qjtransitmaster Posted October 16, 2012 Share #1226 Posted October 16, 2012 You call this increasing ridership? BM1 473,820 478,977 415,953 389,622 385,458 BM3 321,556 327,754 297,045 299,193 293,207 The years are 2007-2011. They look like they're going down to me. Maybe it was first due to bad economy then the service reductions made things worse further driving people away. As the cuts discouraged ridership and put off riders so ridership started to drop as a result of people not being able to get a bus. So I assume that was the cause for the huge drop in ridership the cuts made people give up on those lines. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted October 16, 2012 Share #1227 Posted October 16, 2012 (at the time, I wadn't thinkin about the connectivity b/w my b23 & the SI routes.... my major concern was, where should I put that route down in bay ridge (b/c really, outside of the B16, I didn't want any other route panning west past 4th av)... having the 23 do what you suggest would be an alternative to what the B8 (used to) do down there along 92nd st, as far as xferring b/w the SI routes goes.... but on the flipside, I don't want the 23 & the 8 (and the 64) serving the hospital; I'm not sure if that little pickup/dropoff area inside the hospital can handle all those buses....)Oh,please extend your B23 at least to 83 St and Shore RD :TO shore rd arriving 7am to9am,leaving 2pm to4pm.Mad kids will need that bus to/fro Fort Hamilton HS,belive me on this one! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 17, 2012 Share #1228 Posted October 17, 2012 (at the time, I wadn't thinkin about the connectivity b/w my b23 & the SI routes.... my major concern was, where should I put that route down in bay ridge (b/c really, outside of the B16, I didn't want any other route panning west past 4th av)... having the 23 do what you suggest would be an alternative to what the B8 (used to) do down there along 92nd st, as far as xferring b/w the SI routes goes.... but on the flipside, I don't want the 23 & the 8 (and the 64) serving the hospital; I'm not sure if that little pickup/dropoff area inside the hospital can handle all those buses....) Oh, please extend your B23 at least to 83 St and Shore RD :TO shore rd arriving 7am to 9am, leaving 2 pm to 4 pm. Mad kids will need that bus to/fro Fort Hamilton HS,belive me on this one! Lol.... It's just a proposal. Besides, doesn't the B63 already have a school tripper to Ft Hamilton HS? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted October 17, 2012 Share #1229 Posted October 17, 2012 Lol.... It's just a proposal. Besides, doesn't the B63 already have a school tripper to Ft Hamilton HS? more people need the route of his proposed bus than the B16.THE ONLY REASON they take the 16 is because the 63 is packed and skips the r train,B1,S79,S93 stop.plus the 63 is only used by zoned students like me,who need 5av or the cross streets(80,77,Bay ridge Pkwy,72,Bay ridge AV,maybe the last two or three students get off at Senator or 66 St,IDK) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 18, 2012 Share #1230 Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) more people need the route of his proposed bus than the B16. It was my proposal..... It was my post you copied & pasted in THE ONLY REASON they take the 16 is because the 63 is packed and skips the r train,B1,S79,S93 stop.plus the 63 is only used by zoned students like me, who need 5av or the cross streets (80,77,Bay ridge Pkwy,72,Bay ridge AV,maybe the last two or three students get off at Senator or 66 St,IDK) ....which is why you leave the 16 there. There's not much of a point in adding school trippers (which is basically what you're suggesting) to that "B23" idea of mine for the Ft. hamilton students; as they already have regular 16 service & the 63 trippers.... I'm not factoring in Ft. Hamilton kids w/ that proposal b/c sending the "23" out there would be even more redundant... I mean what is this.... Why should those kids specifically have a shot at having direct 5th av service (with the 63 trippers), direct ft hamilton pkwy service (if the 16 were to be straightened along ft hamilton pkwy), and direct 13th/14th av service (with the proposed "B23")? That is overkill, and really, quite selfish..... Edited October 18, 2012 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLQBTT Posted October 19, 2012 Share #1231 Posted October 19, 2012 (edited) Maybe it was first due to bad economy then the service reductions made things worse further driving people away. As the cuts discouraged ridership and put off riders so ridership started to drop as a result of people not being able to get a bus. So I assume that was the cause for the huge drop in ridership the cuts made people give up on those lines. At least for the BM3, the B & Q are more direct and faster. They serve most of this route and are cheaper too boot! Those who don't take the subway (or BM3) off peak drive instead. Edited October 19, 2012 by LLQBTT 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLQBTT Posted October 19, 2012 Share #1232 Posted October 19, 2012 isn't the B103 pretty empty on weekends? every 1 I see downtown or on the Prospect has 3 or 4 passengers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 19, 2012 Share #1233 Posted October 19, 2012 isn't the B103 pretty empty on weekends? every 1 I see downtown or on the Prospect has 3 or 4 passengers. I had a feeling that downtown service on B103 was useless maybe a reroute to an area not well served by subways to stimulate ridership. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted October 19, 2012 Share #1234 Posted October 19, 2012 isn't the B103 pretty empty on weekends? every 1 I see downtown or on the Prospect has 3 or 4 passengers. Have you not seen the crowds that manifest at the Junction? The whole route may not be used on weekends, but it certainly needs to run on weekends. But I do agree, weekend usage in Downtown Brooklyn on the B103 is poor, but I wouldn't say cut it just yet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1235 Posted October 20, 2012 Maybe it needs to add the local stops along Flatbush. (It pretty much serves only the express bus stops, and bypasses everything between Cortelyou/19th and Foster, and that's a densely populated area that is also equidistantly far from the trains). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1236 Posted October 20, 2012 Maybe it needs to add the local stops along Flatbush. (It pretty much serves only the express bus stops, and bypasses everything between Cortelyou/19th and Foster, and that's a densely populated area that is also equidistantly far from the trains). I'd say just add stops along Cortelyou, at the very least one at the train station. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1237 Posted October 20, 2012 I'd say just add stops along Cortelyou, at the very least one at the train station. That would give MTA a very good reason to eliminate it's downtown brooklyn segment and reroute it to areas not near subways like brooklyn heights or the harbor columbia street waterfront district to gain a new ridership group. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1238 Posted October 20, 2012 That would give MTA a very good reason to eliminate it's downtown brooklyn segment and reroute it to areas not near subways like brooklyn heights or the harbor columbia street waterfront district to gain a new ridership group. Honestly, even weekday usage on the Downtown segment can be dismal. While I don't support it, I wouldn't be suprized if the B103 gets cut back to CI Av/Cortelyou in a few years. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1239 Posted October 20, 2012 (edited) Honestly, even weekday usage on the Downtown segment can be dismal. While I don't support it, I wouldn't be suprized if the B103 gets cut back to CI Av/Cortelyou in a few years. I rather just reroute it to columbia waterfront on some trips to help B61 then other trips via I-278 to bay ridge to create fast service to avoid the More like a coverage thing. But I am not set on it need to learn more about other lines. Wait a sec I forgot the MTA's culver viaduct may bring express service rendering express service in the future via prospect expressway redundant!!! I did hear it may return not sure. Edited October 20, 2012 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1240 Posted October 20, 2012 I'd say just add stops along Cortelyou, at the very least one at the train station. The Flatbush stretch could use the service more. They have NOTHING except B41 non-LTD. This would probably draw people from that overcrowded line. Though adding the train station would probably help too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acela Express Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1241 Posted October 20, 2012 The Flatbush stretch could use the service more. They have NOTHING except B41 non-LTD. This would probably draw people from that overcrowded line. Though adding the train station would probably help too. The B41 has enough runs as it is. The only issue with the line is constant traffic congestion on Flatbush Avenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1242 Posted October 20, 2012 Honestly, even weekday usage on the Downtown segment can be dismal. While I don't support it, I wouldn't be suprized if the B103 gets cut back to CI Av/Cortelyou in a few years. That's not completely true. There has been times where the bus would leave the first stop with a good load and even more people get on at Adams...by the time it actually reaches Livingston (the 3rd srop), its pretty crowded. Catch it from the first stop at the peak of rush gour and you'll see what im talking about 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1243 Posted October 20, 2012 That's not completely true. There has been times where the bus would leave the first stop with a good load and even more people get on at Adams...by the time it actually reaches Livingston (the 3rd srop), its pretty crowded. Catch it from the first stop at the peak of rush gour and you'll see what im talking about I said at times. I've been on crowded B103's from Downtown. (and btw, when I take it from Downtown i normally catch it from the Johnson Street stop. ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1244 Posted October 20, 2012 To me either the B2 or the B100 gets eliminated. I noticed on the Brooklyn bus map they parallel each other for most of the route. I think the B2 should get eliminated and keep the B100 running the way it does now. I would just have some weekday service go to Kings Plaza. My new B100 plans have service to Kings Plaza from 6:30AM to 10:00PM. 15-30 minute headways during the day. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1245 Posted October 20, 2012 To me either the B2 or the B100 gets eliminated. I noticed on the Brooklyn bus map they parallel each other for most of the route. I think the B2 should get eliminated and keep the B100 running the way it does now. I would just have some weekday service go to Kings Plaza. My new B100 plans have service to Kings Plaza from 6:30AM to 10:00PM. 15-30 minute headways during the day. You realize that before the B100 existed the B2 operate seven times more frequent on rush hours, meaning plenty of buses would need to be use. I would keep them as they are IMO 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1246 Posted October 20, 2012 To me either the B2 or the B100 gets eliminated. I noticed on the Brooklyn bus map they parallel each other for most of the route. I think the B2 should get eliminated and keep the B100 running the way it does now. I would just have some weekday service go to Kings Plaza. My new B100 plans have service to Kings Plaza from 6:30AM to 10:00PM. 15-30 minute headways during the day. tell that to people at kings hwy who use it and see if they would entertain this madness. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q101 E Midtown Posted October 20, 2012 Share #1247 Posted October 20, 2012 I'd say just add stops along Cortelyou, at the very least one at the train station. I think another one should also be added at Flatbush. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted October 22, 2012 Share #1248 Posted October 22, 2012 The B41 has enough runs as it is. The only issue with the line is constant traffic congestion on Flatbush Avenue. But this is the 103 we're talking about, and it would provide an alternative (bypassing much of Flatbush Ave where the most congestion is) for riders in that area to the B41, which in that stretch I'm referring to, is only served by the local. (Grew up riding that all the way from downtown, and it's always been murder, with the crowds and traffic. And the trains were too far away to really be of any more benefit for downtown; so they were only for other boroughs or Coney Island). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quill Depot Posted October 23, 2012 Share #1249 Posted October 23, 2012 New Route: B72 via Bay Ridge Pkwy and 65th Street. https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209923832874986141145.0004ccb828e4482513d88&msa=0&ll=40.624311,-74.018583&spn=0.04723,0.131836 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted October 23, 2012 Share #1250 Posted October 23, 2012 New Route: B72 via Bay Ridge Pkwy and 65th Street. https://maps.google.....04723,0.131836 If you're going to do that, the whole route should be on 65th. Plus, 65th is plagued with traffic problems, take a look at my B5 which uses Bay Ridge Avenue. https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=213458373195564989412.0004c1f846c76c1e4b05b&msa=0&ll=40.605482,-73.971634&spn=0.075459,0.154324 There's no need for more service along Bay Ridge Parkway, at least not going to that area around Kings Highway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.