Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Brillant93]

20 hours ago, NoHacksJustKhaks said:

Adding more lanes to Utica doesn't make a difference in my opinion, it'll only take a few months or so for car demand to meet back up over the supply. And next thing you know, traffic again just like before. More lanes always creates more traffic, that's not how you solve this type of issue.

Thats what these car built cities are learning. You build more things for cars more of them would just keep coming. 

[BrooklynBus]

Anyone see this?

Its just insane that someone could think you will attract riders by cutting service and increasing transferring. 

https://www.amny.com/transit/brooklyn-bus-service-plan-1.21177301

[JeremiahC99]

5 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

Anyone see this?

Its just insane that someone could think you will attract riders by cutting service and increasing transferring. 

https://www.amny.com/transit/brooklyn-bus-service-plan-1.21177301

I saw it and I am not happy with it. Why didn’t they use your proposals from 2004 and tweak them for the modern day travel patterns? Do these guys not live in 2018?

Edited September 21, 2018 by JeremiahC99

[BrooklynBus]

3 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I saw it and I am not happy with it. Why didn’t they use your proposals from 2004 and tweak them for the modern day travel patterns? Do these guys not live in 2018?

One of them lives in Paris and I have had several discussions with him on Second Avenue Sagas. He has seen my proposals. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Just now, BrooklynBus said:

One of them lives in Paris and I have had several discussions with him on Second Avenue Sagas. He has seen my proposals. 

I support removing bus stops, but within reason. If the new bus stops are in isolated areas that aren't as accessible, then it isn't as good.  You also need to have clear bus lanes.  Even if these are barricaded bus lanes, I'm not sure they would work if they aren't enforced.

[JeremiahC99]

12 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

One of them lives in Paris and I have had several discussions with him on Second Avenue Sagas. He has seen my proposals. 

I wonder what he think of them? I think of it as great. All it needs is a few modifications to make it work for the Brooklyn of 2018.

[XBht26]

The B15 has a lot of stops less than 2 blocks apart and I believe some should be removed

[BrooklynBus]

17 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I wonder what he think of them? I think of it as great. All it needs is a few modifications to make it work for the Brooklyn of 2018.

He obviously used at least three of them if you look at his map: ft ham pky, 13 Ave, 65 St AV P.

10 hours ago, XBht26 said:

The B15 has a lot of stops less than 2 blocks apart and I believe some should be removed

Very possibly. That's why bus stop removal needs to be done on a case by case basis. There are no magic formulas like every quarter or half mile. 

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

He obviously used at least three of them if you look at his map: ft ham pky, 13 Ave, 65 St AV P.

I saw them and one flaw: no east-west service to/from Canarsie Plaza. The B17 and it’s branch via the Rockaway Pkwy station (which would see more riders in April 2019 when the  is shutdown in Manhattan) is insufficient to serve the plaza and nearby Brooklyn Terminal Market. This needs to be addressed.

 

To provide some east-west access to the plaza, the B23 would be revived. Because this proposal would impact other neighborhoods, the B16 would be restructured. Specifically:

• The B23 would start at 86th Street  station, and follow the routing you proposed for the route in Proposal B and D. The main difference is the route traveling south on Rogers Avenue instead of New York Avenue. From Kings Hwy and Beverly Road, instead of ending there, it would continue east along Beverly Road and Avenue B to Remsen Avenue and south there to Avenue D and Remsen Avenue.
• The B16 would be rerouted to run via Ft. Hamilton Pkwy, closing service gaps along Ft. Hamilton Pkwy and 13th Avenue, which they finally did right.
• Also a branch of the B7 would run east via Foster Avenue to the same terminal, providing one or two-bus service to the plaza.

Edited September 22, 2018 by JeremiahC99

[BrooklynBus]

54 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I saw them and one flaw: no east-west service to/from Canarsie Plaza. The B17 and it’s branch via the Rockaway Pkwy station (which would see more riders in April 2019 when the  is shutdown in Manhattan) is insufficient to serve the plaza and nearby Brooklyn Terminal Market. This needs to be addressed.

 

To provide some east-west access to the plaza, the B23 would be revived. Because this proposal would impact other neighborhoods, the B16 would be restructured. Specifically:

• The B23 would start at 86th Street  station, and follow the routing you proposed for the route in Proposal B and D. The main difference is the route traveling south on Rogers Avenue instead of New York Avenue. From Kings Hwy and Beverly Road, instead of ending there, it would continue east along Beverly Road and Avenue B to Remsen Avenue and south there to Avenue D and Remsen Avenue.
• The B16 would be rerouted to run via Ft. Hamilton Pkwy, closing service gaps along Ft. Hamilton Pkwy and 13th Avenue, which they finally did right.
• Also a branch of the B7 would run east via Foster Avenue to the same terminal, providing one or two-bus service to the plaza.

Don't want to get into a detailed discussion about routes. There are many problems with their system. Did you notice they completely changed my B1 and proposed a route from Coney Island to Manhattan Beach just because it is simpler. It's not where people want to go. You can't expect people to want to use three or four buses to make many trips. 

[JeremiahC99]

23 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

Don't want to get into a detailed discussion about routes. There are many problems with their system. Did you notice they completely changed my B1 and proposed a route from Coney Island to Manhattan Beach just because it is simpler. It's not where people want to go. You can't expect people to want to use three or four buses to make many trips. 

I noticed. They’re trying to undo your famous 1978 Southwest Brooklyn Bus Changes and making things worse than before 1978. They’re supposed to finish what the 1978 changes left out, not completely undo them. Did they forget that you made those changes? No wonder why I want the MTA to hire you back for bus planning.

Edited September 22, 2018 by JeremiahC99

[BrooklynBus]

3 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I noticed. They’re trying to undo your famous 1978 Southwest Brooklyn Bus Changes and making things worse than before 1978. They’re supposed to finish what the 1978 changes left out, not completely undo them. Did they forget that you made those changes? No wonder why I want the MTA to hire you back for bus planning.

I have been emailing one of them who said the map isn't final and they are not happy with it either. Be great if we could work together on it.

Did you see the PM I sent you?

Edited September 22, 2018 by BrooklynBus

[Yankees4life]

I'm not too sure if anybody thought about this but having 2 bus routes running along 7th ave (B67/69) is a bit overkill. I would prefer that the B69 returned to its original routing pre-2010. It makes no sense for it to go straight on 7th ave, right on Flatbush, and then to that circle of death that is Grand Army Plaza to Vanderbuilt. The routing on 8th Ave and Prospect Park W made sense to me, IMO

[BrooklynBus]

35 minutes ago, Yankees4life said:

I'm not too sure if anybody thought about this but having 2 bus routes running along 7th ave (B67/69) is a bit overkill. I would prefer that the B69 returned to its original routing pre-2010. It makes no sense for it to go straight on 7th ave, right on Flatbush, and then to that circle of death that is Grand Army Plaza to Vanderbuilt. The routing on 8th Ave and Prospect Park W made sense to me, IMO

You can't say two routes on 7th Avenue is overkill because no extra service was provided. By moving the B69 to 7th Avenue to accompany the B67, they cut B67 service in half destroying that route. They figured people would take which ever bus came first to get to Downtown Brooklyn. How many along 7th Avenue actually use the B69 for Downtown Brooklyn. My guess would be very few. I agree that they should return the former service to 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West. No one lines the new routing except the MTA because it means fewer route miles. 

[Yankees4life]

23 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

You can't say two routes on 7th Avenue is overkill because no extra service was provided. By moving the B69 to 7th Avenue to accompany the B67, they cut B67 service in half destroying that route. They figured people would take which ever bus came first to get to Downtown Brooklyn. How many along 7th Avenue actually use the B69 for Downtown Brooklyn. My guess would be very few. I agree that they should return the former service to 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West. No one lines the new routing except the MTA because it means fewer route miles. 

That's pretty insane they did that and sent a few more B67s to the Navy Yard. It makes no sense there. But then again, it is the : They never make sense

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

27 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

You can't say two routes on 7th Avenue is overkill because no extra service was provided. By moving the B69 to 7th Avenue to accompany the B67, they cut B67 service in half destroying that route. They figured people would take which ever bus came first to get to Downtown Brooklyn. How many along 7th Avenue actually use the B69 for Downtown Brooklyn. My guess would be very few. I agree that they should return the former service to 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West. No one lines the new routing except the MTA because it means fewer route miles. 

Actually, there's more service provided on weekends. The B67/B69 are half hourly each (every 15 minutes) compared to the B67 alone when it ran around every 20 minutes (it ran every 15 minutes at some times on Saturdays). However, reliability is down the drain, especially since the B69 runtimes are not realistic. However, I do agree that 7th Avenue should only be served by one main route.

Edited September 24, 2018 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[JeremiahC99]

28 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

You can't say two routes on 7th Avenue is overkill because no extra service was provided. By moving the B69 to 7th Avenue to accompany the B67, they cut B67 service in half destroying that route. They figured people would take which ever bus came first to get to Downtown Brooklyn. How many along 7th Avenue actually use the B69 for Downtown Brooklyn. My guess would be very few. I agree that they should return the former service to 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West. No one lines the new routing except the MTA because it means fewer route miles. 

I probably don’t think people in Park Slope would use the B69 to Downtown Brooklyn. It was possible that the B69 reroute on 7th Avenue was made to give better service to the 7th Avenue  stop at Flatbush Avenue, where most people in Park Slope get off to take the subway into Downtown Brooklyn, which is faster than either bus to the neighborhood. While those on 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West have a longer walk to the bus, they have a longer walk to the subway at the other end. Service should run every 8 on both routes to better accommodate both subway riders and those headed to either the Barclays Center or to businesses along Vanderbilt Avenue.

 

3 minutes ago, Yankees4life said:

That's pretty insane they did that and sent a few more B67s to the Navy Yard. It makes no sense there. But then again, it is the : They never make sense

Not only did that not make sense from the beginning, but where they terminated it was as well. They could’ve at least sent it to Williamsburg Bridge Plaza via the B62 route to connect with other routes, and ideally should run from 5:00 AM to 1:00 A.M. every day, with 8 minute frequency during weekdays and 10-12 minute headway’s during weekends. Makes more sense if they’re sending any bus route through the Navy Yard to Williamsburg.

[JeremiahC99]

5 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Actually, there's more service provided on weekends. The B67/B69 are half hourly each (every 15 minutes) compared to the B67 alone when it ran around every 20 minutes (it ran every 15 minutes at some times on Saturdays). However, reliability is down the drain, especially since the B69 runtimes are not realistic. 

Maybe they should run both every 12 minutes at least to make it more appealing to Park Slope, Windsor Terrace, and Kensington residents.

[BrooklynBus]

29 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I probably don’t think people in Park Slope would use the B69 to Downtown Brooklyn. It was possible that the B69 reroute on 7th Avenue was made to give better service to the 7th Avenue  stop at Flatbush Avenue, where most people in Park Slope get off to take the subway into Downtown Brooklyn, which is faster than either bus to the neighborhood. While those on 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West have a longer walk to the bus, they have a longer walk to the subway at the other end. Service should run every 8 on both routes to better accommodate both subway riders and those headed to either the Barclays Center or to businesses along Vanderbilt Avenue.

Not only did that not make sense from the beginning, but where they terminated it was as well. They could’ve at least sent it to Williamsburg Bridge Plaza via the B62 route to connect with other routes, and ideally should run from 5:00 AM to 1:00 A.M. every day, with 8 minute frequency during weekdays and 10-12 minute headway’s during weekends. Makes more sense if they’re sending any bus route through the Navy Yard to Williamsburg.

The advantage of taking the B67 from Downtown Brooklyn to Park Slope was that you would get a seat. With service every 30 minutes, people will only use the bus if they see one coming or Bus Time shows one is near. They won't wait 30 minutes for it, but they would have waited 15 for the comfort if they weren't in a hurry. 

Not going to Williamsburg Plaza saved them one bus. They only looked at operating expenses, not that they would have had additional revenue from more people riding the bus. 

[JeremiahC99]

1 minute ago, BrooklynBus said:

The advantage of taking the B67 from Downtown Brooklyn to Park Slope was that you would get a seat. With service every 30 minutes, people will only use the bus if they see one coming or Bus Time shows one is near. They won't wait 30 minutes for it, but they would have waited 15 for the comfort if they weren't in a hurry. 

Not going to Williamsburg Plaza saved them one bus. They only looked at operating expenses, not that they would have had additional revenue from more people riding the bus. 

This is why the B67 service should run every 10 minutes at least to build ridership. 30 minute headways are absolutely unacceptable. Even I don't consider a route with 30 minute headways is unacceptable. What they need to do it revise the service planning guidelines they have to say that new route should start with minimum headway of at least 10 minutes during the weekdays and every 15 miutes during the weekends, with ideal headways being 8 minutes during the weekdays and evey 10 minutes during weekends.

 

Also not having to to Willliamsburg Bridge Plaza is dumb. It just missed line a whole goodie-bag of bus and subway lines the route can connect with. Did they not study latent demand for those who would use the bus route if the route went to Williamsburg Plaza. The new transfer opportunities there could shorten their trip and reduce the need for slow trips on the subway to get from Williamsburg or North Brooklyn to Downtown Brooklyn via Manhattan.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said:

This is why the B67 service should run every 10 minutes at least to build ridership. 30 minute headways are absolutely unacceptable. Even I don't consider a route with 30 minute headways is unacceptable. What they need to do it revise the service planning guidelines they have to say that new route should start with minimum headway of at least 10 minutes during the weekdays and every 15 miutes during the weekends, with ideal headways being 8 minutes during the weekdays and evey 10 minutes during weekends.

 

Also not having to to Willliamsburg Bridge Plaza is dumb. It just missed line a whole goodie-bag of bus and subway lines the route can connect with. Did they not study latent demand for those who would use the bus route if the route went to Williamsburg Plaza. The new transfer opportunities there could shorten their trip and reduce the need for slow trips on the subway to get from Williamsburg or North Brooklyn to Downtown Brooklyn via Manhattan.

Running a bus every 10 minutes versus every 30 minutes is a huge difference in costs and if the ridership isn't there, then you can't break the budget running buses when there's a budget that must be kept.  I think a bus every 20 minutes is more tolerable.

[JeremiahC99]

36 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Running a bus every 10 minutes versus every 30 minutes is a huge difference in costs and if the ridership isn't there, then you can't break the budget running buses when there's a budget that must be kept.  I think a bus every 20 minutes is more tolerable.

Well 20 minutes may not sound frequent, but is does give a route a chance of being successful. The more frequent the service, the more successful the route can be, especially those newer routes that began with those stupid 30 minute headways. Perhaps 15-20 minute minimum headways should be the new guidelines for service planning. Night service should be every 20 minutes to accommodate home-bound subway riders transferring to buses.

Edited September 25, 2018 by JeremiahC99

[Via Garibaldi 8]

21 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Well 20 minutes may not sound frequent, but is does give a route a chance of being successful. The more frequent the service, the more successful the route can be, especially those newer routes that began with those stupid 30 minute headways. Perhaps 15-20 minute minimum headways should be the new guidelines for service planning. Night service should be every 20 minutes to accommodate home-bound subway riders transferring to buses.

Well 30 minute headways for local buses is indeed abysmal. The agency IMO has used BusTime as a way to justify such headways, and quite frankly more times than not those buses are delayed, thus leading to waits well over 30 minutes. The M50 is a perfect example. 9 times out of 10 unless you're going really far, you're better off walking. We can run more frequent service if operating costs are kept lower because then each trip isn't astronomical to run. The longer the trips take, the more expensive they are the deer trips the can afford to operate.

[BrooklynBus]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Running a bus every 10 minutes versus every 30 minutes is a huge difference in costs and if the ridership isn't there, then you can't break the budget running buses when there's a budget that must be kept.  I think a bus every 20 minutes is more tolerable.

I agree. Providing a new service at 10 minute headways just can't be afforded, and 30 minutes is miserable. New routes should preferably start at every 15 minutes, and then be cut back to every 20 minutes after three months if the ridership is low. Or else start it at every 20 minutes if you absolutely have to. But every 30 minutes for NYC is ridiculous but probably perfectly acceptable elsewhere. You also have to give the route six months to a year to build ridership before you think about discontinuing it.

[B35 via Church]

4 hours ago, Yankees4life said:

I'm not too sure if anybody thought about this but having 2 bus routes running along 7th ave (B67/69) is a bit overkill. I would prefer that the B69 returned to its original routing pre-2010. It makes no sense for it to go straight on 7th ave, right on Flatbush, and then to that circle of death that is Grand Army Plaza to Vanderbuilt. The routing on 8th Ave and Prospect Park W made sense to me, IMO

It isn't about the number of routes, per se - It's about the "combined" service provided on the corridor..... Current B67/B69 service along 7th is the furthest thing from overkill... Park Slope patrons didn't get duped by that shit (they were quite vocal about the loss of B67 service when that change happened) & neither should you.....

Also, have you seen PPW (Prospect Park West) nowadays? It's bogged down with traffic pretty much the whole length now; from Grand Army Plz. to 9th st, minimum... The bike lanes have definitely played a part in that; B69's wouldn't be no where near as fast along 8th/PPW here in 2018 as they were pre-2010..... Also, let's face it - the demand for bus service along PPW was never great & it isn't even an issue of coverage; running it on 7th helped that route out (as far as patronage goes) a lot.... There really isn't much of a reason to revert the pre-2010 B69 routing.....

Within Park Slope, it's pretty much the current B69 routing, or bust......

4 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

You can't say two routes on 7th Avenue is overkill because no extra service was provided. By moving the B69 to 7th Avenue to accompany the B67, they cut B67 service in half destroying that route. They figured people would take which ever bus came first to get to Downtown Brooklyn. How many along 7th Avenue actually use the B69 for Downtown Brooklyn. My guess would be very few. I agree that they should return the former service to 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West. No one lines the new routing except the MTA because it means fewer route miles. 

Literally everytime I'm in Park Slope now, I say to myself, I abhor what they did to the B67 (and I'm not even talking about the extension through the Navy Yard, although I can easily include it)..... They could have kept current service levels on the B67 & still had B69's shifted over to 7th - but being cheap, of course they had to dig into B67 service to justify (the way they saw fit) having both the B67/B69 running along 7th.... What I've noticed ever since the B69 was shifted over to 7th, is that less people are taking B67's into Downtown & both the B67 & the B69 pretty much tank at Flatbush (7th av )..... The ridership trend on the B67 wasn't always for the masses in the neighborhood to catch the Brighton line.... I remember when 7th av on the Brighton line used to be a pretty quiet station... Not so much anymore.

That answers your question btw, nobody in Park Slope takes the B69 to RAMBO....

Edited September 25, 2018 by B35 via Church