Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
B36 Via Ave U

Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

The real question is - What do those people in that general vicinity (around the B48 route, north of Broadway) want/need when it comes to bus service? Because as I see it, NB usage on the B48 past the (J) is atrocious from those folks & service due south suffices as far as Fulton..... I remember reading somewhere that the route overall lost more than half its ridership in a 3 year span - Which tells me that the southern portion of the route is more patronized.....

In saying all that, I don't think running B39's to Union will help much......

 

I believe before the doomsday cuts the 48 picked up plenty of steam north of Broadway. However, once those cuts began it was all written. Now, present day with all routes being controlled by Grand Avenue including the 48 the frequencies completely suck. I believe when the route was under Fresh Pond and Gleason controlled the frequencies were a bit better. 

Should the route be split. Yes. 

via Union Avenue = NO 

Pleasing the Greenpoint, Northside and Southside Williamsburg crowd is a tough one and will be even tougher once the (L) is shutdown. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

I believe before the doomsday cuts the 48 picked up plenty of steam north of Broadway. However, once those cuts began it was all written. Now, present day with all routes being controlled by Grand Avenue including the 48 the frequencies completely suck. I believe when the route was under Fresh Pond and Gleason controlled the frequencies were a bit better. 

Should the route be split. Yes. 

via Union Avenue = NO 

Pleasing the Greenpoint, Northside and Southside Williamsburg crowd is a tough one and will be even tougher once the (L) is shutdown. 

I'd answer "NO" to both those queries, to be honest.... The problem isn't route length, as much as it is the route not being useful to too many residents up there...... I can't speak to how operations were whilst out of FP, but out of Gleason (as usual), service was much better than it is now, running out of Grand....

As far as the upcoming (L) shutdown, that's another can of worms all by itself..... I don't think those people will start utilizing B48's in any noticeable scale because of it though....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 New cross-brooklyn route:

B5

Western terminal: Shore Rd/Bay Ridge Av

Eastern terminal: Avenue U/ East 71st St/ Veterans Av

Eastbound route: South on Shore Rd, left on Bay Ridge Pkwy, left on Ft. Hamilton Pkwy, right on 65th St, Left on Av P (via Dahill), right onto Ave P when crossing Kings (via East 23rd), right on Nostrand, then left on Av U to terminus.

(bus loops back using Barone Triange)

Westbound route: Right on Nostrand, Left on Av P, right on East 24th St, left on Kings Hwy, merge back onto Av P, Right onto 65th St, left on Ft Hamilton, right on Bay Ridge Pkwy, right on Shore Rd, right on Mackay Pl, left on Narrows, left on Bay Ridge Av, left on Shore to terminus. 

Main goal of this route would be to fill the gap in crosstown service between the B4/82 and B9. It would also hopefully take some load off the B82 and provide a direct link between the two ends of Southern Brooklyn.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

 New cross-brooklyn route:

B5

Western terminal: Shore Rd/Bay Ridge Av

Eastern terminal: Avenue U/ East 71st St/ Veterans Av

Eastbound route: South on Shore Rd, left on Bay Ridge Pkwy, left on Ft. Hamilton Pkwy, right on 65th St, Left on Av P (via Dahill), right onto Ave P when crossing Kings (via East 23rd), right on Nostrand, then left on Av U to terminus.

(bus loops back using Barone Triange)

Westbound route: Right on Nostrand, Left on Av P, right on East 24th St, left on Kings Hwy, merge back onto Av P, Right onto 65th St, left on Ft Hamilton, right on Bay Ridge Pkwy, right on Shore Rd, right on Mackay Pl, left on Narrows, left on Bay Ridge Av, left on Shore to terminus. 

Main goal of this route would be to fill the gap in crosstown service between the B4/82 and B9. It would also hopefully take some load off the B82 and provide a direct link between the two ends of Southern Brooklyn.

 

Seems nice, but I would rather have the route deviate at East 16th Street to serve the Kings Hwy BMT Brighton station in both directions, and at New Utrecht Avenue to serve the 62nd Street BMT West End Line station directly. Improves connectivity by that much.

 

In all honestly, 65th Street should be served by an extension of the B2, which can take the aforementioned route, but deviate to serve the D and N train, and operate via 13th Avenue and Bay Ridge Avenue to Bay Ridge-Shore Road. The B64 would then be combined with the B70 via VA Hospital and 95th Street station, thus increasing both routes ridership. Credits to @BrooklynBus for those proposals. The B2 is lightly utilized outside of rush hours and this extension should fix that. Hope they consider this in the Bus Action Plan's borough-wide route restructuring for Brooklyn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Seems nice, but I would rather have the route deviate at East 16th Street to serve the Kings Hwy BMT Brighton station in both directions, and at New Utrecht Avenue to serve the 62nd Street BMT West End Line station directly. Improves connectivity by that much.

 

In all honestly, 65th Street should be served by an extension of the B2, which can take the aforementioned route, but deviate to serve the D and N train, and operate via 13th Avenue and Bay Ridge Avenue to Bay Ridge-Shore Road. The B64 would then be combined with the B70 via VA Hospital and 95th Street station, thus increasing both routes ridership. Credits to @BrooklynBus for those proposals. The B2 is lightly utilized outside of rush hours and this extension should fix that. Hope they consider this in the Bus Action Plan's borough-wide route restructuring for Brooklyn.

Got an idea for extending the :bus_bullet_b2::

After heading down Av R, bus turns onto E 15th St (16th other way) for Kings Highway (B)(Q) . It then makes a left on Av P to 65th where it makes a right. At 15th the bus turns right and then goes left on travels on 62nd/61st to 14th, where it makes a left and then right back onto 65th. You could extend the bus all the way to Shore or have it only go to 77th on the (R) from here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Got an idea for extending the :bus_bullet_b2::

After heading down Av R, bus turns onto E 15th St (16th other way) for Kings Highway (B)(Q) . It then makes a left on Av P to 65th where it makes a right. At 15th the bus turns right and then goes left on travels on 62nd/61st to 14th, where it makes a left and then right back onto 65th. You could extend the bus all the way to Shore or have it only go to 77th on the (R) from here.

 

Just have it go to 3rd Avenue and 77th Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another bus route idea:

BM6 

Manhattan Beach to Midtown:

NB streets traveled: Oriental Blvd, Brighton Beach Av, Ocean Pkwy, Gowanus Expressway, Bklyn Battery Tunnel, Trinity Pl, Church St, 6th Av, 59th St. 

SB streets traveled: 5th Av, 23rd St, Broadway, Battery Pl, Bklyn Battery Tunnel, Gowanus Expressway, Ocean Pkwy, Brighton Beach Av, Oriental Blvd.

Last pickup/first dropoff in Brooklyn is at 18th Av/Ocean Pkwy.

Service operates 7 days a week. Weekends buses skip Downtown by using the FDR drive and exiting at 20th-23rd, traveling along Av C to 23rd.

Bus will operated by NYCT and housed at Ulmer Park (I prefer having there vs MTA Bus as NYCT is often treated better).

You could also extend the BM3, but I had a new route instead to avoid a slower route through Sheepshead Bay.

Edited by R68OnBroadway
font changes, added BM3 comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Another bus route idea:

BM6 

Manhattan Beach to Midtown:

NB streets traveled: Oriental Blvd, Brighton Beach Av, Ocean Pkwy, Gowanus Expressway, Bklyn Battery Tunnel, Trinity Pl, Church St, 6th Av, 59th St. 

SB streets traveled: 5th Av, 23rd St, Broadway, Battery Pl, Bklyn Battery Tunnel, Gowanus Expressway, Ocean Pkwy, Brighton Beach Av, Oriental Blvd.

Last pickup/first dropoff in Brooklyn is at 18th Av/Ocean Pkwy.

Service operates 7 days a week. Weekends buses skip Downtown by using the FDR drive and exiting at 20th-23rd, traveling along Av C to 23rd.

Bus will operated by NYCT and housed at Ulmer Park (I prefer having there vs MTA Bus as NYCT is often treated better).

You could also extend the BM3, but I had a new route instead to avoid a slower route through Sheepshead Bay.

Isn't there a thing that ocean parkway isn't supposed to get any buses for the whole length of the road? I remember reading something about that.

Anyway this seems like a very close derivative of the X29 that instead turns east and we all know what happened to the X29...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Orion6025 said:

Isn't there a thing that ocean parkway isn't supposed to get any buses for the whole length of the road? I remember reading something about that.

The B1 and B9 both operate on Ocean Parkway for short distances. It is possible to get a permit to run buses on roads where they are normally not allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is with the buses in northern Brooklyn? For an up-and-coming area ridership seems rather sad. 

Got a few questions and also made some solutions:

B24:

Why does the B42 go into Queens only to come back to Brooklyn? Seems like a neutering of the route. 

Changes I made to the route:

The route runs its normal route on Greenpoint, but now continues down Roosevelt to the Victor Moore terminal. 

To compensate for this loss, the Q59 is instead rerouted via Metropolitan Av once it reaches Bushwick Av.

B32: 

This route is rather sad. Ridership is very low and it operates every 30 minutes, which is so minimal that the B84, which is kind of like a shuttle, gets that same frequency. The M22 seems better than this route even though it seems to be a ghost line. Anyone got any ideas to make this better? The B62 outshines it everywhere.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, OIG119 said:

The B1 and B9 both operate on Ocean Parkway for short distances. It is possible to get a permit to run buses on roads where they are normally not allowed.

Yes it is. DOT has more of a problem with buses on OP because of the stops. But I doubt they would approve a bus route for a long distance. The lanes are pretty narrow and were not designed for buses. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2018 at 5:16 PM, R68OnBroadway said:

B24:

Why does the B24 go into Queens only to come back to Brooklyn? Seems like a neutering of the route. 

It used to be two routes (B24 Greenpoint-Sunnyside, B29 Williamsburg-Sunnyside). 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

It used to be two routes (B24 Greenpoint-Sunnyside, B29 Williamsburg-Sunnyside). 

The current B24 is of course awkward in that it is essentially those 2 routes in 1, but like one reason I've always been hesitant about splitting the 24 is that would the Greenpoint-Sunnyside segment be a sustainable route? I don't know so much about the line running from the LIE into Brooklyn, but generally in Queens, that route seems to be pretty light. The only time I ever see large crowds boarding on the gpoint leg is 46 street and that is heading towards Williamsburg, and at best there are medium to smallish sized crowds for Gpoint bound buses at 47 street. The supposed "new" B24 only seems to be useful as a subway shuttle for the (7) and (G) and even then, not many people seem to use it unlike the Williamsburg buses

 

Or maybe I'm missing something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Orion6025 said:

The current B24 is of course awkward in that it is essentially those 2 routes in 1, but like one reason I've always been hesitant about splitting the 24 is that would the Greenpoint-Sunnyside segment be a sustainable route? I don't know so much about the line running from the LIE into Brooklyn, but generally in Queens, that route seems to be pretty light. The only time I ever see large crowds boarding on the gpoint leg is 46 street and that is heading towards Williamsburg, and at best there are medium to smallish sized crowds for Gpoint bound buses at 47 street. The supposed "new" B24 only seems to be useful as a subway shuttle for the (7) and (G) and even then, not many people seem to use it unlike the Williamsburg buses

Or maybe I'm missing something.

4

If you could tie the Greenpoint Avenue section into some other route, that would help boost ridership. I've heard the idea of combining that portion with the B32, which geometrically wouldn't be a bad route (meaning, it wouldn't backtrack/meander). Given the general trend towards straighter, simpler routes with less duplication, I can see the MTA going for that, but they would also have to address the issue of the B62's unreliability. 

Also, on the northern end, it could perhaps be extended to Woodside or Jackson Heights. (I've also heard of the idea of combining it with the Q104, but from most of the route, it's probably quicker to take a bus to LIC for the B62 rather than backtrack through Sunnyside). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

If you could tie the Greenpoint Avenue section into some other route, that would help boost ridership. I've heard the idea of combining that portion with the B32, which geometrically wouldn't be a bad route (meaning, it wouldn't backtrack/meander). Given the general trend towards straighter, simpler routes with less duplication, I can see the MTA going for that, but they would also have to address the issue of the B62's unreliability. 

Also, on the northern end, it could perhaps be extended to Woodside or Jackson Heights. (I've also heard of the idea of combining it with the Q104, but from most of the route, it's probably quicker to take a bus to LIC for the B62 rather than backtrack through Sunnyside). 

I guess combining it with the B32 could work. It might count against the Kosciuszko branch of the b24 considering that it'd basically create a circle, but perhaps it could be a more sustainable option to cut one branch down a bit and boost another. If the B24's BQE problems persist, then perhaps the B24+B32 could be a faster option to Wburg which I'd be thrilled with lol. The 7 to the b32 just doesn't cut it. As for the q104, I suppose it could work, but it could be a little awkward sending buses west on skillman, then south on 44 to greenpoint. Of course the northbound section would work without much issues.

Routing it up 39-Steinway Street up to broadway as a standalone might work with the connections to the (7) and (M) / (R) , as well as serving a slice of Astoria. FWIW, there's a school at Skillman and 40 that could potentially serve as a ridership but there's really nothing to draw ridership in the Sunnyside portion unless you count the community center, or if people will bother to walk from the 40s to the bus.

The only killer I see with smashing the it and the 104 together is that it just creates another current version of the b24, but with the V-shape oriented west instead of south. In it's current form, the q104 is pretty reliable and while it is 2-5 minutes late maybe 50% of the time, everything is more or less close to on time. Unless something is done to resolve the traffic around the Greenpoint Ave bridge and the LIE, it could really screw up reliability of the q104.

The reliability thing applies to the b32+b24 also perhaps, though I know very little about the b32. Perhaps the b24+b32 combo could supplement the current b32 (or b62 though that may tank reliability) down to williamsburg,

To prevent cannibalization of the b32 or b62, turning them at the (L) train Bedford avenue station could be possible also, but I don't know if it'd be useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

If you could tie the Greenpoint Avenue section into some other route, that would help boost ridership. I've heard the idea of combining that portion with the B32, which geometrically wouldn't be a bad route (meaning, it wouldn't backtrack/meander). Given the general trend towards straighter, simpler routes with less duplication, I can see the MTA going for that, but they would also have to address the issue of the B62's unreliability. 

Also, on the northern end, it could perhaps be extended to Woodside or Jackson Heights. (I've also heard of the idea of combining it with the Q104, but from most of the route, it's probably quicker to take a bus to LIC for the B62 rather than backtrack through Sunnyside). 

IIRC, BM5 had an idea that entailed the B43 running over that segment of the B24.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Would extending the B67 and B69 to either Ave I or 18th Av be feasible? It would allow for a connection the B8 and B11.

Forget it... It's basically car country down there & you're simply not going to have buses feasibly making all sorts of turns in that general area.... Nowhere really to terminate buses at, at either station.... Hell, that current turn the Midwood bound B11 makes from 50th st to 20th av is a PITA & all the delivery trucks in that area do not help any...... In terms of layover space & turnarounds, Cortelyou rd is the best you're gonna get.....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, R68OnBroadway said:

Would extending the B67 and B69 to either Ave I or 18th Av be feasible? It would allow for a connection the B8 and B11.

Not a good idea there. If people really need that B8 or B11 so badly, walking 3-4 blocks is bit easier than sitting on a bus through that hell of traffic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have an idea for the Brooklyn Buses. It may not be a routing change, but operations change. Since some routes have high ridership, I would suggest converting these routes to articulated operations (Note they are listed by depot in alphabetical order). Routes in bold are those already planned:

 

  • East New York: B14, B15, B17, B42 (some trips), B82, B82 SBS
  • Flatbush: B41 (local and limited), B44 Local, B46 Local, B46 SBS (some trips)
  • Fresh Pond and Grand Avenue: B38 (local and limited), B54, B60, B62, Q58 (local and limited), Q59
  • Jackie Gleason: B8, B35 Local and Limited, B61, B63
  • Ulmer Park: B1, B6, B36 (some trips)

All routes would use articulated buses from 5:00 AM to 11:00 PM, where there is heavy ridership. Outside those hours, routes that operate 24-hours a day will use standard 40-foot buses at 20-minute headways (matching subway frequencies), thus providing better service without having half-empty buses operating during light traffic times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I may have an idea for the Brooklyn Buses. It may not be a routing change, but operations change. Since some routes have high ridership, I would suggest converting these routes to articulated operations (Note they are listed by depot in alphabetical order). Routes in bold are those already planned:

 

  • East New York: B14, B15, B17, B42 (some trips), B82, B82 SBS
  • Flatbush: B41 (local and limited), B44 Local, B46 Local, B46 SBS (some trips)
  • Fresh Pond and Grand Avenue: B38 (local and limited), B54, B60, B62, Q58 (local and limited), Q59
  • Jackie Gleason: B8, B35 Local and Limited, B61, B63
  • Ulmer Park: B1, B6, B36 (some trips)

All routes would use articulated buses from 5:00 AM to 11:00 PM, where there is heavy ridership. Outside those hours, routes that operate 24-hours a day will use standard 40-foot buses at 20-minute headways (matching subway frequencies), thus providing better service without having half-empty buses operating during light traffic times.

So... How about Grand Avenue???

Grand Avenue is artic ready.. Your B38 would need to be placed at Grand Avenue Full time. 

Ulmer Park is NOT artic ready.  So Ulmer is out of the question.

The (MTA) had the perfect chance to built 2 mega depots. One in Brooklyn to replace FB, the other in Jamaica to replace the current Jamaica. The (MTA) is not in the market right now to built anything new depots.. It would be good to have at least 2 more depots built to deal with overcrowding.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Future ENY OP said:

So... How about Grand Avenue???

Grand Avenue is artic ready.. Your B38 would need to be placed at Grand Avenue Full time. 

Ulmer Park is NOT artic ready.  So Ulmer is out of the question.

The (MTA) had the perfect chance to built 2 mega depots. One in Brooklyn to replace FB, the other in Jamaica to replace the current Jamaica. The (MTA) is not in the market right now to built anything new depots.. It would be good to have at least 2 more depots built to deal with overcrowding.  

I put Fresh Pond and Grand Avenue under a single bullet when I made this post under "Fresh Pond and Grand Avenue". They share the B38 route, which has two branches, but the line as a whole has high ridership to warrant artic buses.

I know Grand Avenue is artic ready, but we're talking about in the near future, when every depot will eventually handle artic buses. Around that time, they will also order additional artic buses to cover service. However, if this was to be proposed for implementation in 1 or 2 years, then yes, the B38 would be moved full time to Grand Avenue.

Why would they try to replace Flatbush when the depot is doing fine? It's not overcrowded. Jamaica, on the other hand, is overcrowded, and is planned to be renovated on-property to expand the depot from holding 150 buses to 300 buses, and since JA is currently assigned around 200, this will relive crowding.

Those list of buses to be articulated are just proposals that may or may not see implementation soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I may have an idea for the Brooklyn Buses. It may not be a routing change, but operations change. Since some routes have high ridership, I would suggest converting these routes to articulated operations (Note they are listed by depot in alphabetical order). Routes in bold are those already planned:

  • East New York: B14, B15, B17, B42 (some trips), B82, B82 SBS
  • Flatbush: B41 (local and limited), B44 Local, B46 Local, B46 SBS (some trips)
  • Fresh Pond and Grand Avenue: B38 (local and limited), B54, B60, B62, Q58 (local and limited), Q59
  • Jackie Gleason: B8, B35 Local and Limited, B61, B63
  • Ulmer Park: B1, B6, B36 (some trips)

All routes would use articulated buses from 5:00 AM to 11:00 PM, where there is heavy ridership. Outside those hours, routes that operate 24-hours a day will use standard 40-foot buses at 20-minute headways (matching subway frequencies), thus providing better service without having half-empty buses operating during light traffic times.

Why in the world would you put artics on routes like the B14, B17, B36, B60, and the Q59 in any facet????

You don't solve erratic service on some route by increasing the capacity of the individual buses; that's not what that's for.... Look, it's one thing to want to put an artic on the B35 - it is quite another to want to put them on the B36.....

Furthermore, being that they've flagrantly cut service on routes like the B44 local & the B46 local, what would make you think artics would be placed on those routes??? That bit about Flatbush becoming an all artic depot or what? Those locals are packed to the gills still, due to the service that was taken away from those people....

  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Why in the world would you put artics on routes like the B14, B17, B36, B60, and the Q59 in any facet????

You don't solve erratic service on some route by increasing the capacity of the individual buses; that's not what that's for.... Look, it's one thing to want to put an artic on the B35 - it is quite another to want to put them on the B36.....

Furthermore, being that they've flagrantly cut service on routes like the B44 local & the B46 local, what would make you think artics would be placed on those routes??? That bit about Flatbush becoming an all artic depot or what? Those locals are packed to the gills still, due to the service that was taken away from those people....

Like I said before, I thought there would be high ridership on some routes. That’s where I got my routes to be articulated. With the higher capacity buses running with the same headway’s as before, there would be more room. The B1 during the school year would be a nice example, since that route is crowded to a point that between Manhattan Beach and the Brighton Beach station, the buses sometimes doesn’t make any stops. 

 

Also, this should happen 2 years after they implement the network redesign, as I predict that the listed routes will gain ridership fast due to redesigned routes.

 

And I do admit that my list of articulated is not perfect. Like I said, I picked the routes for ridership and important connections, like nearest subway lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sutter ave is very narrow. Getting through with an artic would be tough. So, no artic for the B14

Try making that right turn from Eastern pkwy onto Utica ave with dollar vans at that corner with an artic for the B17. Or try making the U-turn on seaview and get jack knifed.

SMH!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.