Brooklyn Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Threxx]

I've been weighing whether to showcase this one for some months now...

 

B19: Borough Park-Williamsburg

 

One might ask, is this posed to be an alternative to the B110? No, it's not, and I wouldn't expect anyone to use this route over that one. The B19 is mainly a coverage/supplemental route. It provides coverage to the former 62nd Street half of the B23, and supplements the B12, B46, B47, and other routes. It would be mostly infrequent, but it would draw riders who currently transfer from other route to the B12 to reach Kings County and Downstate Hospitals. MAP

[Threxx]

I've been weighing whether to showcase this one for some months now...

 

B19: Borough Park-Williamsburg

 

One might ask, is this posed to be an alternative to the B110? No, it's not, and I wouldn't expect anyone to use this route over that one. The B19 is mainly a coverage/supplemental route. It provides coverage to the former 62nd Street half of the B23, and supplements the B12, B46, B47, and other routes. It would be mostly infrequent, but it would draw riders who currently transfer from other route to the B12 to reach Kings County and Downstate Hospitals. MAP

 

 

Any comments?

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Any comments?

 

IT looks kinda long.

It's like the distance of a bus route this long as shown on the link https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=New+York+Plaza&daddr=40.7029825,-74.0113192+to:40.7027061,-74.0123241+to:40.7025264,-74.0126564+to:40.71683,-73.995686+to:40.7785659,-73.9541478+to:40.8076117,-73.9293442+to:40.80838,-73.92905+to:3rd+Ave&hl=en&sll=40.824592,-73.908634&sspn=0.0454,0.104628&geocode=FVsSbQIdRKiW-w%3BFQYUbQIdSa2W-ykTdQNCFFrCiTEaLpd3wLg-tQ%3BFfISbQIdXKmW-ym377aBE1rCiTHUv-VeQ0lGOQ%3BFT4SbQIdEKiW-ym377aBE1rCiTHUv-VeQ0lGOQ%3BFR5KbQIdWuqW-ymb-OfwJ1rCiTEAJw7AYZLaag%3BFUU7bgIdnYyX-ykFXd-FvFjCiTFdv0lQwiXnEw%3BFbusbgIdgO2X-ymraSDv3fXCiTF2aGvi0qWFxg%3BFbyvbgIdpu6X-ykzo4HD3fXCiTHO6pslXTTeRA%3BFWgIbwIdZEmY-w&oq=e&mra=dme&mrsp=8&sz=14&via=1,2,3,4,5,6,7&t=m&z=14

Edited November 13, 2012 by Q23 Central Terminal

[checkmatechamp13]

Any comments?

 

 

I don't think it's needed north of Sutter Avenue. I don't think the B46 gets a whole lot of usage coming from Broadway, and even if it did, there's no way that bus would be able to compete with it. Nobody's going to wait on Patchen Avenue when you've got B46s coming like wildfire a block away.

[Threxx]

IT looks kinda long.

It's like the distance of a bus route this long as shown on the link https://maps.google....,5,6,7&t=m&z=14

 

 

Ok, it's not THAT LONG. It's a long route, I agree with you on that.

I don't think it's needed north of Sutter Avenue. I don't think the B46 gets a whole lot of usage coming from Broadway, and even if it did, there's no way that bus would be able to compete with it. Nobody's going to wait on Patchen Avenue when you've got B46s coming like wildfire a block away.

 

 

While that is true, the transfer between the B46 and B12 is unreliable and poorly timed. If people could have a direct option, they'd use it.

 

North of Lafayette it's probably not necessary though. Woodhull would be a better northern terminal.

[checkmatechamp13]

Ok, it's not THAT LONG. It's a long route, I agree with you on that.

 

While that is true, the transfer between the B46 and B12 is unreliable and poorly timed. If people could have a direct option, they'd use it.

 

North of Lafayette it's probably not necessary though. Woodhull would be a better northern terminal.

 

 

Well, that logic might kind of work if you're going south/west, but if you're going north/east, once you get off at Utica, the B46 runs frequently. Even if you just miss a bus or something, there's going to be another in a few minutes anyway.

 

In any case, you at least route it down Ralph Avenue so it actually serves as a supplement to the B47 (not to mention the fact that you miss a connection to the Fulton Street Line by running it on Patchen).

[Threxx]

Well, that logic might kind of work if you're going south/west, but if you're going north/east, once you get off at Utica, the B46 runs frequently. Even if you just miss a bus or something, there's going to be another in a few minutes anyway.

 

In any case, you at least route it down Ralph Avenue so it actually serves as a supplement to the B47 (not to mention the fact that you miss a connection to the Fulton Street Line by running it on Patchen).

 

 

That actually makes sense With this route and increased headways south of Sutter/Rutland, the reliability issues along Ralph Avenue could improve. And as for the B46/B12 thing, I was talking about the B12. It has terrible bunching

[qjtransitmaster]

Past remsen it duplicates B47 try a linden blvd LTD route to jfk then it can go on clarkson to avoid linden traffic and help with B12. As for replacing B23 let B67 do it to get some life support.

[Threxx]

Past remsen it duplicates B47 try a linden blvd LTD route to jfk then it can go on clarkson to avoid linden traffic and help with B12. As for replacing B23 let B67 do it to get some life support.

 

 

That was the point, read mine and checkmate's earlier posts...

 

Hell no... there's no need for a route from that area to JFK...

 

And as for the B23, I have a plan for the Cortelyou half earlier in this thread, I don't feel like digging it up, but extending the B67 isn't part of it. That's not the kind of help the B67 needs.

[checkmatechamp13]

That was the point, read mine and checkmate's earlier posts...

 

Hell no... there's no need for a route from that area to JFK...

 

And as for the B23, I have a plan for the Cortelyou half earlier in this thread, I don't feel like digging it up, but extending the B67 isn't part of it. That's not the kind of help the B67 needs.

 

 

Actually, that might not necessarily be a bad idea. While I don't think the MTA would actually implement it, the route would provide easy access from that area to JFK, without having to transfer to the B15. Plus, it would provide access from bus/subway lines in southern Brooklyn (though personally, I think a route along the Belt Parkway would be better for that purpose).

 

And yeah, that route involved service from Church & McDonald's to Gateway Mall via Cortelyou Road & Avenue D.

[Threxx]

Actually, that might not necessarily be a bad idea. While I don't think the MTA would actually implement it, the route would provide easy access from that area to JFK, without having to transfer to the B15. Plus, it would provide access from bus/subway lines in southern Brooklyn (though personally, I think a route along the Belt Parkway would be better for that purpose).

 

And yeah, that route involved service from Church & McDonald's to Gateway Mall via Cortelyou Road & Avenue D.

 

 

I agree with you, but a route through there isn't a good idea. A route through Central Brooklyn would be better, and I agree, a route via the Belt and then local streets in South Brooklyn would work. It can't happen now, though, since the Belt is closed to bus traffic in the areas where the route would run.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Threxx

[qjtransitmaster]

Actually, that might not necessarily be a bad idea. While I don't think the MTA would actually implement it, the route would provide easy access from that area to JFK, without having to transfer to the B15. Plus, it would provide access from bus/subway lines in southern Brooklyn (though personally, I think a route along the Belt Parkway would be better for that purpose).

 

And yeah, that route involved service from Church & McDonald's to Gateway Mall via Cortelyou Road & Avenue D.

Can buses use the belt now? past canarsie after the bridge replacements? If so when will it happen? No clarkson to remsen and linden is a more direct non duplicative routing yes it will use cortelyou to boro park replacing B23 on some trips.

I agree with you, but a route through there isn't a good idea. A route through Central Brooklyn would be better, and I agree, a route via the Belt and then local streets in South Brooklyn would work. It can't happen now, though, since the Belt is closed to bus traffic in the areas where the route would run.

Dude linden blvd to clarkson and boro park is central brooklyn. It is via clarkson ave and linden blvd as a LTD on linden. Duplicating B47 is a sad excuse to avoid fixing the problems directly. Deal with your problems instead of running away from them behind some new redundant route. That isn't that unique anyway.

[Threxx]

Can buses use the belt now? past canarsie after the bridge replacements? If so when will it happen? No clarkson to remsen and linden is a more direct non duplicative routing yes it will use cortelyou to boro park replacing B23 on some trips.

 

As far as I know, buses can't use the Belt...

 

Dude linden blvd to clarkson and boro park is central brooklyn. It is via clarkson ave and linden blvd as a LTD on linden. Duplicating B47 is a sad excuse to avoid fixing the problems directly. Deal with your problems instead of running away from them behind some new redundant route. That isn't that unique anyway.

 

How is supplementing the B47 with a new route which has multiple purposes running away from the problems. And running it through Central Brooklyn is unnecessary if you want to serve South Brooklyn. Take a look at this.

[qjtransitmaster]

As far as I know, buses can't use the Belt...

 

 

 

How is supplementing the B47 with a new route which has multiple purposes running away from the problems. And running it through Central Brooklyn is unnecessary if you want to serve South Brooklyn. Take a look at this.

B47 needs more service so add the needed service and focus resources on corridors without service. Plus my Linden blvd rte has no intention of serving South brooklyn at all where did that come from?

[Threxx]

B47 needs more service so add the needed service and focus resources on corridors without service. Plus my Linden blvd rte has no intention of serving South brooklyn at all where did that come from?

 

I thought you were playing off of checkmates suggestion. We don't need a JFK route going through Central Brooklyn.

 

And the resources have been focused on corridors without service. 16th Avenue doesn't have service, and it connects to an area which passengers on both sides of the route want to get to. I don't see how that's a waste of resources.

[checkmatechamp13]

Can buses use the belt now? past canarsie after the bridge replacements? If so when will it happen? No clarkson to remsen and linden is a more direct non duplicative routing yes it will use cortelyou to boro park replacing B23 on some trips.

Dude linden blvd to clarkson and boro park is central brooklyn. It is via clarkson ave and linden blvd as a LTD on linden. Duplicating B47 is a sad excuse to avoid fixing the problems directly. Deal with your problems instead of running away from them behind some new redundant route. That isn't that unique anyway.

 

I'm not sure about buses on the Belt. I mean, I thought somebody said BM3 buses use it to deadhead to Manhattan or whatever, and then of course, there's the B83. I guess if there's a section where it can't use the Belt, they'll have to find a way around that. (maybe take Pennsylvania to Flatlands and then make its way back down). Of course, the problem is that it's still slower for the most part than staying on the Belt. If Threxx's B55 were to be implemented, I would add a couple of stops along Flatlands east of Pennsylvania Avenue (I think there's been some new housing built down by that way, but I'm not sure)

 

How is supplementing the B47 with a new route which has multiple purposes running away from the problems. And running it through Central Brooklyn is unnecessary if you want to serve South Brooklyn. Take a look at this.

 

He's saying that if the issue is unreliable service on the B47, you should just add more service on the B47 (or monitor it better or whatever), rather than creating a seperate route. Don't "run away" by creating a new route.

[Threxx]

I'm not sure about buses on the Belt. I mean, I thought somebody said BM3 buses use it to deadhead to Manhattan or whatever, and then of course, there's the B83. I guess if there's a section where it can't use the Belt, they'll have to find a way around that. (maybe take Pennsylvania to Flatlands and then make its way back down). Of course, the problem is that it's still slower for the most part than staying on the Belt. If Threxx's B55 were to be implemented, I would add a couple of stops along Flatlands east of Pennsylvania Avenue (I think there's been some new housing built down by that way, but I'm not sure)

 

He's saying that if the issue is unreliable service on the B47, you should just add more service on the B47 (or monitor it better or whatever), rather than creating a seperate route. Don't "run away" by creating a new route.

 

The B55 isn't to seve that new housing. The new route from there will do that.

 

But the point isn't to add service to the route, per say, it's to add service to the corridors.

[checkmatechamp13]

The B55 isn't to seve that new housing. The new route from there will do that.

 

But the point isn't to add service to the route, per say, it's to add service to the corridors.

 

 

Which new route are you referring to?

 

In any case, it's the same idea. He's basically saying that people along Ralph Avenue have to deal with unreliable service, but instead of combating the problem directly by looking at the B47, you added another route to the corridor. (Because really, while I'd prefer Ralph Avenue to Patchen, I don't see a need for that route past Sutter & Rutland). If you focused on improving the entire B47, you'd benefit people south of Sutter & Rutland as well.

 

I mean, I see his point. And TBH, it's a little hypocritical to say that passengers who need to reach the from SI should just deal with it and wait for the next train when the transfers don't link up, while meanwhile, you have the opposite mindset with the buses. (And I'm not going all VG8 on you where I'm bringing up random ideas from other threads, because it is relevant).

[B35 via Church]

I've been thinking about that new Williamsburg route they've been planning. Since we've all pretty much agreed that the B24 should be split one way or another, what if the Greenpoint Avenue leg of the route were combined with the new Williamsburg route. It could basically go down Franklin Street & Kent/Wythe Avenue, and eventually make its way down to the Marcy Avenue subway station.

 

For the hell of it, I mapped it out. It doesn't look too bad. (But it shouldn't be combined with another route). It sort of "ties together the loose ends" of the B24 & new Williamsburg route, since there isn't a whole lot of activity by the area where they would terminate in Greenpoint. (At least, I don't think)

 

The Q59 would also be rerouted down Marcy Avenue/Rodney Street, rather than Kent/Wythe Avenue like it is now.

 

Yeah, I would do away w/ the Q59 west of WBP.... Bad enough people barely take the B62 @ WBP itself.... Lot of biking & walking going on in that general area (north of WBP & west of the B62 [bedford]).... People in that part of Williamsburg aren't trying to get to/from the or connect to any of the other buses inside WBP - They want the hipster (L)ocal to/from manhattan.....

 

I'm tellin ya, those folks want nothing to do w/ the area around the .... farthest south you'll see most of them go is broadway itself, and it's the areas west of WBP (basically over there by Peter Luger steakhouse, westward).... What I'm getting at is, it wouldn't be optimal sending the 24 to WBP on that end (yes, I know... given the circumstances, there's nowhere else it can be sent that would make any iota of sense)....

 

It's part of the reason why I would simply have the B24 be a Greenpoint av shuttle (I haven't touched my brooklyn proposal map since), instead of sending it down to WBP, since I know it would be unrealistic to send it into manhattan (which would probably be the most optimal for those folks).....

 

 

* side note.... It's time for the B48 to get sent to Sunnyside IMO..... I rode the thing everyday last week, varying times (monday-friday), and all but one time did someone ride it east of manhattan av; we both took it to the last stop (buses are detoured on norman instead of running on nassau, but still)...

Edited November 15, 2012 by B35 via Church

[B35 via Church]

I may as well split the original / above post...

 

 

 

B19: Borough Park-Williamsburg

 

One might ask, is this posed to be an alternative to the B110? No, it's not, and I wouldn't expect anyone to use this route over that one. The B19 is mainly a coverage/supplemental route. It provides coverage to the former 62nd Street half of the B23, and supplements the B12, B46, B47, and other routes. It would be mostly infrequent, but it would draw riders who currently transfer from other route to the B12 to reach Kings County and Downstate Hospitals.

 

MAP

Any comments?

 

I'm looking at that "B19" or whatever, and outside of giving 16th av *some* bus service, I don't see what you're trying to remedy/resolve with such a route.... The B12 & the B46 doesn't need supplements, and the B47 needs "help" south of the , not north of it....

 

 

....I was talking about the B12. It has terrible bunching

Pre-2010, I would agree 100% w/ the assessment here.....

 

Current date though.... Yes, the bunching is apparent, but it doesn't warrant being deemed as terrible anymore... It's gotten much better.

And there aren't near as many empty buses (either direction) either.

 

 

....No clarkson to remsen and linden is a more direct non duplicative routing yes it will use cortelyou to boro park replacing B23 on some trips.

 

Dude linden blvd to clarkson and boro park is central brooklyn. It is via clarkson ave and linden blvd as a LTD on linden. Duplicating B47 is a sad excuse to avoid fixing the problems directly. Deal with your problems instead of running away from them behind some new redundant route. That isn't that unique anyway.

 

Although you speak metaphorically, I have to agree with your point here.... Creating new supplementary routes when you can just use those same physical buses to boost service on an (established) problematic route will go much farther in nipping the original problem in the bud, instead of adding service along portions of said corridor that eventually goes on to serve some entirely different areas where folks aren't even tryna get to in any grand scale.....

 

In plain english, it's wasteful....

It's not much more than a band-aid solution not even covering the entire wound....

Edited November 15, 2012 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

* side note.... It's time for the B48 to get sent to Sunnyside IMO..... I rode the thing everyday last week, varying times (monday-friday), and all but one time did someone ride it east of manhattan av; we both took it to the last stop (buses are detoured on norman instead of running on nassau, but still)...

 

 

Just to be sure, it would take the B48 route, and then turn onto Metropolitan and cover the B24, right?

 

Out of curiosity, how much of the B24 ridership comes from those PJs over by Morgan Avenue (I forget the name)? And how is ridership along each leg of the route? (I assume it's relatively low in general). And how many people get off at the versus the ?

[B35 via Church]

Just to be sure, it would take the B48 route, and then turn onto Metropolitan and cover the B24, right?

 

Out of curiosity, how much of the B24 ridership comes from those PJs over by Morgan Avenue (I forget the name)? And how is ridership along each leg of the route? (I assume it's relatively low in general). And how many people get off at the versus the ?

 

hmm...

 

- You mean what I would do w/ the B48?

Nah, I would turn 48's on Meeker off Lorimer & have it run straight towards the kuh-shush-ko bridge (Lol), on in to Queens...

 

- people do take 24's b/w the cooper houses (those pj's you're referring to) & the (J)/WBP... from what I notice though, it's moreso school kids than adults.... more adults I see taking 24's to/from those pj's moreso take the (graham or lorimer... most get off the 24 for the L at graham though).... Not sure if this answers that question....

 

- ridership on each leg.... being general, the williamsburg spur sees more people...

middays, greenpoint spur is very weak (peak hrs, different story).... williamsburg spur sees way more people than the greenpoint spur during midday hours..... williamsburg spur middays isn't all that different/drastic from williamsburg spur usage during peak hrs.... greenpoint spur during the rush is similar in usage to the williamsburg spur..... Hope that wasn't confusing....

 

- B24 usage to the subways in Brooklyn.... I'd venture to say 60/40, to (J)/M/Z....

[Threxx]

Yeah, I would do away w/ the Q59 west of WBP.... Bad enough people barely take the B62 @ WBP itself.... Lot of biking & walking going on in that general area (north of WBP & west of the B62 [bedford]).... People in that part of Williamsburg aren't trying to get to/from the or connect to any of the other buses inside WBP - They want the hipster (L)ocal to/from manhattan.....

 

I'm tellin ya, those folks want nothing to do w/ the area around the .... farthest south you'll see most of them go is broadway itself, and it's the areas west of WBP (basically over there by Peter Luger steakhouse, westward).... What I'm getting at is, it wouldn't be optimal sending the 24 to WBP on that end (yes, I know... given the circumstances, there's nowhere else it can be sent that would make any iota of sense)....

 

It's part of the reason why I would simply have the B24 be a Greenpoint av shuttle (I haven't touched my brooklyn proposal map since), instead of sending it down to WBP, since I know it would be unrealistic to send it into manhattan (which would probably be the most optimal for those folks).....

 

 

* side note.... It's time for the B48 to get sent to Sunnyside IMO..... I rode the thing everyday last week, varying times (monday-friday), and all but one time did someone ride it east of manhattan av; we both took it to the last stop (buses are detoured on norman instead of running on nassau, but still)...

 

 

I disagree, if they had the option to connect to the in Woodside, I think they'd use it, as it's a better connection to Midtown, which is where they ultimately end up anyway... I agree with checkmate's plan.

 

And yes, that's why my B48 plan calls for an extension south and a re-route to Sunnyside to the north.

 

As for my B55 (which isn't referred to in the above post) I was reffering to the new Spring Creek-ENY/Broadway Jct route the MTA is proposing. The B55 doesn't need to make more stops than I marked.

[B35 via Church]

I disagree, if they had the option to connect to the in Woodside, I think they'd use it, as it's a better connection to Midtown, which is where they ultimately end up anyway... I agree with checkmate's plan.

 

And yes, that's why my B48 plan calls for an extension south and a re-route to Sunnyside to the north.

 

As for my B55 (which isn't referred to in the above post) I was reffering to the new Spring Creek-ENY/Broadway Jct route the MTA is proposing. The B55 doesn't need to make more stops than I marked.

 

The B55 doesn't need to make more stops than you marked?

Dude, for one, I don't have the slightest idea of what B55 you're even talking about....

 

....and two, what is it you're disagreeing with exactly?

 

Checkmate's plan is basically what I proposed the B24 do a while back (which is solely, the current B24 greenpoint portion from QB), plus an extension via wythe/kent, to/from WBP.... Nothing was said about the , period, but especially to Woodside, in my post to checkmate for you to even disagree with...... I don't even know why you're bringing that up to me now, to tell the truth.

 

As far as what you would do with the B48, well cool beans.....

[Threxx]

The B55 doesn't need to make more stops than you marked?

Dude, for one, I don't have the slightest idea of what B55 you're even talking about....

 

 

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=213458373195564989412.0004ce7c590f8d241708f&msa=0