map somehow has the S93 listed as running every 10 minutes during middays SMH: http://web.mta.info/nyct/maps/bussi2.pdf )

Believe it or not, the S93 is the quickest-growing route in the city, but you wouldn't know it with how stingy they are about adding service.

As long as the S93 is under the umbrella of the S53, it's never going to have anywhere near the amt. of service that the S53 has.... That's the conclusion I've come to....

What would you say is contributing to the influx of usage on the S93 as of late?

2 minutes ago, Vtrain said:

I wonder if the S53, S79SBS & S93 will be moved to the 59th St/4th Av subway station when the Staten Island local bus study is released.

I thought with the new forum update, those that were still in the red would end up with neutral (0) rep.... Apparently not.

Anyway, as far as this post goes, I don't understand what you're wondering about...

Are you wondering if such an extension would be proposed & eventually implemeted? Your inquiry is being made, as if they have to release the proposal before making any changes.... This agency does what it wants.

[aemoreira81]

4 hours ago, Vtrain said:

I wonder if the S53, S79SBS & S93 will be moved to the 59th St/4th Av subway station when the Staten Island local bus study is released.

For that to work, there would have to be a subfleet speed-limited higher than 40 mph.

As for what is contributing to increased S93 ridership, to the point where I would argue that Saturday service is warranted...less parking on campus because of carpark and road reconstruction by the state Dormitory Authority continuing through at least the end of November. Also on Saturdays, there are a significant number of people transferring at Clove and Victory.

Part of my original post also had to do with the fact that some evening classes at CSI end after the last S93 has left for Brooklyn. On those occasions, I found myself taking the X10 instead to transfer to the BM5 to get home.

 

 

[Around the Horn]

They really need to stop with the S53/93 paring nonsense... (same thing to some extent with the S59 and S89). This is not like the S40/90 or any of the St George limiteds where its strictly a rush hour express variant... IMO the S53 and S93 have almost nothing in common with each other... 

The S93 should be a 7 days a week stand alone route with the S53 being paired with an S83 limited to Port Richmond bypassing Arrochar. 

I do like the idea of an S93X (and frankly I feel the same way about a Q64X, but thats a discussion for another day...)