Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[B35 via Church]

Honestly, do I need to baby you guys:

 

I had everything EXCEPT the eastern terminal (Ralph Avenue, west)

 

https://maps.google.....01886,0.038581

 

lol.... You're proving his point !

[Threxx]

You're confusing arrogance with knowing a neighborhood... Let's discuss your B33 proposal for example and discuss why I'm iffy on the route, though I feel it has potential. I don't see any ridership coming from that portion of Knapp St. Why? Because that area, the part of Knapp St. where that bus would go is mainly car folks so you'd have to have something there that would make them not want to use their car and I don't see that happening. Then we go along to Avenue X... Now there I could see some folks using it... Mainly folks who don't want to schlepp to the B36 or that don't want to wait for the unreliable/crowded B49. Once you get to the train station then it may steal some B1 riders, but up to what point I don't know simply because I don't see that much ridership along Harway Avenue... In sum the route has a lot of residential and very little commercial to draw a sustainable amount of ridership.

 

 

Nah, this is fine. I'm talking about when one tries to defend his words when they don't know a neighborhood and they act like they do. It's not just this, for example, the B46 incident earlier in this thread??!!

 

lol.... You're proving his point !

 

 

HOW?

 

______

 

This is a PSA. Please drop the current subject and return to the topic of the thread to avoid the impending flame war.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Nah, this is fine. I'm talking about when one tries to defend his words when they don't know a neighborhood and they act like they do. It's not just this, for example, the B46 incident earlier in this thread??!!

 

 

FYI I've used bus routes all over Brooklyn... I'm quite familiar with the B46 because I've used it... Doesn't change what I said on it though...

Edited July 3, 2012 by Via Garibaldi 8

[B35 via Church]

HOW?

 

______

 

This is a PSA. Please drop the current subject and return to the topic of the thread to avoid the impending flame war.

 

 

A route has to take on a routing to get to an endpoint dude....

Did I really have to explain that......

 

....and there will be no "flame war" on my end..... This to me is a discussion & nothing more.

[Threxx]

FYI I've used bus routes all over Brooklyn... I'm quite familiar with the B46 because I've used it... Doesn't change what I said on it though...

 

 

The facts you said were legit facts. The proposal was utter BS, though...

 

I've used bus routes all over Brooklyn as well, FYI...

 

....and there will be no "flame war" on my end..... This to me is a discussion & nothing more.

 

 

Cool. Everyone needs to settle down.

 

I have to go, now. Please don't start anything...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

A route has to take on a routing to get to an endpoint dude....

Did I really have to explain that......

 

....and there will be no "flame war" on my end..... This to me is a discussion & nothing more.

 

 

Exactly...

[B35 via Church]

I don't see any ridership coming from that portion of Knapp St. Why? Because that area, the part of Knapp St. where that bus would go is mainly car folks so you'd have to have something there that would make them not want to use their car and I don't see that happening.

 

Personally, I don't like the idea of any route on Knapp st.... I've said it before, and I'll continue to say it - It's a dead draw.

Mostly for the reason you just pointed out....

 

 

Cool. Everyone needs to settle down.

 

Splendid, however, I was never riled up to begin with.....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Personally, I don't like the idea of any route on Knapp st.... I've said it before, and I'll continue to say it - It's a dead draw.

Mostly for the reason you just pointed out....

 

Exactly... The only reason to have the B44 and B4 around Knapp is because they can serve the movie theatre and that nursing home and give folks in those apartment buildings a local bus since there are seniors and such... But further up past where the B4 goes... Not necessary at all.

 

Splendid, however, I was never riled up to begin with.....

 

lol

[checkmatechamp13]

Damn, this discussion moved fast.

 

Whoa, what happened to my proposal? What is this stuff 'bout SI? If you want to discuss SI, there is an SI thread, just pointing that out...

 

 

I was just using examples of proposals I made that would involve extending a route. Most of them happened to be on SI.

 

My problem with you is that you INSIST on extending routes even when they don't need to be because you feel like the possibility of getting that "potential" ridership is so detrimental for routes. It is okay to have short routes. You're not even satisfied with routes that are already doing well. It's like when is a route "good enough" to not be ****** with for you? That's my question. There's a difference between making a route conducive and going overboard and I don't think you realize the difference between the two. You have to accept that some routes no matter how you try to extend them are just not going to have hoards of passengers.

 

 

Uh, no, every extension has a purpose: To provide better connections for the riders along the route (Either along the "existing" part in the area it would be extended to). Take the B31 extension. As of now, it's just a shuttle to the subway station, which means that riders have a hard time getting to points west of there. If it's along Kings Highway or Avenue U, they can just transfer (but then again, the B3 & B82 aren't the most reliable routes), but if they need to get to Bay Ridge, it's a PITA.

 

Back in the day, Manhattan Beach used to be served by a little shuttle to the subway (well, it went around to Sheepshead Bay, but as far as Manhattan Beach was concerned, it was a shuttle to the subway). Now, it's served by a full-blown route that runs very frequently and provides connections all the way out in Bay Ridge.

 

Are buses more crowded than they were back then? Yes, but that just means that it's serving it's purpose. Would you rather have the old B21 back where riders going out to Bay Ridge have to take a bus to the Brighton Line, and then make a transfer at Coney Island and then again at 59th Street? Those B21s were probably nice and empty. Or would you rather have the current route which provides convenient access to those neighborhoods, even though it's crowded.

 

Aside from that, it's not like I'd make the buses crushloaded. If ridership increased that much, more service could always be added (But off the top of my head, I can't think of a proposal I made where buses would suddenly become crushloaded).

 

The is afraid the media and riders will jump all over them if they make a major change like that, b/c of the rep they currently have, it will be thought of as a bad change, even though it may speed your trip. For example, Howard Beach residents complained about the Q52 change when there wan't anything to complain about. There trip was better, not worse, but the media spreads false info to keep ratings up, and that's exactly what will happen in this case. It will take serious pressure to get any of these proposals implemented.

 

 

Actually, it was Broad Channel residents who protested because the Q52 would only have 1 stop in their neighborhood, whereas the Q21 had 3. The MTA could've compromised by having the Q52 stop there and have the Q53 bypass those other 2 stops, but whatever. The point was that it was a somewhat valid complaint.

 

In any case, whatever the MTA does, it's always going to be criticized and it knows this. That's not the reason why: The MTA just doesn't care about the customers. That's why they don't count any additional revenue when they're making any type of proposal (unless it suits their agenda)

 

The point still applies.... You're just explaining the changes underperforming (u/p from now on) routes would undergo in lieu of becoming less u/p (in other words, more useful).... They would still fall in that category of "[performing like they quote-unquote should]"..... I'm not saying you can't attempt to increase ridership on an u/p route... That's the whole overall point w/ what's being talked about - optimizing routes......

 

 

I'm not seeing what you're saying. If a route is "optimal", then it's performing "as it should". For instance, the S54 is "meant" to be fairly empty, but just not that empty.

 

While he's obsessed with maximizing routes you're the opposite.

 

 

Uh, no. Like I said, I justify every proposal I make. If a route becomes "a victim of its own success", then more service could always be added. Like I said, would you prefer the old B21 return?

 

I agree with B35. If every route was as crowded as those two, why ride and put yourself through that misery every day? Ridership would plummet.

 

 

Like I said, there's nothing saying a high-ridership route has to be overcrowded. That's just an issue of not enough service. (And aside from that, I don't think the M15 is really that crowded. SRO, yes, but not crushloaded, at least on a regular basis)

 

I don't think checkmate gets it that public transportation is supposed to have a level of COMFORT to it. Even the local bus and subway. People are NOT attracted to crushloaded buses and subways. There's a point where you turn people off and that's another point he doesn't get. There's a point in which you go overkill with trying to "maximize" ridership.

 

 

Off the top of my head, I can't even think of any proposal I made where the buses would constantly be crushloaded. And as I keep on saying, high ridership just means the route is doing it's job. When the M60 started up, it ran on 30 minute headways and was always crushloaded. Should they not have started the route because it's too crowded? Now, the route has the additional service it needs, and (at least if the buses are properly spaced and all that) isn't overcrowded.

 

You're confusing arrogance with knowing a neighborhood... Let's discuss your B33 proposal for example and discuss why I'm iffy on the route, though I feel it has potential. I don't see any ridership coming from that portion of Knapp St. Why? Because that area, the part of Knapp St. where that bus would go is mainly car folks so you'd have to have something there that would make them not want to use their car and I don't see that happening. Then we go along to Avenue X... Now there I could see some folks using it... Mainly folks who don't want to schlepp to the B36 or that don't want to wait for the unreliable/crowded B49. Once you get past the train station and continue along Ave X., then it may steal some B1 riders, but up to what point I don't know simply because I don't see that much ridership along Harway Avenue... In sum the route has a lot of residential and very little commercial to draw a sustainable amount of ridership. You also have the B64 running a block away along Bath Avenue which is certainly more commercial than Harway Avenue.

 

 

Look at the map again. It wouldn't parallel the B64.

 

A route has to take on a routing to get to an endpoint dude....

 

 

It's not the issue that he wanted the route to terminate at Bergen Beach and he couldn't think of a way to get there. He knew that he wanted a route running clear across Avenue J to Ralph Avenue. It was just an issue of where to terminate the route. Ralph Avenue & Avenue J is a "stupid-looking terminal" when you look at it on a map, so he figured that he might as well extend the route further into Bergen Beach.

[B35 via Church]

I'm not seeing what you're saying. If a route is "optimal", then it's performing "as it should".

 

For instance, the S54 is "meant" to be fairly empty, but just not that empty.

 

Not entirely true..... "Optimal" is the best of something....

Using your example, you can optimize the S54 route, but it may never get to the same level as a route like the current S53..... You made that point yourself.....

 

(I know you're not saying this, but I'll still point it out to reinforce what I'm sayin)

There is no universal definition of an optimal route, but you can still attempt to optimize routes.....

 

 

Anyway, A route you're continuing to tweak isn't at its best yet.... You said you were talking about routes that could better serve people, etc. by changing its route/having a different route....That doesn't automatically equate to being optimal (the contrary to this, is what I'm sensing from you).....

 

That is what I'm saying.....

You may or may not agree, but I wanna make sure what I'm layin down here is crystal......

 

 

It's not the issue that he wanted the route to terminate at Bergen Beach and he couldn't think of a way to get there. He knew that he wanted a route running clear across Avenue J to Ralph Avenue. It was just an issue of where to terminate the route. Ralph Avenue & Avenue J is a "stupid-looking terminal" when you look at it on a map, so he figured that he might as well extend the route further into Bergen Beach.

 

Exactly.....

 

I know it wasn't pre-determined that he decided to choose Bergen Beach as a terminal (threxx alluded to that himself in - which did nothin to refute what via said in - which led up to the end of & all of ).....

 

It's not about not thinking of a way to get there (bergen beach) - It's about not thinking up an endpoint of a route you're altering/coming up with an idea for in the first place.... Everything you're explaining to me, should have been factored in by him before he decided to post that idea on the forums.....That is what via was getting at, and that is what I'm agreeing with....

 

So nothing in this reply of yours is correcting anything I said in that particular quote of mine.....

Edited July 3, 2012 by B35 via Church

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Uh, no, every extension has a purpose: To provide better connections for the riders along the route (Either along the "existing" part in the area it would be extended to). Take the B31 extension. As of now, it's just a shuttle to the subway station, which means that riders have a hard time getting to points west of there. If it's along Kings Highway or Avenue U, they can just transfer (but then again, the B3 & B82 aren't the most reliable routes), but if they need to get to Bay Ridge, it's a PITA.

 

That's exactly my point though. You think that every route that isn't doing well (and by well I mean super route status) has to automatically be extended or combined and that is going to solve the problem and optimize the route. Sorry, but that's just not the case. You can extend some routes all you want and all you would be doing is having them run further with perhaps even fewer passengers. I think routes have to "market" themselves, and the marketing comes into a number of factors, not just convenience but also frequency and what are passengers' other options if said route screws up for example? Why would these folks want to use said route for example, if they generally drive to their destination? These are the sorts of things that I think about.

 

Aside from that, it's not like I'd make the buses crushloaded. If ridership increased that much, more service could always be added (But off the top of my head, I can't think of a proposal I made where buses would suddenly become crushloaded).

 

Like I said, there's nothing saying a high-ridership route has to be overcrowded. That's just an issue of not enough service. (And aside from that, I don't think the M15 is really that crowded. SRO, yes, but not crushloaded, at least on a regular basis)

 

Off the top of my head, I can't even think of any proposal I made where the buses would constantly be crushloaded. And as I keep on saying, high ridership just means the route is doing it's job. When the M60 started up, it ran on 30 minute headways and was always crushloaded. Should they not have started the route because it's too crowded? Now, the route has the additional service it needs, and (at least if the buses are properly spaced and all that) isn't overcrowded.

 

Come on now... You yourself said that you like crowded buses and keep complaining about routes that in your opinion aren't crowded enough, then you sit here and say that you wouldn't make them that crowded. Who are you kidding? Then you sit there and say that you don't think that the M15 is that crowded... Perhaps you should ask the M15 riders that I see packed in on some of those buses.

 

Look at the map again. It wouldn't parallel the B64.

 

It would be if the southern portion of the B64 was reinstated, which it most certainly should be. A route like the B33 shouldn't exist if the B64's southern terminal can't be reinstated. Why have a bus running down Harway Avenue if the thinks that it shouldn't provide any service further down Bath Avenue which has far more potential to draw riders? So my point is if you were to run the B33 down Harway, then the B64 should certainly be reinstated down that portion of Bath Avenue.

Edited July 3, 2012 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Threxx]

Well, things haven't gotten any better!

 

 

It would be if the southern portion of the B64 was reinstated, which it most certainly should be. A route like the B33 shouldn't exist if the B64's southern terminal can't be reinstated. Why have a bus running down Harway Avenue if the thinks that it shouldn't provide any service further down Bath Avenue which has far more potential to draw riders? So my point is if you were to run the B33 down Harway, then the B64 should certainly be reinstated down that portion of Bath Avenue.

 

I do have the B64 running down Bath, and Harway isn't the most commercial street. However, I routed the B33 through all of these subway stations on purpose. Originally, the B33 was supposed to go all the way to Kings Highway Station, but would that be to redundant to the B31? I cut it back to Avenue U because of that.

[BrooklynBus]

How I wish I was younger, young men? Threxx if I was you're age now I would be debating all of you and watching this discussion very closely. How nice it would have been to know people also interested in bus routes instead of all my friends who only cared about baseball stats. I will only say this. Yes, the B21 was empty all the time. It always had like 6 to 12 people and virtually everyone on it got off or on at Coney Island Hospital if they weren't going to a train. Practically no one rode around the loop and it never operated more frequently than 20 minutes. That's why I decided to do away with it one Saturday morning when laying in bed and it hit me like a flash to send the B1 using Ocean Parkway to 86 Street instead of extending it through Sheepshead Bay Station. I just knew instantly it was the correct move. I consider the B1 my greatest accomplishment although it took another 32 years for the extension to 4th Avenue. I still think some buses need to go the rest of the way to Shore Rd and 86th or to 101 Street if there is no bus along the length of Shore Road.

 

Threxx, there are some planning principles you should know. Try to avoid branching and double feed buses where possible to minimize walking distances instead of using border streets like Bergen Avenue. Continue with the discussion and remember you are doing a big jigsaw puzzle. The pieces must all fit.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

How I wish I was younger, young men? Threxx if I was you're age now I would be debating all of you and watching this discussion very closely. How nice it would have been to know people also interested in bus routes instead of all my friends who only cared about baseball stats. I will only say this. Yes, the B21 was empty all the time. It always had like 6 to 12 people and virtually everyone on it got off or on at Coney Island Hospital if they weren't going to a train. Practically no one rode around the loop and it never operated more frequently than 20 minutes. That's why I decided to do away with it one Saturday morning when laying in bed and it hit me like a flash to send the B1 using Ocean Parkway to 86 Street instead of extending it through Sheepshead Bay Station. I just knew instantly it was the correct move. I consider the B1 my greatest accomplishment although it took another 32 years for the extension to 4th Avenue. I still think some buses need to go the rest of the way to Shore Rd and 86th or to 101 Street if there is no bus along the length of Shore Road.

 

Threxx, there are some planning principles you should know. Try to avoid branching and double feed buses where possible to minimize walking distances instead of using border streets like Bergen Avenue. Continue with the discussion and remember you are doing a big jigsaw puzzle. The pieces must all fit.

 

lol... Let's not make ourselves feel like old men now...

[Threxx]

lol... Let's not make ourselves feel like old men now...

 

One day you will accept the truth.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

One day you will accept the truth.

 

 

Oh I have... 30 is the new 50...

[Threxx]

Oh I have... 30 is the new 50...

 

 

The only way you'll know my dad is 50 is if he tells you. And you won't believe him. No joke.

_______

 

Alright, heading back on topic:

 

The Jigsaw puzzle of Brooklyn is missing pieces, and the is trying to make what they have to fit together. Everyone who has made a proposal is trying to get those missing pieces back.

 

The B33 was originally supposed to reach Kings Highway station. I feared that the routing I had would be redundant to the B31. (Via G. Avenue & Avenue R to E. 16th Street.) Would it make the route more successful?

Edited July 3, 2012 by ThrexxBus

[checkmatechamp13]

1) That's exactly my point though. You think that every route that isn't doing well (and by well I mean super route status) has to automatically be extended or combined and that is going to solve the problem and optimize the route. Sorry, but that's just not the case. You can extend some routes all you want and all you would be doing is having them run further with perhaps even fewer passengers. I think routes have to "market" themselves, and the marketing comes into a number of factors, not just convenience but also frequency and what are passengers' other options if said route screws up for example? Why would these folks want to use said route for example, if they generally drive to their destination? These are the sorts of things that I think about.

 

2) Come on now... You yourself said that you like crowded buses and keep complaining about routes that in your opinion aren't crowded enough, then you sit here and say that you wouldn't make them that crowded. Who are you kidding? Then you sit there and say that you don't think that the M15 is that crowded... Perhaps you should ask the M15 riders that I see packed in on some of those buses.

 

3) It would be if the southern portion of the B64 was reinstated, which it most certainly should be. A route like the B33 shouldn't exist if the B64's southern terminal can't be reinstated. Why have a bus running down Harway Avenue if the thinks that it shouldn't provide any service further down Bath Avenue which has far more potential to draw riders? So my point is if you were to run the B33 down Harway, then the B64 should certainly be reinstated down that portion of Bath Avenue.

 

 

1) Don't give me that crap. Would the S54 become a super-route if it followed the route I said? How about the S55? Or S89? Or B31? They would be average-length routes with average (or probably still below-average) ridership, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

 

2) Yeah, I said I like routes to be crowded, not crushloaded. Yeah, it's so much fun to have to fight to get on the bus. And I love it when 3 or 4 buses pass you by because there's no more room (maybe if the passengers moved back, there would be room, but I digress). Aside from that, if a route is too crowded, you spend more time loading and unloading passengers.

 

By crowded, I mean there are some standees, but everybody can move around without bumping into each other.

 

And for the M15, I'm saying on a regular basis, and at least during the times I see them, that doesn't seem to be the case. If they had 40-foot buses, that would be a different story, but that's not the case, now is it?

 

3) The B64 runs down Harway Avenue, not Bath Avenue in that portion. And aside from that, the B64 to Coney Island has been discussed to death. Just about everybody is in agreement that it should go back to Coney Island. In fact, even he himself had it going back to Coney Island: http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/35015-brooklyn-bus-proposalsideas-thread-2012/page__st__880?do=findComment&comment=548213

 

I'm not saying I necessarily support the B33 idea, but for Christ's sake, get your facts straight. Just because he doesn't bring up the B64 in every single idea that involves a route going remotely near it doesn't mean that he doesn't want it restored.

 

Threxx, there are some planning principles you should know. Try to avoid branching and double feed buses where possible to minimize walking distances instead of using border streets like Bergen Avenue. Continue with the discussion and remember you are doing a big jigsaw puzzle. The pieces must all fit.

 

 

What do you mean by "double feed" buses? Do you mean have two routes along the same street? Or have in centralized within the neighborhood (i.e. Have it take East 73rd/74th Street instead of going along the edge of the neighborhood by Bergen Avenue)

 

The B33 was originally supposed to reach Kings Highway station. I feared that the routing I had would be redundant to the B31. (Via G. Avenue & Avenue R to E. 16th Street.) Would it make the route more successful?

 

 

LOL. The first thing I thought when you said "Via G. Avenue" was that there was some kind of avenue named after him. I'm like "Are we in an Italian city now?".

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1) Don't give me that crap. Would the S54 become a super-route if it followed the route I said? How about the S55? Or S89? Or B31? They would be average-length routes with average (or probably still below-average) ridership, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

 

I'm saying that you would ***** and moan about the routes needing to be further extended to "optimize" their usage. You complain even about routes that have good ridership and now suddenly this set up would some how be different??

 

2) Yeah, I said I like routes to be crowded, not crushloaded. Yeah, it's so much fun to have to fight to get on the bus. And I love it when 3 or 4 buses pass you by because there's no more room (maybe if the passengers moved back, there would be room, but I digress). Aside from that, if a route is too crowded, you spend more time loading and unloading passengers.

 

By crowded, I mean there are some standees, but everybody can move around without bumping into each other.

 

God forbid passengers don't have to stand... We couldn't have buses like that now could we?? Not unless they were extended beyond recognition to "optimize" their usage...

 

And for the M15, I'm saying on a regular basis, and at least during the times I see them, that doesn't seem to be the case. If they had 40-foot buses, that would be a different story, but that's not the case, now is it?

 

But we're not talking about 40 foot buses, so there is no point in bringing that up. Furthermore, how often can make such a conclusion when you yourself admit that you're not in Manhattan that much...??

 

3) The B64 runs down Harway Avenue, not Bath Avenue in that portion. And aside from that, the B64 to Coney Island has been discussed to death.

 

#1 the B64 runs TO Harway Avenue, via Bath Avenue NOT, down Harway Avenue. Once it reaches 25th Avenue it turns on 25th Avenue and terminates AT Harway Avenue. I think you need glasses with stronger prescriptions...

 

I'm not saying I necessarily support the B33 idea, but for Christ's sake, get your facts straight. Just because he doesn't bring up the B64 in every single idea that involves a route going remotely near it doesn't mean that he doesn't want it restored.

 

There is nothing for me to get straight because I never said that he didn't want it restored. I'm allowed to voice my opinion and that's what I did. My point was that NO new routes should come into play until the current ones are restored that are needed, period. That comment has nothing to do with whether or not he thinks it should be restored, so I think you need to get your facts straight as usual.

 

LOL. The first thing I thought when you said "Via G. Avenue" was that there was some kind of avenue named after him. I'm like "Are we in an Italian city now?".

 

 

I'm not going to lie... I thought the same thing.... It should be "via G. Avenue" otherwise it looks like something else to me.

[checkmatechamp13]

1) I'm saying that you would ***** and moan about the routes needing to be further extended to "optimize" their usage. You complain even about routes that have good ridership and now suddenly this set up would some how be different??

 

2) God forbid passengers don't have to stand... We couldn't have buses like that now could we?? Not unless they were extended beyond recognition to "optimize" their usage...

 

3) But we're not talking about 40 foot buses, so there is no point in bringing that up. Furthermore, how often can make such a conclusion when you yourself admit that you're not in Manhattan that much...??

 

4) #1 the B64 runs TO Harway Avenue, via Bath Avenue NOT, down Harway Avenue. Once it reaches 25th Avenue it turns on 25th Avenue and terminates AT Harway Avenue. I think you need glasses with stronger prescriptions...

 

5) There is nothing for me to get straight because I never said that he didn't want it restored. I'm allowed to voice my opinion and that's what I did. My point was that NO new routes should come into play until the current ones are restored that are needed, period. That comment has nothing to do with whether or not he thinks it should be restored, so I think you need to get your facts straight as usual.

 

1) What the hell are you talking about? How do you know I would "****** & moan". I'd be content if the route had decent ridership, provided that's as good as you can get without screwing up the route. For instance, that S54 likely wouldn't get great ridership, but I'd still be happy with the route.

 

Actually, you know what? Your buddy SIR North Shore has made even longer extensions than I've proposed, and again, not a word out of you. He complains that the S44 is unreliable, and yet he wanted to combine it with the S55. Oh, yeah, that's not a long route at all. That route will only be about an hour and a half long. No problems. And I guess we can combine the S40 and S51 to create an S41. That won't create any problems, right? And yeah, he knows so much about the reliability of the limiteds, right? I guess the S96 coming 20 minutes late counts as "on time" for him, and makes it so much better than the S46, right? I guess between Port Richmond and West Brighton, it travels through some kind of time portal where it magically arrives at his stop on time.

 

But yeah, I'm the bad guy, right?

 

2) Oh, no we'll just have buses running completely empty. Maybe that'll be better. That one person who gets on will get the whole bus to themselves, but when the MTA cuts the route, they'll be left without any route at all.

 

And aside from that, you have yet to prove me wrong. Would the S55 have standees if it were extended to Perth Amboy? I doubt it. The same with the S54 going to St. George, or the S98 going to Elizabeth (though that might be a different story, but would you rather stand or not have the bus run in the first place?)

 

3) I said "I don't think the M15 is really that crowded". I didn't say "I know for a fact that the M15 isn't that crowded". And aside from that, I spent a whole summer going back and forth to Manhattan every day, and aside from that, I've had to go to meetings with the YMCA and all that, and some were in East Midtown and Chinatown and all that. Am I going that often? No, but let's not act like I'm a hermit who's never left Staten Island.

 

4) You said "Oh, you can't have the B33 running down Harway Avenue while the B64 remains cut back from that area", and I proved that he wanted it extended back along Harway Avenue.

 

5) He didn't say "Oh, let's create this B33 route ASAP, even though we haven't restored the B64". He said the B64 should be restored, and the B33 should serve that area. In fact, I think he considers the B64 more of a priority (as it should be), considering he made that proposal first, before making the B33 proposal.

[BrooklynBus]

 

What do you mean by "double feed" buses? Do you mean have two routes along the same street? Or have in centralized within the neighborhood (i.e. Have it take East 73rd/74th Street instead of going along the edge of the neighborhood by Bergen Avenue)

 

 

If you have a choice of running a route alongside a park or a few blocks from the park, you pick the one a few blocks from the park so people can access the route from both sides of the route, not only one. Hence the route is fed from both sides or double fed. That's why the B2 does not operate alongside Marine Park. The same true with the B31 before it was rerouted from Avenue U. I'm still not sure that was such a great idea. It killed the B2 and made it necessary to increase B3 service.

 

Also when the MTA combined the B67 and the 69, they chose 7th Avenue for both rather than 8th and 9th Av for both. It is preferable to double feed although I don't like the idea of putting both those routes on one street.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1) What the hell are you talking about? How do you know I would "****** & moan". I'd be content if the route had decent ridership, provided that's as good as you can get without screwing up the route. For instance, that S54 likely wouldn't get great ridership, but I'd still be happy with the route.

 

Because that's exactly what you do. B31 this... BM4 that... Well if they used that bus blah blah blah blah... Yes I'd call that ******** & moaning. They don't use it enough for you so let's extend the B31 further west and if it tanks then what?

 

Actually, you know what? Your buddy SIR North Shore has made even longer extensions than I've proposed, and again, not a word out of you. He complains that the S44 is unreliable, and yet he wanted to combine it with the S55. Oh, yeah, that's not a long route at all. That route will only be about an hour and a half long. No problems. And I guess we can combine the S40 and S51 to create an S41. That won't create any problems, right? And yeah, he knows so much about the reliability of the limiteds, right? I guess the S96 coming 20 minutes late counts as "on time" for him, and makes it so much better than the S46, right? I guess between Port Richmond and West Brighton, it travels through some kind of time portal where it magically arrives at his stop on time.

 

But yeah, I'm the bad guy, right?

 

When has he even been on to make any proposals of late anyway? If he has made them I haven't seen them. Aside from that I'm sure some of his proposals go overboard like some of yours do. The three of us did agree on the S54 extension and I agreed with him on some additional express bus later on at night, but that's about it, so I don't know why you keep bringing him up because he hasn't been on in months.

 

2) Oh, no we'll just have buses running completely empty. Maybe that'll be better. That one person who gets on will get the whole bus to themselves, but when the MTA cuts the route, they'll be left without any route at all.

 

As if they're somehow "guaranteed" to be "fuller" because you're extended right?

 

And aside from that, you have yet to prove me wrong. Would the S55 have standees if it were extended to Perth Amboy? I doubt it. The same with the S54 going to St. George, or the S98 going to Elizabeth (though that might be a different story, but would you rather stand or not have the bus run in the first place?)

 

There's nothing to prove because you're wrong in the first place. The only plausible extension is the S54. The others... I mean what are you trying to do start a civil war? Seriously, Forest Avenue is already a mess as it is and here you come along proposing to extend the friggin' route to NJ. And please don't rehash this whole argument again about what you would do with the line to ensure that it was "reliable". Take that over to the SI proposals thread.

 

3) I said "I don't think the M15 is really that crowded". I didn't say "I know for a fact that the M15 isn't that crowded". And aside from that, I spent a whole summer going back and forth to Manhattan every day, and aside from that, I've had to go to meetings with the YMCA and all that, and some were in East Midtown and Chinatown and all that. Am I going that often? No, but let's not act like I'm a hermit who's never left Staten Island.

 

And don't act like you're an expert on the route either. You use that line often. Oh I think so and so based solely on the few times that you use the route or see it and what's worse is you stubbornly defend that stance when you don't have personal experience to back it up with.

 

4) You said "Oh, you can't have the B33 running down Harway Avenue while the B64 remains cut back from that area", and I proved that he wanted it extended back along Harway Avenue.

You didn't prove anything because no one was ever debating that he didn't want it restored besides you so you can leave that comment right here... Dead upon arrival.

 

5) He didn't say "Oh, let's create this B33 route ASAP, even though we haven't restored the B64". He said the B64 should be restored, and the B33 should serve that area. In fact, I think he considers the B64 more of a priority (as it should be), considering he made that proposal first, before making the B33 proposal.

 

Who cares what he said? I said for the thousandth time that I was voicing my own personal opinion, which had nothing to do with his proposal. Now let's move on already since this is a moot point that you keep harping on.

[checkmatechamp13]

If you have a choice of running a route alongside a park or a few blocks from the park, you pick the one a few blocks from the park so people can access the route from both sides of the route, not only one. Hence the route is fed from both sides or double fed. That's why the B2 does not operate alongside Marine Park. The same true with the B31 before it was rerouted from Avenue U. I'm still not sure that was such a great idea. It killed the B2 and made it necessary to increase B3 service.

 

Also when the MTA combined the B67 and the 69, they chose 7th Avenue for both rather than 8th and 9th Av for both. It is preferable to double feed although I don't like the idea of putting both those routes on one street.

Gotcha. So I was basically right about wanting routes "centralized".

 

1) Because that's exactly what you do. B31 this... BM4 that... Well if they used that bus blah blah blah blah... Yes I'd call that ******** & moaning. They don't use it enough for you so let's extend the B31 further west and if it tanks then what?

 

2) When has he even been on to make any proposals of late anyway? If he has made them I haven't seen them. Aside from that I'm sure some of his proposals go overboard like some of yours do. The three of us did agree on the S54 extension and I agreed with him on some additional express bus later on at night, but that's about it, so I don't know why you keep bringing him up because he hasn't been on in months.

 

3) As if they're somehow "guaranteed" to be "fuller" because you're extended right?

 

4) There's nothing to prove because you're wrong in the first place. The only plausible extension is the S54. The others... I mean what are you trying to do start a civil war? Seriously, Forest Avenue is already a mess as it is and here you come along proposing to extend the friggin' route to NJ. And please don't rehash this whole argument again about what you would do with the line to ensure that it was "reliable". Take that over to the SI proposals thread.

 

5) And don't act like you're an expert on the route either. You use that line often. Oh I think so and so based solely on the few times that you use the route or see it and what's worse is you stubbornly defend that stance when you don't have personal experience to back it up with.

 

1) BrooklynBus even suggested that the B31 be extended further west (just to Ceasar's Bay instead of Bay Ridge because he'd have the B2 cover that). If you're not going to take my word that it would perform decently, then take the word of somebody with many years of experience with the actual planning process. If he had thought "Oh, the B21 is fine the way it is. Sending it all the way to Bay Ridge would make it more unreliable", we wouldn't have the successful B1 we have today. Yeah, it's probably a little more unreliable than the old B21, but it's much more frequent and serves many more neighborhoods.

 

Come to think about it, ThrexxBus suggested extending the B31 further westward and you haven't been nearly as critical of him as you have of me regarding that specific proposal. Only when I bring it up do you jump in saying it's a terrible idea.

 

2) Because you've had plenty of opportunities in general to criticize him the way you criticize me and yet I'm the only one you go after.

 

3) You act like I'm extending the routes halfway across the city. Go ahead, give me an extension that would involve making routes more than a mile or two longer (Aside from the B31 extension, which I've already justified, as it helps complete the grid and gives Gerritsen Beach riders access to more places). If you're going to bring up crap of "Oh, he's obsessed with extending routes all over the place", I want concrete examples. If you want to bring it up in the SI thread, then do it there, but otherwise, drop this crap.

4) If you're not going to take my word on it, take the word of somebody who's been on practically every route in the 5 boroughs: http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/34584-staten-island-bus-service-proposalsideas-thread-2012/page__st__140?do=findComment&comment=537589

 

He said there was nothing wrong with the idea of sending S98s to New Jersey. It's just a matter of whether it should serve Downtown Elizabeth or the Jersey Gardens Mall. He said there was nothing wrong with the S55 to Perth Amboy and with the S52 extension to Richmond Road.

 

And aside from that, how can S98s be caught in traffic on Forest Avenue if they currently don't run off-peak? The passengers are no worse off than they are now (and again, if you want to go all ShortLine on me and insist that we discuss it in the SI thread, then do that, or else don't use it as an example).

 

5) I highly doubt riders are fighting to get on the bus on a regular basis. Is it possible that it's the case? Yes, but I doubt it. Or else somebody like Gorgor would've complained about it (considering he does use the route regularly)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1) BrooklynBus even suggested that the B31 be extended further west (just to Ceasar's Bay instead of Bay Ridge because he'd have the B2 cover that). If you're not going to take my word that it would perform decently, then take the word of somebody with many years of experience with the actual planning process. If he had thought "Oh, the B21 is fine the way it is. Sending it all the way to Bay Ridge would make it more unreliable", we wouldn't have the successful B1 we have today. Yeah, it's probably a little more unreliable than the old B21, but it's much more frequent and serves many more neighborhoods. Come to think about it, ThrexxBus suggested extending the B31 further westward and you haven't been nearly as critical of him as you have of me regarding that specific proposal. Only when I bring it up do you jump in saying it's a terrible idea.

 

So what? Just because BrooklynBus makes a suggestion doesn't mean that it is gold. I'm very familiar with Gerritsen Beach because I used to hang out with friends down there and we had guys come over to Sheepshead Bay to play hockey every weekend. Those folks are not interested in traveling to other parts of Brooklyn. They're isolated in Gerritsen Beach and they like it that way. Now do they go to the city and other places? Yeah, of course, but they're very much like some folks on Staten Island that go out of their neighborhood once in a blue moon. The ones that have to go to the city for work of course get of out Gerritsen Beach, but the point I'm making is if you and BrooklynBus and ThrexxBus think extending the B31 is going to get hoards of passengers coming from Gerritsen Beach think again. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Gerritsen Beach residents made a stink. They are not wild about having outsiders come into their neck of the woods and everyone knows everyone there and that's just the way they like it... Nice and isolated.

 

2) Because you've had plenty of opportunities in general to criticize him the way you criticize me and yet I'm the only one you go after.

 

Please... The guy barely posts in here and he hasn't been on months to my knowledge, so stop whining already.

 

3) You act like I'm extending the routes halfway across the city. Go ahead, give me an extension that would involve making routes more than a mile or two longer (Aside from the B31 extension, which I've already justified, as it helps complete the grid and gives Gerritsen Beach riders access to more places). If you're going to bring up crap of "Oh, he's obsessed with extending routes all over the place", I want concrete examples. If you want to bring it up in the SI thread, then do it there, but otherwise, drop this crap.

 

I already gave some concrete examples and the B31 example above is one of them. If B31 riders really wanted access westward, they would've been demanding the for it because remember in spite of the low ridership on the BM4 it is still around, so they do have some power down there. Quite frankly if folks can drive from Gerritsen Beach they'll do that usually, hence why the B31 gets the usage that it does. People accept the fact that it's isolated down there and they like it that way so extending the B31 for folks who want to remain isolated makes absolutely no sense, as if suddenly these folks are going to say "WOW now I can get on the B31 and go further westward in Brooklyn!"

 

4) If you're not going to take my word on it, take the word of somebody who's been on practically every route in the 5 boroughs: http://www.nyctransi...140#entry537589

 

He said there was nothing wrong with the idea of sending S98s to New Jersey. It's just a matter of whether it should serve Downtown Elizabeth or the Jersey Gardens Mall. He said there was nothing wrong with the S55 to Perth Amboy and with the S52 extension to Richmond Road.

 

And aside from that, how can S98s be caught in traffic on Forest Avenue if they currently don't run off-peak? The passengers are no worse off than they are now (and again, if you want to go all ShortLine on me and insist that we discuss it in the SI thread, then do that, or else don't use it as an example).

 

Oh because he's a daily user of the S98... Listen, I suffered with crappy S98 service for YEARS, so much so that I switched to the express bus just to get to work on time, so I know first hand how poorly service along Forest Avenue has been and continues to be for that matter even with the improved frequencies.

 

5) I highly doubt riders are fighting to get on the bus on a regular basis. Is it possible that it's the case? Yes, but I doubt it. Or else somebody like Gorgor would've complained about it (considering he does use the route regularly)

 

 

Gorgor complains about the M15 quite frequently, including crowding. I don't know where you've been...

Edited July 3, 2012 by Via Garibaldi 8

[checkmatechamp13]

1) So what? Just because BrooklynBus makes a suggestion doesn't mean that it is gold. I'm very familiar with Gerritsen Beach because I used to hang out with friends down there and we had guys come over to Sheepshead Bay to play hockey every weekend. Those folks are not interested in traveling to other parts of Brooklyn. They're isolated in Gerritsen Beach and they like it that way. Now do they go to the city and other places? Yeah, of course, but they're very much like some folks on Staten Island that go out of their neighborhood once in a blue moon. The ones that have to go to the city for work of course get of out Gerritsen Beach, but the point I'm making is if you and BrooklynBus and ThrexxBus think extending the B31 is going to get hoards of passengers coming from Gerritsen Beach think again. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Gerritsen Beach residents made a stink. They are not wild about having outsiders come into their neck of the woods and everyone knows everyone there and that's just the way they like it... Nice and isolated.

 

2) Please... The guy barely posts in here and he hasn't been on months to my knowledge, so stop whining already.

 

3) I already gave some concrete examples and the B31 example above is one of them. If B31 riders really wanted access westward, they would've been demanding the for it because remember in spite of the low ridership on the BM4 it is still around, so they do have some power down there. Quite frankly if folks can drive from Gerritsen Beach they'll do that usually, hence why the B31 gets the usage that it does. People accept the fact that it's isolated down there and they like it that way so extending the B31 for folks who want to remain isolated makes absolutely no sense, as if suddenly these folks are going to say "WOW now I can get on the B31 and go further westward in Brooklyn!"

 

4) Oh because he's a daily user of the S98... Listen, I suffered with crappy S98 service for YEARS, so much so that I switched to the express bus just to get to work on time, so I know first hand how poorly service along Forest Avenue has been and continues to be for that matter even with the improved frequencies.

 

5) Gorgor complains about the M15 quite frequently, including crowding. I don't know where you've been...

 

 

1) With what, like 20-30 years of experience, yeah his opinion is worthless, right? In case you've forgotten, he lives in Southern Brooklyn as well, in an area that's probably just as isolated as Gerritsen Beach (Manhattan Beach).

 

2) My point is that at the same time I was making proposals, he was doing that as well, and yet of course, you always go for my proposals to criticize.

 

3) Yeah, I doubt it's because of political power. If that were the case, the X27/28 would still have weekend service. The only thing keeping the BM4 afloat is that blank check agreement and when that expires, you can kiss that route bye-bye.

 

And nope, the B31 was the only example, and I was the one who brought it up. Nice try, though. Go ahead, if you already said it then I want you to direct me to the post where you said it.

 

And how do you know thay're not going to think like that? The same way you "knew for a fact" that Country Club residents weren't shopping in Parkchester, right? There are people all over Staten Island who are insular. I know some people who barely leave their own neighborhood except to go to school, and the school is in a bordering neighborhood (i.e. They live in West Brighton or Elm Park and go to school in Port Richmond). I guess we should just have a bunch of little shuttle routes terminating in Port Richmond, right? Screw the non-insular people who need to get places outside their neighborhood.

 

4) And if you were paying attention, you'd realize that there would be more service down Forest Avenue in general. Service to Arlington wouldn't be touched. There would be additional service running down Forest Avenue, and yet you're still complaining.

5) He complains about the M15, but not about the crowding. He says it's slow and unreliable at times, but he doesn't complain about the crowding.