Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Interested Rider]

13 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

Lightly used? LIGHTLY USED?! I got passed up by two full buses at Avenue L and Nostrand at 4 pm on a Tuesday...

That's just nonsense

I have been using the B/9 a lot over the years and for anyone to say that the route is lightly used is quite mistaken.

Though I take the route from  Nostrand Avenue to Coney Island Avenue now and vice versa and have taken it from 8th avenue to either Coney Island Avenue or Nostrand Avenue many times over the years, no matter what time during the day I have taken it, it has always been crowded during the day in both directions. 

The B/9 may be lightly used on days like today (a religious holiday), the sabbath and this Friday (another religious holiday) and even then the different communities at the end of the route have been known to make sufficient use of the route on those days.

[Bay Ridge Express]

1 hour ago, Interested Rider said:

I have been using the B/9 a lot over the years and for anyone to say that the route is lightly used is quite mistaken.

Though I take the route from  Nostrand Avenue to Coney Island Avenue now and vice versa and have taken it from 8th avenue to either Coney Island Avenue or Nostrand Avenue many times over the years, no matter what time during the day I have taken it, it has always been crowded during the day in both directions. 

The B/9 may be lightly used on days like today (a religious holiday), the sabbath and this Friday (another religious holiday) and even then the different communities at the end of the route have been known to make sufficient use of the route on those days.

Not to mention the increase in ridership from the whole Sea Beach fiasco...

[Yankees4life]

16 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

I think Bay Pkwy would be better, seeing as that route has higher usage and would avoid the whole traffic jam on Kings Hwy. It could also even be extended to the  at 71 or even 13 Av at its fullest potential, but factoring in the fact that the B9 should be left unchanged.

Maybe via Quintin and then turn left to Bay Parkway and end at the station. Not too sure how they'll terminate tho

[checkmatechamp13]

On 4/20/2019 at 1:50 PM, Bay Ridge Express said:

The B1's route is extremely useful and straightforward, but if you're trying to do some inter-borough traveling from one end to the other, then forget it, because you will save a lot more time either driving or even taking the  to the  to the  if you're going between Bay Ridge and Brighton.

The and crawl through the yard. You would be better off getting off at 86th Street and catching the B1 there.

[ABOGbrooklyn]

On 4/20/2019 at 5:40 PM, BrooklynBus said:

Thank you. I designed it give straightforward and useful. So the question is will the MTA seek to make more routes straight forward and useful in their redesigns  to encourage ridership or will the prime focus be on eliminating poor performers  and elminate bus stops and reduce coverage such as eliminating routes that parallel subways in order to cut costs. They already stated for Queens that they want to reduce redundancy between buses and subways, forgetting that different modes serve different populations. For example, people prefer to transfer between two buses than to switch to a subway for only one stop for the last quarter or half mile leg of their journey. For ridership to grow they must make an investment in the system. Reduced service means reduced ridership. 

Speaking of redundancy, why is their a need for the B67 and 69 running on almost the same route? This seems unnecessary. Also why doesn't the B49 run all Ocean Ave all the way instead of being right next to the 44, also ridiculous..

[JeremiahC99]

29 minutes ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

Speaking of redundancy, why is their a need for the B67 and 69 running on almost the same route? This seems unnecessary. Also why doesn't the B49 run all Ocean Ave all the way instead of being right next to the 44, also ridiculous..

In regards of the B67 and B69, this was because in 2010, the B69 was rerouted from 8th Avenue/Prospect Pk W to directly serve the 7th Avenue  station (where many passengers on the B69 were getting off anyway), and consolidate service onto a single corridor (7th Avenue), and one with a hell lot of desirable shopping and dining locations. What they should do is have both routes run every 8 minutes between its shared terminal at Kensington-Cortelyou Road and the High Street  station. This would make the 7th Avenue shopping corridor have more frequent service for shoppers and diners as well.

As for the B49, that is how the route was back then, since there was no need for a bus on the northern end of Ocean Avenue. Luckily, this problem was addressed by @BrooklynBus several years ago, which you can read about here: http://brooklynbus.tripod.com/id15.html.

In his proposal, the B49 would be split into two routes:

• The existing B49, which would remain unaltered.
• A new route called the B50 (the previous designation for the section of the current B82 between Midwood and Spring Creek), which would run along entire length of Ocean Avenue between Avenue Z and Prospect Park, then along the entire length of Empire Blvd to terminate at Utica Avenue and Empire Blvd (a location that I somewhat disagree with). Service would be limited stop south of Foster Av during rush hours.

Unfortunately, even with the slew of changes it came with, that proposal was rejected along with all of the other proposals he made back then were rejected, which was disappointing because they have potential. According to the flawed logic of the  they didn’t want anyone telling them how to plan the routes. Now that it is 2019, I feel that it needs to be revisited. Some small changes would be made to this proposal. First, the B50 would be renamed the B59 LTD, and have Limited stop service at all times except late nights. This would be split off from the B49 LTD. In addition, I do not agree with terminating the Ocean Avenue-Empire Blvd route at Utica Avenue/Empire Blvd, especially since aside from the B12, B17, and B46, there is nothing else to transfer to. It also feels like a dead zone around there. As a result, I propose extending the B59 LTD at least to Crown Heights-Eastern Pkwy at the Utica Avenue  station to permit access to the subway. A further extension to Ralph Avenue and St. John’s Place should also be considered. While this could subject the B59 LTD to rush hour Utica Avenue traffic, something I have experienced personally since I ride through the corridor Monday-Thursday on my way to school, the added connection to the subway would be a big plus.

[BrooklynBus]

On 4/20/2019 at 6:56 PM, Interested Rider said:

The reason that many riders prefer taking two buses instead of a bus and a train as if there is no elevator at the station, then climbing the stairs is tough especially if you have packages and cannot walk that well.  

As our population ages, climbing stairs becomes more difficult so the alternative of two buses especially now with all local buses low floor very soon becomes an attractive alternative to a bus/train routing. Do a search of previous threads involving access to subway stations and right there is the best argument for keeping parallel bus service to subway lines.

In the era of providing better access for all riders, it is incumbent that if it means that parallel routes to subways be kept, then so be it. My advice to those that are thinking about it to think twice as while you are able to walk steps with no problem right now, think of yourself when you become a senior and are the position of a person who has to travel for medical appointments or shopping. Right then and there,  unless the person making the decision is without a heart, they would keep the parallel bus routes.

Unfortunately, if you look at the MTA’s goals for the Queens Study, one of them is to reduce redundancy between buses and subways. I am afraid, They are going to screw up all the boroughs instead of making things better. And after all the studies fail, after Byford is gone, because of their own ineptitude, they will come to the same conclusion they did in the mid eighties that borough studies are impractical and they should go back to incremental planning. 

[B35 via Church]

10 hours ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

Speaking of redundancy, why is their a need for the B67 and 69 running on almost the same route? This seems unnecessary...

The need is not for 2 routes, the need is for the combined levels of service those 2 routes provide along 7th, etc. south of Flatbush av...

The MTA created a complementary relationship along that corridor where there was no need for it.... Service was reduced on the B67 to have had the B69 shifted from running via 8th & via Prospect Park West, to running along 7th (with the B67)....

10 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

....Some small changes would be made to this proposal. First, the B50 would be renamed the B59 LTD, and have Limited stop service at all times except late nights. This would be split off from the B49 LTD. In addition, I do not agree with terminating the Ocean Avenue-Empire Blvd route at Utica Avenue/Empire Blvd, especially since aside from the B12, B17, and B46, there is nothing else to transfer to. It also feels like a dead zone around there. As a result, I propose extending the B59 LTD at least to Crown Heights-Eastern Pkwy at the Utica Avenue  station to permit access to the subway. A further extension to Ralph Avenue and St. John’s Place should also be considered. While this could subject the B59 LTD to rush hour Utica Avenue traffic, something I have experienced personally since I ride through the corridor Monday-Thursday on my way to school, the added connection to the subway would be a big plus.

You actually disagree with BrooklynBus? Your Messiah.... Your Lord & savior.... Your Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.....

Haha..... To hell with global warming, "Hell" itself must have frozen over.

Edited April 26, 2019 by B35 via Church

[Trainmaster5]

10 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

In regards of the B67 and B69, this was because in 2010, the B69 was rerouted from 8th Avenue/Prospect Pk W to directly serve the 7th Avenue  station (where many passengers on the B69 were getting off anyway), and consolidate service onto a single corridor (7th Avenue), and one with a hell lot of desirable shopping and dining locations. What they should do is have both routes run every 8 minutes between its shared terminal at Kensington-Cortelyou Road and the High Street  station. This would make the 7th Avenue shopping corridor have more frequent service for shoppers and diners as well.

As for the B49, that is how the route was back then, since there was no need for a bus on the northern end of Ocean Avenue. Luckily, this problem was addressed by @BrooklynBus several years ago, which you can read about here: http://brooklynbus.tripod.com/id15.html.

In his proposal, the B49 would be split into two routes:

• The existing B49, which would remain unaltered.
• A new route called the B50 (the previous designation for the section of the current B82 between Midwood and Spring Creek), which would run along entire length of Ocean Avenue between Avenue Z and Prospect Park, then along the entire length of Empire Blvd to terminate at Utica Avenue and Empire Blvd (a location that I somewhat disagree with). Service would be limited stop south of Foster Av during rush hours.

Unfortunately, even with the slew of changes it came with, that proposal was rejected along with all of the other proposals he made back then were rejected, which was disappointing because they have potential. According to the flawed logic of the  they didn’t want anyone telling them how to plan the routes. Now that it is 2019, I feel that it needs to be revisited. Some small changes would be made to this proposal. First, the B50 would be renamed the B59 LTD, and have Limited stop service at all times except late nights. This would be split off from the B49 LTD. In addition, I do not agree with terminating the Ocean Avenue-Empire Blvd route at Utica Avenue/Empire Blvd, especially since aside from the B12, B17, and B46, there is nothing else to transfer to. It also feels like a dead zone around there. As a result, I propose extending the B59 LTD at least to Crown Heights-Eastern Pkwy at the Utica Avenue  station to permit access to the subway. A further extension to Ralph Avenue and St. John’s Place should also be considered. While this could subject the B59 LTD to rush hour Utica Avenue traffic, something I have experienced personally since I ride through the corridor Monday-Thursday on my way to school, the added connection to the subway would be a big plus.

I must be missing something with your proposal to extend the B59LTD to Utica-Eastern Parkway. Empire and Flatbush is the  ,  stop, right? Empire and Nostrand gives you the  ,  Sterling St. stop. There’s no reason for you to send a bus to the Crown Heights Utica station for a connection AFAIC. Carry on.

[B35 via Church]

10 minutes ago, Trainmaster5 said:

I must be missing something with your proposal to extend the B59LTD to Utica-Eastern Parkway. Empire and Flatbush is the  ,  stop, right? Empire and Nostrand gives you the  ,  Sterling St. stop. There’s no reason for you to send a bus to the Crown Heights Utica station for a connection AFAIC. Carry on.

*shrugs*

Well, for whatever this objectivity is worth, what's being proposed with that should be two separate routes;

• Ocean Hill - Lefferts Gardens (via Empire, via Utica av IRT)
• Manhattan Beach - Lefferts Gardens (via Ocean)

Regardless if it's a LTD, one route should not be running from KCC to Utica av IRT via Ocean, via Empire, etc.... Reliability is a problem enough as it is with a lot of our bus routes in this city.... Last thing that's needed is some long, drawn out bus route....

[Lil 57]

This can be considered both a Brooklyn and Queens bus proposal but since this is regarding the  train work being done, I'll post it here.

New Route: QM14, this route would be an express route from Elmhurst to Midtown Manhattan via Grand Ave/Grand Street and the Williamsburg Bridge to give direct service to Manhattan and to ease the potential overcrowding of the  train.

Map: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1QRQOuBDe6HI4NTkqowWS02R_v5Cicr50&usp=sharing

Span: From 5 AM - 1 AM Monday-Saturday, 6 AM - 12 AM Sunday.

Headways:

AM Rush: 12-15 minutes

Noon: 20-30 minutes

PM rush: 12-15 minutes

Evening: 15 minutes*

Weekends: Every 15 minutes until around 9 PM, then every 30 minutes.*

* During Weekday Evenings and Weekends until 9 PM, Alternative buses Start/End at Grand Ave/Borden Ave in Queens.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Lil 57

[B35 via Church]

2 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

This can be considered both a Brooklyn and Queens bus proposal but since this is regarding the  train work being done, I'll post it here.

New Route: QM14, this route would be an express route from Elmhurst to Midtown Manhattan via Grand Ave/Grand Street and the Williamsburg Bridge to give direct service to Manhattan and to ease the potential overcrowding of the  train.

Map: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1QRQOuBDe6HI4NTkqowWS02R_v5Cicr50&usp=sharing

Span: From 5 AM - 1 AM Monday-Saturday, 6 AM - 12 AM Sunday.

Headways:

AM Rush: 12-15 minutes

Noon: 20-30 minutes

PM rush: 12-15 minutes

Evening: 15 minutes*

Weekends: Every 15 minutes until around 9 PM, then every 30 minutes.*

* During Weekday Evenings and Weekends until 9 PM, Alternative buses Start/End at Grand Ave/Borden Ave in Queens.

Ouch...

I don't see much of anyone on the Queens side of this route using a route like this, nor do I see a need for something primarily aiming to benefit displaced Williamsburg patrons, running along Grand av on up to Elmhurst.... Who wants to put up with an express bus that has to put up with the hassle of crossing the Grand st. bridge & navigating through industrial Maspeth with all that truck traffic....

Grand av (Queens) via Brooklyn, en route to Manhattan is a terrible stretch of road to route an express bus along....

[Lil 57]

15 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

Just now, B35 via Church said:

Ouch...

I don't see much of anyone on the Queens side of this route using a route like this, nor do I see a need for something primarily aiming to benefit displaced Williamsburg patrons, running along Grand av on up to Elmhurst.... Who wants to put up with an express bus that has to put up with the hassle of crossing the Grand st. bridge & navigating through industrial Maspeth with all that truck traffic....

Grand av (Queens) via Brooklyn, en route to Manhattan is a terrible stretch of road to route an express bus along....

Oh, I forgot about that, but I did hear in the past that Maspeth wanted an express bus service and with the  running every 20 minutes during Evenings and Weekends, Williamsburg should have a direct bus service to Manhattan (which would have been done with those Williamsburg to 14th street bus routes). My main purpose of this route was to give Maspeth and Williamsburg better bus service but I'm not sure where to end it. What could happen is to have one express route just serve Williamsburg and surrounding areas and have some QM buses serve the LIE service road as I did in this post below.

 

 

 

2

On 3/29/2019 at 8:21 PM, Lil 57 said:

All of the QM1 trips came for this week, seems the  is finally listening to us about the missing QM1 trips.

Anyways, I was taking the QM11 today to queens and the B/O went via the LIE service road because it was quicker than staying on the LIE. This isn't the first time that this happened so an idea popped into my head. I thought that if buses were constantly detouring through Maspeth via the LIE service road to avoid traffic, why not have some routes stop there? Maspeth always wanted some sort of Express Bus service so if lower-ridership routes stopped there on the way to their destination, that might boost ridership.

During the rush, I'll have the QM10, QM11 and QM40 buses stop along the LIE service road and during off-peak hours the QM4 would stop along there with those trips being called "QM4C". QM4C buses would also make all QM11 stops on Queens Blvd until Jewel Ave.

Eastbound Stops:

Borden Ave/Maurice Ave

Borden Ave/61st Street

Borden Ave/Hamilton Place

Borden Ave/69th Street

Queens-Midtown Expy/71st Street

Westbound Stops:

Borden Ave/69th Street

Borden Ave/Hamilton Place

Borden Ave/63rd Street

Queens-Midtown Expy/Maurice Ave

 

 

[Lil 57]

I also wonder if BM2 ridership would increase because of the  train work being done.

[BrooklynBus]

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

*shrugs*

Well, for whatever this objectivity is worth, what's being proposed with that should be two separate routes;

• Ocean Hill - Lefferts Gardens (via Empire, via Utica av IRT)
• Manhattan Beach - Lefferts Gardens (via Ocean)

Regardless if it's a LTD, one route should not be running from KCC to Utica av IRT via Ocean, via Empire, etc.... Reliability is a problem enough as it is with a lot of our bus routes in this city.... Last thing that's needed is some long, drawn out bus route....

It's only a half mile longer and Empire Blvd is not a congested street. Rerouting the B49 to Empire Utica is about the same distance as the existing route and it is not a dead zone, but a very active area with transfers available to three bus routes which could fill the seats just from transfers alone. I lived a few blocks from there for 25 years. There is no need for another route to the Eastern Parkway Utica Station and it would just be expensive and wasteful to operate. 

[JeremiahC99]

8 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

It's only a half mile longer and Empire Blvd is not a congested street. Rerouting the B49 to Empire Utica is about the same distance as the existing route and it is not a dead zone, but a very active area with transfers available to three bus routes which could fill the seats just from transfers alone. I lived a few blocks from there for 25 years. There is no need for another route to the Eastern Parkway Utica Station and it would just be expensive and wasteful to operate. 

I only bought that extension up because I felt that a connection to the  at Utica, as well as the B14 at the same location could potentially increase ridership, considering that Utica  is a major hub, with the subways to connect to. I don't feel that terminating routes short of major hubs is a good idea. It is like the B67 extension through the growing Brooklyn Navy Yard. It runs through a growing area, but exits into Williamsburg and terminates at Division and Wythe Avenues, several block too short from Williamsburg Plaza, where many transfer opportunities exist between subways and buses. Also, the B32, while a great route to serve the developing waterfront, terminates too short of a major transit hub that is the Queens Plaza area, where many more bus and subway routes are available for those riders to transfer at. This was discussed here on your testimony about the new routes in 2013 on your old blog that I still read: https://bklyner.com/how-should-the-mta-plan-changes-to-its-bus-routes-sheepshead-bay/.

Why the hell would they terminate these bus routes short of major hubs and traffic generators, such as the Williamsburg Plaza or Queens Plaza? Doesn't make any sense. By having these routes terminate at these major point, people would be more likely to ride the buses if the new routes are more convenient. Yes it may be expensive to make these extension, but I honestly feel that the revenue that the routes can offset some of the operating costs. What the  has done, planning routes considering only costs without considering revenue, is wrong, and has resulted in low ridership on these newly created routes. The poor headways of 30 minutes during rush hours on them may also be the reason. Both sides of the equation, operating costs and revenue, must be looked at.

On the subject of the B49, the original proposal did not call for rerouting of all B49 trips. Rather, it split half of the trips into the B49 and B50 (my B59 LTD). This can maintain local service on Rogers and Bedford Avenue, since the B44 SBS has to make SBS stops along the corridor, and not everyone can walk long distances to these bus stops. My version incorporates this, but converts the 6 morning B49 LTD trips from Empire Blvd to a separate B59 LTD route on both Ocean Avenue and Empire Blvd. Could be full time (no overnight service on both the B49 and B59) or could be rush hours only, but the basic route of the route serving the full length of both streets to at least Utica/Empire would be covered.

5 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

You actually disagree with BrooklynBus? Your Messiah.... Your Lord & savior.... Your Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.....

Haha..... To hell with global warming, "Hell" itself must have frozen over.

Well I do not agree with everyone 100%. Everyone has some disagreements over what should be done. In the Ocean-Empire proposal, I do not agree with terminating the route short of a major hub since it could hinder ridership increases by missing major connections, like the  line going east towards Brownsville and East NY. This is similar to what the  has done by using their shortsightedness to terminate routes short of major hubs and destinations, then operating routes at poor headways. While they did consider operating costs, which is fine, the did not consider the revenue that would've accumulated by having the route terminate at these major places, which they would've offset some of the costs. Both operating costs and revenue must be considered when planning bus routes.

[BrooklynBus]

45 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I only bought that extension up because I felt that a connection to the  at Utica, as well as the B14 at the same location could potentially increase ridership, considering that Utica  is a major hub, with the subways to connect to. I don't feel that terminating routes short of major hubs is a good idea. It is like the B67 extension through the growing Brooklyn Navy Yard. It runs through a growing area, but exits into Williamsburg and terminates at Division and Wythe Avenues, several block too short from Williamsburg Plaza, where many transfer opportunities exist between subways and buses. Also, the B32, while a great route to serve the developing waterfront, terminates too short of a major transit hub that is the Queens Plaza area, where many more bus and subway routes are available for those riders to transfer at. This was discussed here on your testimony about the new routes in 2013 on your old blog that I still read: https://bklyner.com/how-should-the-mta-plan-changes-to-its-bus-routes-sheepshead-bay/.

Why the hell would they terminate these bus routes short of major hubs and traffic generators, such as the Williamsburg Plaza or Queens Plaza? Doesn't make any sense. By having these routes terminate at these major point, people would be more likely to ride the buses if the new routes are more convenient. Yes it may be expensive to make these extension, but I honestly feel that the revenue that the routes can offset some of the operating costs. What the  has done, planning routes considering only costs without considering revenue, is wrong, and has resulted in low ridership on these newly created routes. The poor headways of 30 minutes during rush hours on them may also be the reason. Both sides of the equation, operating costs and revenue, must be looked at.

On the subject of the B49, the original proposal did not call for rerouting of all B49 trips. Rather, it split half of the trips into the B49 and B50 (my B59 LTD). This can maintain local service on Rogers and Bedford Avenue, since the B44 SBS has to make SBS stops along the corridor, and not everyone can walk long distances to these bus stops. My version incorporates this, but converts the 6 morning B49 LTD trips from Empire Blvd to a separate B59 LTD route on both Ocean Avenue and Empire Blvd. Could be full time (no overnight service on both the B49 and B59) or could be rush hours only, but the basic route of the route serving the full length of both streets to at least Utica/Empire would be covered.

Well I do not agree with everyone 100%. Everyone has some disagreements over what should be done. In the Ocean-Empire proposal, I do not agree with terminating the route short of a major hub since it could hinder ridership increases by missing major connections, like the  line going east towards Brownsville and East NY. This is similar to what the  has done by using their shortsightedness to terminate routes short of major hubs and destinations, then operating routes at poor headways. While they did consider operating costs, which is fine, the did not consider the revenue that would've accumulated by having the route terminate at these major places, which they would've offset some of the costs. Both operating costs and revenue must be considered when planning bus routes.

While I generally agree with not terminating routes short of a major transportation hub, this would be an exception. Forgetting about the extra cost, you have to ask yourself who would else use the extension if it went further to the station? The answer is few if any. Look at who uses the station now and where they are coming from. Virtually all B46 passengers are coming from the south, very few from the north, because they have the A train. You also have B14 riders from the east and B17 riders from the southeast. If there is service along Empire Blvd a few Utica Avenue subway riders might be diverted to Sterling Street, but most of the riders would be bus riders who do not need the subway for their trip. So which riders would benefit from a further extension up Utica to the subway? I cannot think of any other than B14 riders who would have a connection to Empire Blvd via an indirect trip instead of taking the B14 to the B12 to the B49. Those B14 passengers traveling further to somewhere along Ocean Avenue would find it quicker to change for the IRT at Utica Avenue and transfer for the Brighton line at Atlantic Avenue. I really can't see the benefit of the extension you propose considering the cost even when considering additional revenue.

As far as not rerouting all the B49s, that proposal was made before the B44 SBS. I would not make the same proposal today. When I am finished with all my new proposals for Brooklyn, I will post them. 

Edited April 26, 2019 by BrooklynBus

[B35 via Church]

2 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

Oh, I forgot about that, but I did hear in the past that Maspeth wanted an express bus service and with the  running every 20 minutes during Evenings and Weekends, Williamsburg should have a direct bus service to Manhattan (which would have been done with those Williamsburg to 14th street bus routes). My main purpose of this route was to give Maspeth and Williamsburg better bus service but I'm not sure where to end it. What could happen is to have one express route just serve Williamsburg and surrounding areas and have some QM buses serve the LIE service road as I did in this post below.

To be perfectly honest, I don't see those folks in Wms'burg taking express buses..... Residential Maspeth however, I would provide express service for - but it wouldn't be anything via Brooklyn & you can thank our lovely highway network (or lack thereof) for that....

2 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

I also wonder if BM2 ridership would increase because of the  train work being done.

I would expect it to..... Nothing significant enough to spawn any service increases or schedule adjustments, though.....

58 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

It's only a half mile longer and Empire Blvd is not a congested street. Rerouting the B49 to Empire Utica is about the same distance as the existing route and it is not a dead zone, but a very active area with transfers available to three bus routes which could fill the seats just from transfers alone. I lived a few blocks from there for 25 years. There is no need for another route to the Eastern Parkway Utica Station and it would just be expensive and wasteful to operate. 

I'm not exactly defending another route to Utica av IRT, so that's moot AFAIC.....

Anyway, when I speak of some long, drawn out bus route, I'm referring to Jeremiah's "B59 LTD" (which is an extension of your "B50" proposal)  not your "B50" proposal by itself..... I don't have a problem w/ that proposal of yours, as far as distance is concerned....

15 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Well I do not agree with everyone 100%. Everyone has some disagreements over what should be done.

In the Ocean-Empire proposal, I do not agree with terminating the route short of a major hub since it could hinder ridership increases by missing major connections, like the  line going east towards Brownsville and East NY. This is similar to what the  has done by using their shortsightedness to terminate routes short of major hubs and destinations, then operating routes at poor headways. While they did consider operating costs, which is fine, the did not consider the revenue that would've accumulated by having the route terminate at these major places, which they would've offset some of the costs. Both operating costs and revenue must be considered when planning bus routes.

Could have fooled me with the way you stop at nothing to chomp at the bit to parrot BrooklynBus' talking points !! - Almost verbatim at that.....

As far as the (original) proposal goes, you wasn't on this forum when I went back & forth with your self exalted high ranking grandmaster here, but I do not agree with:

1. filling that service gap on Empire Blvd, east of Kingston/Brooklyn
2. filling that service gap on Ocean av, north of Foster
3. any bus route terminating at Empire Blvd/Utica av on any full-time basis
4. an "Ocean av" route serving Empire Blvd (and vice versa)...
5. a route running between KCC & Empire Blvd/Utica av (see bullet point #3), and....
6. quite honestly, LTD service of any sort along Ocean av

[JeremiahC99]

23 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

As far as the (original) proposal goes, you wasn't on this forum when I went back & forth with your self exalted high ranking grandmaster here, but I do not agree with:

1. filling that service gap on Empire Blvd, east of Kingston/Brooklyn
2. filling that service gap on Ocean av, north of Foster
3. any bus route terminating at Empire Blvd/Utica av on any full-time basis
4. an "Ocean av" route serving Empire Blvd (and vice versa)...
5. a route running between KCC & Empire Blvd/Utica av (see bullet point #3), and....
6. quite honestly, LTD service of any sort along Ocean av

How do you not agree with all of that. The service gaps on both corridors makes travel difficult in the areas. For example, the Prospect Park Zoo is difficult to access from East Flatbush. Even getting accross Empire Blvd is difficult due to the B12 and B43 not connecting to each other. 

For Ocean Avenue, travel there is very indirect. For example, if one was coming from Kensington on the B16 or B35, they would first have to ride 15 minutes out of their way to Bedford and Rogers Avenues and ride there. That is very inconvenient. Who would want to do that? If I were a potential transit rider looking to get from Borough Park to Manhattan Beach only using the bus (and no subway) and I was told that I would ride past Ocean Avenue to Rogers Avenue to get the Ocean Avenue Bus, I wouldn't take that trip. However, if I was told to catch the Ocean Avenue bus and not have to ride to Rogers Avenue, then I would gun for the bus.

It's 2019. These service gaps need to be filled to make travel simpler. Bus service need to be simple and direct, not convoluted, complex, and indirect. The need for an straight Ocean Avenue Route serving the entirety of Ocean and a route along the entirety of Empire Blvd between Utica Avenue and Flatbush Avenue has become greater, as no potential passenger is willing to put up with a complex routing to get to popular places, like Prospect Park. No offense, but what year are you living in? 1999?

[Lex]

1 minute ago, JeremiahC99 said:

It's 2019. These service gaps need to be filled to make travel simpler. Bus service need to be simple and direct, not convoluted, complex, and indirect. The need for an straight Ocean Avenue Route serving the entirety of Ocean and a route along the entirety of Empire Blvd between Utica Avenue and Flatbush Avenue has become greater, as no potential passenger is willing to put up with a complex routing to get to popular places, like Prospect Park. No offense, but what year are you living in? 1999?

Okay, I'm done.🤦‍♀️

[Lil 57]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

To be perfectly honest, I don't see those folks in Wms'burg taking express buses..... Residential Maspeth however, I would provide express service for - but it wouldn't be anything via Brooklyn & you can thank our lovely highway network (or lack thereof) for that....

At least the B39 should be extended to 14th Street like this.

MAP: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GwPfT-y8Ck-9_nlSUtb-yZIcZPEK-VkX&usp=sharing

This revised B39 would run every 8-10 minutes in the rush and every 10-15 minutes other times, it can run from 5 AM to Midnight weekdays and 6 AM to Midnight Weekends.

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

would expect it to..... Nothing significant enough to spawn any service increases or schedule adjustments, though.....

Maybe Sunday service on the BM2 from 8 AM to 8 PM but other than that, everything else should be fine.

Edited April 26, 2019 by Lil 57

[JeremiahC99]

5 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

At least the B39 should be extended to 14th Street like this

MAP: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GwPfT-y8Ck-9_nlSUtb-yZIcZPEK-VkX&usp=sharing

This revised B39 would run every 8-10 minutes in the rush and every 10-15 minutes other times, it can run from 5 AM to Midnight every day.

Chrystie Street , while a direct route to Delancey St, is much slower than Allen Street. Therefore, i recommend you revise your B39 route to have the route on Allen Street going southbound, just like the M15 route. Having a bus route on Chystie Street would just slow the bus down.

Also, if you are keen at terminating the route at 11th Avenue and West 15th Street, you are just better terminating it at either Chelsea Piers at 23rd St, The current M14D terminal, or either the current M14A terminal or at 10th Avenue and 14th St, where the  will plan to terminate the M14A once SBS launches in June.

Edited April 26, 2019 by JeremiahC99

[B35 via Church]

4 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

How do you not agree with all of that. The service gaps on both corridors makes travel difficult in the areas. For example, the Prospect Park Zoo is difficult to access from East Flatbush. Even getting accross Empire Blvd is difficult due to the B12 and B43 not connecting to each other. 

For Ocean Avenue, travel there is very indirect. For example, if one was coming from Kensington on the B16 or B35, they would first have to ride 15 minutes out of their way to Bedford and Rogers Avenues and ride there. That is very inconvenient. Who would want to do that? If I were a potential transit rider looking to get from Borough Park to Manhattan Beach only using the bus (and no subway) and I was told that I would ride past Ocean Avenue to Rogers Avenue to get the Ocean Avenue Bus, I wouldn't take that trip. However, if I was told to catch the Ocean Avenue bus and not have to ride to Rogers Avenue, then I would gun for the bus.

It's 2019. These service gaps need to be filled to make travel simpler. Bus service need to be simple and direct, not convoluted, complex, and indirect. The need for an straight Ocean Avenue Route serving the entirety of Ocean and a route along the entirety of Empire Blvd between Utica Avenue and Flatbush Avenue has become greater, as no potential passenger is willing to put up with a complex routing to get to popular places, like Prospect Park. No offense, but what year are you living in? 1999?

Mmm hmm - So those service gaps were justified back in 1999 then? Yes, because 20 years is sooooooooooo long ago..... F***ing nitwit.

As for what year I'm living in? The year that has the likes of I, continuing to possess the current high level of awareness, intelligence, & intellect without having to rely on another grown ass man to formulate & extract opinions from.....

It's 2019 - Free-thought is a motha', aint it - and you're the type that's too petrified to exude it.....

It's 2019 - and I'm still saying those particular service gaps don't need addressing.....

Telling me what year it is, is not an argument.

[Lil 57]

 

 

 

 

3

9 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Chrystie Street , while a direct route to Delancey St, is much slower than Allen Street. Therefore, i recommend you revise your B39 route to have the route on Allen Street going southbound, just like the M15 route. Having a bus route on Chystie Street would just slow the bus down.

Also, if you are keen at terminating the route at 11th Avenue and West 15th Street, you are just better terminating it at either Chelsea Piers at 23rd St, The current M14D terminal, or either the current M14A terminal or at 10th Avenue and 14th St, where the  will plan to terminate the M14A once SBS launches in June.

Makes sense since we want to transport people from 14th Street to Williamsburg as fast as possible. I'll revise it.

EDIT: Google Maps won't let me do a direct turn onto Delancey St but the DOT could revise the rules to let buses make that left turn. 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Lil 57

[B35 via Church]

10 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

At least the B39 should be extended to 14th Street like this.

MAP: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GwPfT-y8Ck-9_nlSUtb-yZIcZPEK-VkX&usp=sharing

This revised B39 would run every 8-10 minutes in the rush and every 10-15 minutes other times, it can run from 5 AM to Midnight weekdays and 6 AM to Midnight Weekends.

All things considered, generally speaking, I wouldn't mind a service of the sort.... Only thing is, I'd stop something like that right at 1st av ..... Anyone needing service along 14th itself would have to xfer.... Don't want to inject an overabundance of buses along 14th.