Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Around the Horn]

8 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

For 16th Avenue, the B67 and B69 would be extended to serve it to the 62nd Street  station.

This would be a complete waste of money...

[JeremiahC99]

50 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

This would be a complete waste of money...

Not necessarily, as it does restore a previously cut service that actually had benefits, including closing a service gap that existed after the routes elimination.

The previous B23 route duplicated the B8 route in its entirety. It did not serve new markets, and got no extensions anywhere that could benefit passengers, and as a result, the B23 became an enormous waste of money.

The proposal I made would restore service on both 16th Avenue and on Cortelyou Road, But this time, instead of having the B23 restore to the old useless path on both Cortelyou Road and 16th Avenues, service would replace the B16, which would be rerouted to Fort Hamilton Pkwy like i mentioned, and run to Bay Ridge, while having the B67 and B69 serve 16th Avenue would be better than continuing to leave the corridor with no crucial services. As the B67 serves Downtown Brooklyn, this service would be a boon for 16th Avenue folks looking to go to the Barclays Center and surrounding areas as an alternative to the  and  trains, especially during service disruptions.

Another way to serve 16th Avenue is to have a route that runs from the 62nd Street terminal vía 16th Avenue, then overlay the B67/B69, to Prospect Pk W, and overlay the B61 through Red Hook, then vía the Battery Tunnel (used by the now more speedier Staten Island express routes) into Lower Manhattan, at an unspecified location. This would eliminate the need for a B67 and B69 extension on 16th Avenue, and also provide a direct bus service between Red Hook and Lower Manhattan, something sorely needed in the growing Red Hook neighborhood. This route will only SLIGHTLY impact B61 and B67 ridership and have LITTLE effect on B69 riders.

Its a win-win for all.

Coming up, a plan for Downtown Brooklyn Service.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

2 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Not necessarily, as it does restore a previously cut service that actually had benefits, including closing a service gap that existed after the routes elimination.

The previous B23 route duplicated the B8 route in its entirety. It did not serve new markets, and got no extensions anywhere that could benefit passengers, and as a result, the B23 became an enormous waste of money.

The proposal I made would restore service on both 16th Avenue and on Cortelyou Road, But this time, instead of having the B23 restore to the old useless path on both Cortelyou Road and 16th Avenues, service would replace the B16, which would be rerouted to Fort Hamilton Pkwy like i mentioned, and run to Bay Ridge, while having the B67 and B69 serve 16th Avenue would be better than continuing to leave the corridor with no crucial services. As the B67 serves Downtown Brooklyn, this service would be a boon for 16th Avenue folks looking to go to the Barclays Center and surrounding areas as an alternative to the  and  trains, especially during service disruptions.

Another way to serve 16th Avenue is to have a route that runs from the 62nd Street terminal vía 16th Avenue, then overlay the B67/B69, to Prospect Pk W, and overlay the B61 through Red Hook, then vía the Battery Tunnel (used by the now more speedier Staten Island express routes) into Lower Manhattan, at an unspecified location. This would eliminate the need for a B67 and B69 extension on 16th Avenue, and also provide a direct bus service between Red Hook and Lower Manhattan, something sorely needed in the growing Red Hook neighborhood. This route will only SLIGHTLY impact B61 and B67 ridership and have LITTLE effect on B69 riders.

Its a win-win for all.

Coming up, a plan for Downtown Brooklyn Service.

No one in that area is looking to specifically go to Barclays Center. I'd go a little further and say some won't even bother anything that's not the B110.

Even if they wanted to, the  and  is enough, despite the service disruption (or they can take the  ). 

Edited April 5, 2019 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

No one in that area is looking to specifically go to Barclays Center. I'd go a little further and say some won't even bother anything that's not the B110.

Even if they wanted to, the  and  is enough, despite the service disruption (or they can take the  ). 

Even then it would still be better than the current situation (no service on crucial corridors like 16th Avenue, and Cortelyou Road). 16th Avenue and Cortelyou Road must be better served.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

3 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Even then it would still be better than the current situation (no service on crucial corridors like 16th Avenue, and Cortelyou Road). 16th Avenue and Cortelyou Road must be better served.

Better than nothing does not mean useful. I'd rather have a service that is useful for residents than one that is just placed/extended just because.

[Bay Ridge Express]

2 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Even then it would still be better than the current situation (no service on crucial corridors like 16th Avenue, and Cortelyou Road). 16th Avenue and Cortelyou Road must be better served.

I'd say if anything, the B8's problems should be fixed first, hence the need for a split. My conjecture is that one half of the split can be used to serve the corridors that you are describing, or however you want to slice it, like extending the B67/69... that I'm not sure about.

[B35 via Church]

14 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

The previous B23 route duplicated the B8 route in its entirety. It did not serve new markets, and got no extensions anywhere that could benefit passengers, and as a result, the B23 became an enormous waste of money.....

In your bizarro world, maybe......

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

+ 2 reps for anyone that can point out at least 2 lies this dude just told....

15 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

This would be a complete waste of money...

Very much so....

I mean, there's been several suggestions floating around that involves extending the B67 southward & I refuse to concur with any of them.... Personally, I'd truncate the thing at Church av if it were feasible & the space existed for it... Since th'aint the case, current terminal they shall stay AFAIC.....

11 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

No one in that area is looking to specifically go to Barclays Center. I'd go a little further and say some won't even bother anything that's not the B110.

Even if they wanted to, the  and  is enough, despite the service disruption (or they can take the  ). 

9 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Better than nothing does not mean useful.....

That's that ole "give people service and they will use it" train of thought....

If I were to (partially) restore the B23 here in 2019, it wouldn't go past the  due west of Flatbush (av)..... Points east, I'd use it as a gap filler b/w the B8 & the B35 in my general neck of the woods (I hate the the term "central Brooklyn") & that'd be the end of it.....

The old B23 west of the  I believe would be a dead draw....

6 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

I'd say if anything, the B8's problems should be fixed first, hence the need for a split. My conjecture is that one half of the split can be used to serve the corridors that you are describing, or however you want to slice it, like extending the B67/69... that I'm not sure about.

Agreed with the opening statement....

As for the rest of the post, well basically, any split of the B8 should have the resultant routes serving whatever portions/segments of the current B8 itself... Regardless if I think any addt'l local service should run along Cortelyou & any restoration of service along 16th av is worth it or not, they're completely separate animals to that of the B8..... Don't let this dude obfuscate matters with his 10 10 "win-win for all" crap.....

[Future ENY OP]

On 4/1/2019 at 9:59 PM, bobtehpanda said:

The Fulton Mall area isn't exactly doing too hot.

 

On 4/2/2019 at 1:31 PM, B35 via Church said:

Yeah, and you can thank the MetroTech project for that.....

Fulton Mall strip being less patronized than it used to be, has nothing to do with anything transit related.

 

On 4/2/2019 at 2:57 PM, Lex said:

Not to mention that Fulton Street's width over there would make mixed traffic more of a nightmare than further east on the same street...

Kinda wanted bring convo on this side. However, you all have a good point. With all of the construction that’s going on in that area and mixed traffic of cars. Fulton Street has definitely lost its touch. I’d put Livingston Street in that same category.

Honestly, they (DOT) need to put a bus only street on Livingston Street from 7AM-10PM to have these buses flow through Downtown Brooklyn. There are times throughout the day bus in that immediate area can’t move.  Also, ticket and tow all commuter vans using Livingston. (Possibly resulting of an all ban of commuter vans in downtown brooklyn) 

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

 

 

Kinda wanted bring convo on this side. However, you all have a good point. With all of the construction that’s going on in that area and mixed traffic of cars. Fulton Street has definitely lost its touch. I’d put Livingston Street in that same category.

Honestly, they (DOT) need to put a bus only street on Livingston Street from 7AM-10PM to have these buses flow through Downtown Brooklyn. There are times throughout the day bus in that immediate area can’t move.  Also, ticket and tow all commuter vans using Livingston. (Possibly resulting of an all ban of commuter vans in downtown brooklyn) 

That would be a great idea, and this brings me to another proposal.

Back in 2010-11, the NYC DOT did a study on the traffic conditions in Downtown Brooklyn. Link is here: https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/dbstc_final_report.pdf. Buses were also looked into as well. It was found that overlapping bus service in key corridors, especially Fulton and Livingston, is a big problem, as all these bus routes compete with each other and other vehicles for street space. Result: delays, congestion, and unreliability for theses buses, as well as rider confusion on which bus goes where.

One of the solutions looked at to solve this was a Downtown Brooklyn Shuttle system operation on Fulton and Livingston Streets. Modeled after the Denver RTD 16th Street Mallshuttle, the shuttle system would replace all routes operating on both the Fulton Mall and Livingston Street between Flatbush Avenue and Adams Street, the western end of the mall. A new bus terminal would be built away from the corridor, though the Ashland and Fulton intersection was used for conceptual purposes. The DOT though it was an excellent idea, so they made this a long term solution.

My proposal would be to implement most, if not all of the recommendations in the study. The Jay Street Transit Priority would be implemented almost exactly how it was outlined in the study. However, north of Tillary street, the bus stops at Chapel and Concord Streets would be moved further north to Nassau Street, away from the Charter School, to speed service and improve crowding conditions when school lets out. Everything else is the same, but the routes on the street keep the same travel path.

The meat of this plan would be a new bus terminal away from the Fulton Mall corridor. Using Ashland/Fulton as a conceptual location, like in the DOT study, the B25, B26, B37, B38/LTD, B41/LTD, B45, B52, B67, and B103 LTD would all terminate at this new transit center. To replace Fulton Mall and Livingston Street service, a slightly modified shuttle route would be implemented. In my proposal, this shuttle would be named the B88 Downtown Brooklyn Link, and operate between terminal and Fulton Landing, using the routing shown on the map in the link below. Fulton Mall would become a one-way westbound busway (tying into Joralemon Street at the end of the mall), and Livingston Street would be one way-eastbound, with the south side of the street consisting of two bus lanes next to the curb. The northern end of the B67 would be replaced with an extension of the B61.

The B88 would operate 24 hours a day, with 3 minute headways throughout the day, and an unspecified headway during the night hours. Fleet for this service would possibly be either a New Flyer XDE40 with BRT specs or a New Flyer XE40 with BRT specs, with electric chargers installed at the terminal, or at East New York Depot, where the route would be based at.

This would reduce confusion, end traffic conflicts, and improve bus reliability for those outside the study area. In addition, access to the Downtown Brooklyn area would not be lost under these proposals.

Link to the map for future reference: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1aaXd-yTdXiN-VwmqmbvN5cmPIIZaoUp1&usp=sharing.

Note: This proposal is INDEPENDENT of any other route changes. Because of this, current paths of the routes outside of the study area affected are shown. Any other change is beyond the scope of this proposal.

[Lex]

2 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

That would be a great idea, and this brings me to another proposal.

Back in 2010-11, the NYC DOT did a study on the traffic conditions in Downtown Brooklyn. Link is here: https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/dbstc_final_report.pdf. Buses were also looked into as well. It was found that overlapping bus service in key corridors, especially Fulton and Livingston, is a big problem, as all these bus routes compete with each other and other vehicles for street space. Result: delays, congestion, and unreliability for theses buses, as well as rider confusion on which bus goes where.

One of the solutions looked at to solve this was a Downtown Brooklyn Shuttle system operation on Fulton and Livingston Streets. Modeled after the Denver RTD 16th Street Mallshuttle, the shuttle system would replace all routes operating on both the Fulton Mall and Livingston Street between Flatbush Avenue and Adams Street, the western end of the mall. A new bus terminal would be built away from the corridor, though the Ashland and Fulton intersection was used for conceptual purposes. The DOT though it was an excellent idea, so they made this a long term solution.

My proposal would be to implement most, if not all of the recommendations in the study. The Jay Street Transit Priority would be implemented almost exactly how it was outlined in the study. However, north of Tillary street, the bus stops at Chapel and Concord Streets would be moved further north to Nassau Street, away from the Charter School, to speed service and improve crowding conditions when school lets out. Everything else is the same, but the routes on the street keep the same travel path.

The meat of this plan would be a new bus terminal away from the Fulton Mall corridor. Using Ashland/Fulton as a conceptual location, like in the DOT study, the B25, B26, B37, B38/LTD, B41/LTD, B45, B52, B67, and B103 LTD would all terminate at this new transit center. To replace Fulton Mall and Livingston Street service, a slightly modified shuttle route would be implemented. In my proposal, this shuttle would be named the B88 Downtown Brooklyn Link, and operate between terminal and Fulton Landing, using the routing shown on the map in the link below. Fulton Mall would become a one-way westbound busway (tying into Joralemon Street at the end of the mall), and Livingston Street would be one way-eastbound, with the south side of the street consisting of two bus lanes next to the curb. The northern end of the B67 would be replaced with an extension of the B61.

The B88 would operate 24 hours a day, with 3 minute headways throughout the day, and an unspecified headway during the night hours. Fleet for this service would possibly be either a New Flyer XDE40 with BRT specs or a New Flyer XE40 with BRT specs, with electric chargers installed at the terminal, or at East New York Depot, where the route would be based at.

This would reduce confusion, end traffic conflicts, and improve bus reliability for those outside the study area. In addition, access to the Downtown Brooklyn area would not be lost under these proposals.

Link to the map for future reference: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1aaXd-yTdXiN-VwmqmbvN5cmPIIZaoUp1&usp=sharing.

Note: This proposal is INDEPENDENT of any other route changes. Because of this, current paths of the routes outside of the study area affected are shown. Any other change is beyond the scope of this proposal.

Stop trying to push that BS. It's honestly becoming painful.

[JeremiahC99]

21 minutes ago, Lex said:

Stop trying to push that BS. It's honestly becoming painful.

That is an actual logical proposal, albeit for the long term. This proposal, like the DOT proposal for the bus terminal, would actually help with traffic and reliability.

However, in response to feedback, the proposed fleet would be changed. Instead of XDE40s or XE40s, the fleet for the shuttle would be XE60s. That should be better.

Did you read that DOT study I put in there? It’s actually very informative.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

29 minutes ago, Lex said:

Stop trying to push that BS. It's honestly becoming painful.

I wouldn't bother addressing it when he's so fixated on the type of fleet the route will use.

[B35 via Church]

45 minutes ago, Lex said:

Stop trying to push that BS. It's honestly becoming painful.

Seriously..... This is the third damn time he's posted that shit on here.

19 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I wouldn't bother addressing it when he's so fixated on the type of fleet the route will use.

He's not fixated on the fleet... He just doesn't have a counterargument of his own.

[JeremiahC99]

20 minutes ago, Fredrick Wells 3 said:

How about restoring the B51 but Full Time (7 Days a Week)?

I was thinking having a B51 operate from Downtown Brooklyn, and over the Manhattan Bridge, like before, but instead of going to City Hall like it did before, I a proposing it be a Canal Street Crosstown route, terminating at Canal Street and Washington Street. This would provide a crosstown bus service between Houston Street (M21) and Chambers Street (M22). The B51 Downtown terminus is undetermined, but would eventually tie into the Downtown Bus terminal and shuttle proposal i mentioned a while back.

Edited April 12, 2019 by JeremiahC99

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, Fredrick Wells 3 said:

How about restoring the B51 but Full Time (7 Days a Week)?

How about no?  Who is the ridership base?

52 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I was thinking having a B51 operate from Downtown Brooklyn, and over the Manhattan Bridge, like before, but instead of going to City Hall like it did before, I a proposing it be a Canal Street Crosstown route, terminating at Canal Street and Washington Street. This would provide a crosstown bus service between Houston Street (M21) and Chambers Street (M22). The B51 Downtown terminus is undetermined, but would eventually tie into the Downtown Bus terminal and shuttle proposal i mentioned a while back.

Another fantastic idea... That's just what we need... A bus running down Canal Street which has tons of congestion as it is.  You can walk down Canal Street faster.  Clearly you don't use bus service in the areas you are proposing these routes and it shows.

[Lex]

53 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I was thinking having a B51 operate from Downtown Brooklyn, and over the Manhattan Bridge, like before, but instead of going to City Hall like it did before, I a proposing it be a Canal Street Crosstown route, terminating at Canal Street and Washington Street. This would provide a crosstown bus service between Houston Street (M21) and Chambers Street (M22). The B51 Downtown terminus is undetermined, but would eventually tie into the Downtown Bus terminal and shuttle proposal i mentioned a while back.

You'd be better off tying the route into Bergen Beach. At least it would have a shot at attracting people.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, Lex said:

You'd be better off tying the route into Bergen Beach. At least it would have a shot at attracting people.

In Bergen Beach where?

[Lex]

2 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

In Bergen Beach where?

Follow the B41. (No, they won't be serving Bergen Beach together, as that designation would only apply to buses running from Kings Plaza to Downtown Brooklyn.)

And no, I'm not suggesting that it actually should be implemented, but if reinstating the B51 is really worth looking at, something needs to change on the Brooklyn end.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, Lex said:

Follow the B41. (No, they won't be serving Bergen Beach together, as that designation would only apply to buses running from Kings Plaza to Downtown Brooklyn.)

And no, I'm not suggesting that it actually should be implemented, but if reinstating the B51 is really worth looking at, something needs to change on the Brooklyn end.

I don't know where to begin with this one.  A lot has changed when the B51 was eliminated to now.  Demographic shifts for starters.  It mainly served people with ADA issues. The question is who would be the ridership for any sort of resurrection of a B51?

Regarding any Bergen Beach comments, if any bus were to run with the B3 and B41, it would be terminated where they currently terminate at.  There is no need to run the service into Bergen Beach since residents there can simply walk to the bus. From my understanding, they don't want a bus running into Bergen Beach proper.  The neighborhood isn't that big anyway and it's all residential.  There's no commercial strip, save Avenue U, and you have the buses there already.

[JeremiahC99]

12 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Another fantastic idea... That's just what we need... A bus running down Canal Street which has tons of congestion as it is.  You can walk down Canal Street faster.  Clearly you don't use bus service in the areas you are proposing these routes and it shows.

Well true the bus would face congestion, but we need to think outside the box.

To alleviate traffic before the route is implemented, one idea add an HOV 3+ lane to accommodate traffic going to the Holland Tunnel. It would run the length of Canal from the Manhattan Bridge to Hudson Street. This would improve sports on both buses and cars. A parking ban could work as well.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Well true the bus would face congestion, but we need to think outside the box.

To alleviate traffic before the route is implemented, one idea add an HOV 3+ lane to accommodate traffic going to the Holland Tunnel. It would run the length of Canal from the Manhattan Bridge to Hudson Street. This would improve sports on both buses and cars. A parking ban could work as well.

Good luck with that.  Canal Street is a parking lot now and there's no bus on it.  Then there's the enforcement factor, but most of all who is going to use the bus?

[Orion6025]

13 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Well true the bus would face congestion, but we need to think outside the box.

To alleviate traffic before the route is implemented, one idea add an HOV 3+ lane to accommodate traffic going to the Holland Tunnel. It would run the length of Canal from the Manhattan Bridge to Hudson Street. This would improve sports on both buses and cars. A parking ban could work as well.

Why on earth would you go through all that effort to revive a largely useless route.

1 hour ago, Fredrick Wells 3 said:

How about restoring the B51 but Full Time (7 Days a Week)?

The B51 lives, it's called the 4 and 5 trains..... The B51's terminal in Downtown Brooklyn was literally 1 and a half blocks from the  and  train Borough Hall station and its former terminal in Manhattan was right above the  /  Bklyn Bridge station. You're doing people a favor by not running it; all those suckers that would ride it save themselves a ton of time by being forced to take the subway lmfao. And beyond those two terminals, it had very little local street service/coverage, and all of that is easily accessible to the subway...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 minutes ago, Orion6025 said:

Why on earth would you go through all that effort to revive a largely useless route.

The B51 lives, it's called the 4 and 5 trains..... The B51's terminal in Downtown Brooklyn was literally 1 and a half blocks from the  and  train Borough Hall station and its former terminal in Manhattan was right above the  /  Bklyn Bridge station. You're doing people a favor by not running it; all those suckers that would ride it save themselves a ton of time by being forced to take the subway lmfao. And beyond those two terminals, it had very little local street service/coverage, and all of that is easily accessible to the subway...

They weren't suckers. They were people that primarily had ADA issues and couldn't access the subway.  That's why I asked who would use it because there has been drastic demographic changes in some cases.  It would probably make more sense to provide Access-A-Ride or a e-hail program for those people if ADA accessibility is still a problem in the interim as more stations are worked on.

[Orion6025]

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

They weren't suckers. They were people that primarily had ADA issues and couldn't access the subway. 

Borough Hall and Bklyn Bridge City Hall are both ADA accessible IIRC.

Well, now at least. I don't know about then.

Edited April 12, 2019 by Orion6025
clarification at the end

[Via Garibaldi 8]

19 minutes ago, Orion6025 said:

Borough Hall and Bklyn Bridge City Hall are both ADA accessible IIRC.

Well, now at least. I don't know about then.

This article provides some background:

The End of the Line for the 'Family' on the B51

Published by

WNYC News

Video: http://www.wnyc.org/story/71376-the-end-of-the-line-for-the-family-on-the-b51/

Jun 23, 2010 · by Andrea Bernstein

New York, NY — It's 6:30 in the morning, and most New Yorkers are still in their pajamas. But it's a party on the B51 bus in downtown Brooklyn. I take a seat. Someone else's it seems.

"Miss, I don’t mean to be rude," a rider named Della tells me, "but people on this bus do have OCD. If you're sitting in a seat that somebody is sitting in, I’m serious! I’m being honest! We are family on this bus!"

The B51 goes from Downtown Brooklyn, over the Manhattan Bridge, to Chinatown, the courthouses, and City Hall. There are people on this very bus who have been riding it since 1985. After this week, the B51 dies.

The passengers here tick off the names of their fellow riders. People with disabilities, knee injuries, asthma, anxiety, the elderly. Cheryl, a court worker, explains the bus carries lots of senior citizens. "Except for me. Oh my God, Why did I include myself?"

Nine hundred people ride the B51 bus every day, compared to a system average of about 13,000. The cost to the MTA per rider is about three times the fare paid. Still, the passengers don’t want to see the line die. A lot of them went to a meeting with the MTA. An MTA representative told them trains also serve this route, and in a time of huge budget gaps, priorities need to be set.

"He was like, 'We already came to the conclusion,'" Della and Cheryl told me together. "Did he not look at his watch and say at 6:14 on 6/14, at 6:30 pm, 'We’ve already used all of the allocations.'"

Those calculations don’t take into effect the social unit that’s formed on many of these buses. "Hi, Family!" is the standard greeting as passengers embark. Also heard: "Good morning, sweetie! You okay, Pookie?"

There’s a lot of anxiety about what will happen. As I ride the B51, Anna, a city worker, clutches her chest as she thinks about what she’ll do next week. Sixty-year old Maryse Pascal isn’t sure. "I love the ride. In the afternoon you feel like you’re on a mini vacation. I love the view. I can’t go underground, after September 11 I just feel so panicky."

Rider "Anna" on the B51 is anxious about taking an alternate route when the service is cut next week.

Pascal says she hasn’t been able to go into a tunnel since that day, where she watched "the whole thing" from the nearby Verizon building. In 1993, she was working in the Twin Towers when a van-bomb detonated. Pascal says she thinks she’ll walk some days over the Manhattan Bridge, though she doesn’t think she can manage both directions. Other days she considers retiring. But, she says, "I need to work. I have a mortgage. Things are slow for my husband, work is very slow -- he hardly works because he does carpet, and who wants carpet in this economy?"

As the line pulls into one of it’s final stops near City Hall, a woman called TJ tells me Friday, the last weekday run of the B51, there will be a real party, with fried chicken. "I’m going to do a prayer, sing a little gospel song, ride on. We going to bring some food and go out right."

Source: https://www.wnyc.org/story/71376-the-end-of-the-line-for-the-family-on-the-b51/

This was also discussed before here:

 

Edited April 12, 2019 by Via Garibaldi 8