Bee Line, Ct. Transit and Northern suburbs bus proposal thread

[qjtransitmaster]

- Frequency enhancement.... Are you talking about the full BL-13 or the short turn BL-13 b/w Tarrytown & Port Chester?

 

- Too much duplication on 119?

Don't be ridiculous, that's like saying there's too much duplication on 495 w/ all the buses entering Port Authority....

How else do you expect all those buses from the west to get to Downtown White Plains....

 

- BL-14 needs to be streamlined? Huh?

With what exactly?

 

- BL-15.... ehh, it's more or less backup to the BL-14, may as well keep the thing around.... Although I will admit the route could maybe run along the Taconic b/w 133 & Underhill, to get to Yorktown Hgts, Cortlandt Town Center, and Peekskill proper to speed up the trip.....

 

- The BL-10 I don't have a problem with... I think the BL-11 is the route that not only needs to be re-done, but become defunct (and is worse off than the 10 btw).... Turn those trips into 14's that begin/end at MNRR Croton-Harmon, towards White Plains.... The BL-77, while I happen to agree, what can you even do with that route? I highly doubt having it serve more of Putnam would help, unfortunately....

 

- What makes the BL-19 "WTF" worthy? Between Ossining & Mt. Kisco, that route is an absolute lifeline.....

The W 6 &3 are ok to an extent. Tell me more about how the BL-19 is used? 

[B35 via Church]

Tell me more about how the BL-19 is used? 

Lol.... I thought the 19 was "err, WTF" worthy.... Come to find out you don't even know how it's used.....

 

....And another thing.... If you're not gonna answer my questions, I'm going to intentionally not answer yours from now on....

Tired of asking you questions, only for you to ask more questions, instead of answering what's asked of you...

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Finally getting around to this post....

 

I get what you're trying to do & agree with it in general..... Good proposal.

 

Getting down to some specifics.... I wouldn't bother having the 77 serve WCC; I'd have buses go from 119/100 straight to WMC (this would take ppl. off BL-40's, if it's scheduled to come before the 40 @ the transcenter, that is) like the Leprechanun connection bus does..... I agree w/ using Woods rd instead of plaza rd E/W, but having buses directly serve the Halpern Bldg. is unnecessary (keep buses along emergency rd).... Having it directly serve Pace is a good idea, but I wouldn't just stop at Pace for that general area.... What I'd propose, would go hand in hand w/ making it a little more of a variant to the BL-15 b/w it & WP.... 

 

I'm not all that familar with Carmel, but I think it's time for the 77 to head elsewhere in Carmel (not exactly sure where though).... Everytime I look around, they keep cutting parking spaces @ Carmel bowl.... Now it's down to like 10, from 30 (used to be 60 something just 2 years ago)....

 

Looking at your proposal there, coming to think of it, there's a few other things I think an expanded 77 should do... I definitely wouldn't have it utilizing as much of the Taconic as it currently does (as that's a large part of the problem), nor as much as you'd (still) would..... The "Taconic Express" is not much more than a brand (name) (so to speak) to allure folks into taking the thing..... But the fact of the matter is (as you said), the service area is way too small.... It still gets its riders of course, but as QJT alluded to, this poor thing is struggling.....

 

I'm going to make this easier for myself.....

All stops are not shown, but here's a map of what I think should maybe be done (in respect to your proposal)....

 

>> MAP Here <<

(just look at the lime green line)

Alright, I was kinda having debating whether to run into the two areas you mentioned (WCC and the Halpern Building). Seems like servicing Plesantville MNRR would work out as well. 

 

As for the 77 running somewhere else in Carmel, I was thinking to Shoprite plaza (I think there's enough spaces there, a bit more than Carmel Bowl. It seems more of an active place, and it would serve the village of Carmel directly.

 

Also, I assume with the rerouting the 77 into Yorktown, that it would make stops. I just want to know what the new stops would be between Jefferson Valley and FDR.

[qjtransitmaster]

Lol.... I thought the 19 was "err, WTF" worthy.... Come to find out you don't even know how it's used.....

 

....And another thing.... If you're not gonna answer my questions, I'm going to intentionally not answer yours from now on....

Tired of asking you questions, only for you to ask more questions, instead of answering what's asked of you...

wtf ok I will tell you one it's frequency and two U shape structure and indirect routing to ossining plus it must be a lifeline since it's the only bus there. Last I took it people used it between mt kisco or maybe kantonah to Pleasantville then a new set of riders and the handful of remaining ones took it to ossining. I have seen full 19 trips by the way when I took MNRR up there. However there are several short turns after 5pm or 4 pm don't remember the exact schedule but it was shocking.

 

Alright, I was kinda having debating whether to run into the two areas you mentioned (WCC and the Halpern Building). Seems like servicing Plesantville MNRR would work out as well. 

 

As for the 77 running somewhere else in Carmel, I was thinking to Shoprite plaza (I think there's enough spaces there, a bit more than Carmel Bowl. It seems more of an active place, and it would serve the village of Carmel directly.

 

Also, I assume with the rerouting the 77 into Yorktown, that it would make stops. I just want to know what the new stops would be between Jefferson Valley and FDR.

once upon a time in the early 2000s 77 served Yorktown.

[B35 via Church]

Alright, I was kinda having debating whether to run into the two areas you mentioned (WCC and the Halpern Building). Seems like servicing Plesantville MNRR would work out as well. 

 

As for the 77 running somewhere else in Carmel, I was thinking to Shoprite plaza (I think there's enough spaces there, a bit more than Carmel Bowl. It seems more of an active place, and it would serve the village of Carmel directly.

 

Also, I assume with the rerouting the 77 into Yorktown, that it would make stops. I just want to know what the new stops would be between Jefferson Valley and FDR.

Carmel suggestion sounds good to me.... It's a similar situation w/ the n21/27 in Glen Cove, as far as that goes....

 

As for your question to my suggestion, there wouldn't be any new stops b/w FDR P&R & Jefferson Valley (mall)......

Why would you think there would be, when JVM would be used as a P&R....

 

I'll just get right to it, b/c I get what you're alluding to..... It's not an issue of having new stops b/w FDR P&R & JVM.....

I would not have the route running on the Taconic b/w FDR & rt.6, because it's quicker to just have the route run up 132 & up that local road to get to the lone/current bus stop (BL-16) inside Jefferson Valley..... Doing Taconic > Rt 6 > Jefferson Valley bus stop (sears) is circuitous (if your proposal would have buses serving the mall, you have the blue placemarker there, so IDK).... It's bad enough that you have to backtrack to get to the Somers Commons 77 stop (which nothing can be done about, since rt 6 is only 1 (busy) lane in that area).....

 

That's the idea, chief.....

 

wtf ok I will tell you one it's frequency and two U shape structure and indirect routing to ossining plus it must be a lifeline since it's the only bus there. Last I took it people used it between mt kisco or maybe kantonah to Pleasantville then a new set of riders and the handful of remaining ones took it to ossining. I have seen full 19 trips by the way when I took MNRR up there. However there are several short turns after 5pm or 4 pm don't remember the exact schedule but it was shocking.

I got news for you.... That route carries more than the 13 out of Ossining! Most those folks (Ossining) take it to Pleasantville.

You have those that ride from Pleasantville & Chappaqua that ride it up to Mt. Kisco.....

 

If you try to make the 19 more direct b/w Ossining & Mt Kisco (meaning, running it along 133), en route to Katonah, you may as well kill that route - b/c it is not the majority of folks riding 19's from Ossining to Mt Kisco & beyond.... Having the 19 bypass Pleasantville & Chappaqua is pointless......

 

I don't wanna hear about frequency, when that argument can be raised for any of the north of white plains routes - that's the easy argument to make.... As far as the U shaped routing, when you get that deep into the suburbs, you of all people should know that means absolutely nothing.... It is all about the connecting of sought after townships/villages/etc. to one another - and for the 19 to do so with Ossining, Pleasantville, and Mt. Kisco only proves that point.... Past Mt. Kisco, is really nothing more than coverage.....

 

We are not talking about urban/grid-like street configuration here....

 

SPEEEEEED means nothing if the buses can't garner a decent enough riderbase..... You really gotta get off that whole bit.

[qjtransitmaster]

Carmel suggestion sounds good to me.... It's a similar situation w/ the n21/27 in Glen Cove, as far as that goes....

 

As for your question to my suggestion, there wouldn't be any new stops b/w FDR P&R & Jefferson Valley (mall)......

Why would you think there would be, when JVM would be used as a P&R....

 

I'll just get right to it, b/c I get what you're alluding to..... It's not an issue of having new stops b/w FDR P&R & JVM.....

I would not have the route running on the Taconic b/w FDR & rt.6, because it's quicker to just have the route run up 132 & up that local road to get to the lone/current bus stop (BL-16) inside Jefferson Valley..... Doing Taconic > Rt 6 > Jefferson Valley bus stop (sears) is circuitous (if your proposal would have buses serving the mall, you have the blue placemarker there, so IDK).... It's bad enough that you have to backtrack to get to the Somers Commons 77 stop (which nothing can be done about, since rt 6 is only 1 (busy) lane in that area).....

 

That's the idea, chief.....

 

I got news for you.... That route carries more than the 13 out of Ossining! Most those folks (Ossining) take it to Pleasantville.

You have those that ride from Pleasantville & Chappaqua that ride it up to Mt. Kisco.....

 

If you try to make the 19 more direct b/w Ossining & Mt Kisco (meaning, running it along 133), en route to Katonah, you may as well kill that route - b/c it is not the majority of folks riding 19's from Ossining to Mt Kisco & beyond.... Having the 19 bypass Pleasantville & Chappaqua is pointless......

 

I don't wanna hear about frequency, when that argument can be raised for any of the north of white plains routes - that's the easy argument to make.... As far as the U shaped routing, when you get that deep into the suburbs, you of all people should know that means absolutely nothing.... It is all about the connecting of sought after townships/villages/etc. to one another - and for the 19 to do so with Ossining, Pleasantville, and Mt. Kisco only proves that point.... Past Mt. Kisco, is really nothing more than coverage.....

 

We are not talking about urban/grid-like street configuration here....

 

SPEEEEEED means nothing if the buses can't garner a decent enough riderbase..... You really gotta get off that whole bit.

I had a feeling that was the case. You do have a point I guess between Pleasantville and katonah it's difficult to compete with the MNRR especially with MTA adding service all the time so it makes sense that pleasantville to ossining segment would get the bulk of riders. Question is a Mt kisco to Tarrytown route were created to replace the W13 on rte 9 and use rte 133 or parts of W15's route between ossining and katonah how well would it do?  On a separate note. Later :What if there was also a rte 35 crosstown rte connecting Yorktown to katonah  and peakskill eating parts of W15.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Carmel suggestion sounds good to me.... It's a similar situation w/ the n21/27 in Glen Cove, as far as that goes....

 

As for your question to my suggestion, there wouldn't be any new stops b/w FDR P&R & Jefferson Valley (mall)......

Why would you think there would be, when JVM would be used as a P&R....

 

I'll just get right to it, b/c I get what you're alluding to..... It's not an issue of having new stops b/w FDR P&R & JVM.....

I would not have the route running on the Taconic b/w FDR & rt.6, because it's quicker to just have the route run up 132 & up that local road to get to the lone/current bus stop (BL-16) inside Jefferson Valley..... Doing Taconic > Rt 6 > Jefferson Valley bus stop (sears) is circuitous (if your proposal would have buses serving the mall, you have the blue placemarker there, so IDK).... It's bad enough that you have to backtrack to get to the Somers Commons 77 stop (which nothing can be done about, since rt 6 is only 1 (busy) lane in that area).....

 

That's the idea, chief.....

Oh okay, was just wondering. It's better that it saves time to JVM. Shouldn't be a PITA for that one discontinued stop (probably didn't get any many riders to begin with). 

 

Anyways, I have another proposal regarding the 60 (a revamp of the schedule on Sunday in both directions)

 

Buses would leave The Bronx to White Plains at:

8:20 AM, 9:20 AM, 10:20 AM, 11:20 AM, 12:20 PM, 1:20 PM, 2:20 PM, 3:20 PM, 4:20 PM, 5:20 PM, 6:20 PM

 

Buses would leave White Plains to the Bronx at 

9:50 AM, 10:50 AM, 11:50 AM, 12:50 PM, 1:50 PM, 2:50 PM, 3:50 PM, 4:50 PM, 5:50 PM, 6:50 PM, 7:50 PM

 

(Bus Runtime in either direction: 80 minutes)

 

Buses would leave The Bronx to Mamaroneck at:

9:50 AM, 10:50 AM, 11:50 AM, 12:50 PM, 1:50 PM, 2:50 PM, 3:50 PM, 4:50 PM, 

 

Buses would leave Mamaroneck to the Bronx at:

9:45 AM, 10:45 AM 11:45 AM, 12:45 PM, 1:45 PM, 2:45 PM, 3:45 PM, 4:45 PM

(Total Runtime in either direction: 65 minutes)

 

Buses would leave New Rochelle to the Bronx at:

9:07 AM, 10:07 AM

 

Buses leave The Bronx to New Rochelle at:

5:50 PM, 7:20 PM

[qjtransitmaster]

Oh okay, was just wondering. It's better that it saves time to JVM. Shouldn't be a PITA for that one discontinued stop (probably didn't get any many riders to begin with). 

 

Anyways, I have another proposal regarding the 60 (a revamp of the schedule on Sunday in both directions)

 

Buses would leave The Bronx to White Plains at:

8:20 AM, 9:20 AM, 10:20 AM, 11:20 AM, 12:20 PM, 1:20 PM, 2:20 PM, 3:20 PM, 4:20 PM, 5:20 PM, 6:20 PM

 

Buses would leave White Plains to the Bronx at 

9:50 AM, 10:50 AM, 11:50 AM, 12:50 PM, 1:50 PM, 2:50 PM, 3:50 PM, 4:50 PM, 5:50 PM, 6:50 PM, 7:50 PM

 

(Bus Runtime in either direction: 80 minutes)

 

Buses would leave The Bronx to Mamaroneck at:

9:50 AM, 10:50 AM, 11:50 AM, 12:50 PM, 1:50 PM, 2:50 PM, 3:50 PM, 4:50 PM, 

 

Buses would leave Mamaroneck to the Bronx at:

9:45 AM, 10:45 AM 11:45 AM, 12:45 PM, 1:45 PM, 2:45 PM, 3:45 PM, 4:45 PM

(Total Runtime in either direction: 65 minutes)

 

Buses would leave New Rochelle to the Bronx at:

9:07 AM, 10:07 AM

 

Buses leave The Bronx to New Rochelle at:

5:50 PM, 7:20 PM

You do realize this is a Westchester bus right? And this schedule benefits the bronx more than it even should. Mamoroneck short turns are an outright insult to the Westchester ridership. Local service in the bronx is better off as an MTA service. With 60 closed door. The current schedule makes one wonder where their priorities lie it's not their job to make up for the MTA's mistakes.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

You do realize this is a Westchester bus right? And this schedule benefits the bronx more than it even should. Mamoroneck short turns are an outright insult to the Westchester ridership. Local service in the bronx is better off as an MTA service. With 60 closed door. The current schedule makes one wonder where their priorities lie it's not their job to make up for the MTA's mistakes.

As if Westchester people don't utilize the service to the Bronx.

 

You do realize that this serves almost the same amount of service as the current 60 (look at the Mamaroneck short turns on Sunday). It should tell you something by now. Mamaroneck isn't too close to the Bronx to begin with, travel wise and distance wise (to an extent). Without the riders going to the Bronx, this route would not have the service, nor riders it has. I don't even think it would even be running on Sundays. 

By that logic, the 1 & 2 are also an insult to riders, where point blank is, there isn't the same amount of ridership for those routes North of Yonkers. Same thing here, not as much demand to White Plains compared to points south. So the "outright insult" portion is nothing.

[qjtransitmaster]

As if Westchester people don't utilize the service to the Bronx.

 

You do realize that this serves almost the same amount of service as the current 60 (look at the Mamaroneck short turns on Sunday). It should tell you something by now. Mamaroneck isn't too close to the Bronx to begin with, travel wise and distance wise (to an extent). Without the riders going to the Bronx, this route would not have the service, nor riders it has. I don't even think it would even be running on Sundays. 

By that logic, the 1 & 2 are also an insult to riders, where point blank is, there isn't the same amount of ridership for those routes North of Yonkers. Same thing here, not as much demand to White Plains compared to points south. So the "outright insult" portion is nothing.

W60 is an inter county route it has 2 ridership groups or more. The 1&2 carry people to and from Westchester and don't do ridiculous open door in the bronx. Plus have multiple ridership groups.

On a side note: you know anything about the W14& 19 + ossining 13? Or the W14's many faces?

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

W60 is an inter county route it has 2 ridership groups or more. The 1&2 carry people to and from Westchester and don't do ridiculous open door in the bronx. Plus have multiple ridership groups.

On a side note: you know anything about the W14& 19 + ossining 13? Or the W14's many faces?

Yeah, and why do you think the MTA has not given a damn about running service on the full length of Boston Road, while bee-line buses have an open-door policy.

 

W14's many faces, lolwut?

[qjtransitmaster]

Yeah, and why do you think the MTA has not given a damn about running service on the full length of Boston Road, while bee-line buses have an open-door policy.

 

W14's many faces, lolwut?

Seriously no need to be childish you are an adult right? Not continuing this moving on. Anybody else have a better picture of the W14 last I used it it had many people useing it for short distances with very few LD riders.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Seriously no need to be childish you are an adult right? Not continuing this moving on. Anybody else have a better picture of the W14 last I used it it had many people useing it for short distances with very few LD riders.

I'm not being childish, I'm telling it to you it straight up (which you for some reason, fail to see). Show me where I was being childish....

[B35 via Church]

I had a feeling that was the case. You do have a point I guess between Pleasantville and katonah it's difficult to compete with the MNRR especially with MTA adding service all the time so it makes sense that pleasantville to ossining segment would get the bulk of riders.

 

Question is a Mt kisco to Tarrytown route were created to replace the W13 on rte 9 and use rte 133 or parts of W15's route between ossining and katonah how well would it do?  On a separate note. Later :What if there was also a rte 35 crosstown rte connecting Yorktown to katonah  and peakskill eating parts of W15.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think the 13 should run to Ossining..... I would have most trips end at Tarrytown, with a select number of trips running up to Sleepy Hollow (Phelps Memorial) every hour (the via Benedict av trips)..... The BL-14 should have a service increase of about  2 or 3 more trips per day ending at Ossining.....

 

As for your question.... a Mt. Kisco - Tarrytown route via Ossining utilizing rt. 9 & rt 133 I can't see working out.... There's no demand for direct service b/w Mt. Kisco & Ossining, and the only real reason you get anyone along route 9 taking the BL-13 (for the most part) is to get to rt 119 (and/or downtown white plains)....

 

.....Which explains the BL-11... Considering that route's usage, I would still try to phase that route out for BL-14 service..... I would make the BL-14 the workhorse route (so to speak), north of white plains.... Hell, there's enough workhorse routes south of white plains (fitting that all of them run to the Bronx... go figure)...

 

So in laymen's, a Mt. Kisco - Tarrytown route via what you're asking about, would carry air all day basically....

 

As for a rt 35 "crosstown", at minimum, that route better start at Cortlandt Town Center... Or else it wouldn't have a chance.

That would easily bring the rest of Westchester county to that shopping center......

 

 

Oh okay, was just wondering. It's better that it saves time to JVM. Shouldn't be a PITA for that one discontinued stop (probably didn't get any many riders to begin with).

Which discontinued stop is this now?

 

You do realize this is a Westchester bus right? And this schedule benefits the bronx more than it even should. Mamoroneck short turns are an outright insult to the Westchester ridership. Local service in the bronx is better off as an MTA service. With 60 closed door. The current schedule makes one wonder where their priorities lie it's not their job to make up for the MTA's mistakes.

Well, consider that a considerable chunk of BL-60 patronage emanate from the Bronx......

 

Putting it another way..... If the MTA handled Boston road service the way Bee-Line does; there's a good chance the 60 would end in New Roc, the 61 would have less service than it does now, and the 62 wouldn't exist...... the 60 & the 61 would have similar ridership levels like the 30 or something......

 

On a side note: you know anything about the W14& 19 + ossining 13? Or the W14's many faces?

What more do you want to know about the BL-19 that I didn't mention in an earlier post?

 

I (also) don't know what you mean by the many faces of the BL-14....

 

.....Anybody else have a better picture of the W14 last I used it it had many people useing it for short distances with very few LD riders.

Now I think you're flat out lying.... No need for that, just ask how is the BL-14 used.....

 

"Many people" do not use that route for short distances.... The part of the route where you'll get riders using it short(er) distances, is b/w Cortlandt town center & Peekskill proper.... South of Peekskill, riders utilize that route for long distances..... Been fanning the BL-14 for too long to know what you're saying there is hogwash.....

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Which discontinued stop is this now?

 

Well, consider that a considerable chunk of BL-60 patronage emanate from the Bronx......

 

Putting it another way..... If the MTA handled Boston road service the way Bee-Line does; there's a good chance the 60 would end in New Roc, the 61 would have less service than it does now, and the 62 wouldn't exist...... the 60 & the 61 would have similar ridership levels like the 30 or something......

The discontinued stop is Route 132 and E Main Street, one block before hitting Route 6.

[qjtransitmaster]

To be perfectly honest, I don't think the 13 should run to Ossining..... I would have most trips end at Tarrytown, with a select number of trips running up to Sleepy Hollow (Phelps Memorial) every hour (the via Benedict av trips)..... The BL-14 should have a service increase of about  2 or 3 more trips per day ending at Ossining.....

 

As for your question.... a Mt. Kisco - Tarrytown route via Ossining utilizing rt. 9 & rt 133 I can't see working out.... There's no demand for direct service b/w Mt. Kisco & Ossining, and the only real reason you get anyone along route 9 taking the BL-13 (for the most part) is to get to rt 119 (and/or downtown white plains)....

 

.....Which explains the BL-11... Considering that route's usage, I would still try to phase that route out for BL-14 service..... I would make the BL-14 the workhorse route (so to speak), north of white plains.... Hell, there's enough workhorse routes south of white plains (fitting that all of them run to the Bronx... go figure)...

 

So in laymen's, a Mt. Kisco - Tarrytown route via what you're asking about, would carry air all day basically....

 

As for a rt 35 "crosstown", at minimum, that route better start at Cortlandt Town Center... Or else it wouldn't have a chance.

That would easily bring the rest of Westchester county to that shopping center......

 

 

Which discontinued stop is this now?

 

Well, consider that a considerable chunk of BL-60 patronage emanate from the Bronx......

 

Putting it another way..... If the MTA handled Boston road service the way Bee-Line does; there's a good chance the 60 would end in New Roc, the 61 would have less service than it does now, and the 62 wouldn't exist...... the 60 & the 61 would have similar ridership levels like the 30 or something......

 

What more do you want to know about the BL-19 that I didn't mention in an earlier post?

 

I (also) don't know what you mean by the many faces of the BL-14....

 

Now I think you're flat out lying.... No need for that, just ask how is the BL-14 used.....

 

"Many people" do not use that route for short distances.... The part of the route where you'll get riders using it short(er) distances, is b/w Cortlandt town center & Peekskill proper.... South of Peekskill, riders utilize that route for long distances..... Been fanning the BL-14 for too long to know what you're saying there is hogwash.....

That's what I meant about the W14 actually around peeskill.  The rte 35 crosstown I vision will serve Cortlandt town center actually I guess we are on the same page. Ok what makes the W15 so lightly used other than frequency? Ohh actually the mt kisco Tarrytown route I asked about would follow the routing of the W15 to rte 9a then via rte 133 to ossining and rte 9 to Tarrytown.

[GreatOne2k]

Anyone think that the 61 should run on Sunday to at least Larchmont (if not Port Chester) on 60 minute headways?

Weekday midday (and maybe Saturday) 61 service could run every 30 minutes to/from Larchmont.

 

The 26 and 52 are other possible routes that could gain Sunday service

[B35 via Church]

.....The rte 35 crosstown I vision will serve Cortlandt town center actually I guess we are on the same page.

 

Ok what makes the W15 so lightly used other than frequency?

 

Ohh actually the mt kisco Tarrytown route I asked about would follow the routing of the W15 to rte 9a then via rte 133 to ossining and rte 9 to Tarrytown.

So where DO you have this rt. 35 crosstown running between exactly? What 2 terminals?

 

The 15 is too indirect for Peekskill riders, for starters.... Short of Peekskill & past Pleasantville, the route doesn't see much of any riders... Meaning, a long (unofficial) non-stop portion (one of the things I like about the ride)....

[qjtransitmaster]

Anyone think that the 61 should run on Sunday to at least Larchmont (if not Port Chester) on 60 minute headways?

Weekday midday (and maybe Saturday) 61 service could run every 30 minutes to/from Larchmont.

 

The 26 and 52 are other possible routes that could gain Sunday service

Instafix just extend the 7 to larchmont via 5th a.k.a 61's routing. More to 61 is just wasteful. Only reason I used to use it was MTA'S broken rush hour setup with Harrison Shorturns. 61 doesn't need Sunday service outside the parts it shares with the 60 it carries air mostly there are rare occasions when it bucks that but it barely runs for a reason.

[qjtransitmaster]

So where DO you have this rt. 35 crosstown running between exactly? What 2 terminals?

 

The 15 is too indirect for Peekskill riders, for starters.... Short of Peekskill & past Pleasantville, the route doesn't see much of any riders... Meaning, a long (unofficial) non-stop portion (one of the things I like about the ride)....

I see I can see why now that I think about it. As for rte 35 crosstown either peekskill or verplanck to port chester via 684 to armonk and the airport and king street OR to rye/playland via SUNY purchase I am not decided on the final route but if it doesn't skip SUNY purchase it would look like a local bus version of the old 84 only difference is it won't bother with white plains or duplicate MNRR like the 84 did. Some trivia for ya I met a guy who worked for bee-line and he told me about why the 84 got axed which was due to the fact most riders in Putnam county used it as a shuttle to MNRR rather than stay on to white plains which meant 84 was going on the highway empty and skipping major destinations as well.

[40MntVrn]

Putting it another way..... If the MTA handled Boston road service the way Bee-Line does; there's a good chance the 60 would end in New Roc, the 61 would have less service than it does now, and the 62 wouldn't exist...... the 60 & the 61 would have similar ridership levels like the 30 or something......

 

As a person who used the 62 frequently, I can't say this is true. Yes, ridership would dip in the bronx if the MTA handled Boston Road differently, but there are still people who rely on the 60/61/62 who need their destinations north, and sometimes Metro North can't foot that bill.

 

 

Instafix just extend the 7 to larchmont via 5th a.k.a 61's routing. More to 61 is just wasteful. Only reason I used to use it was MTA'S broken rush hour setup with Harrison Shorturns. 61 doesn't need Sunday service outside the parts it shares with the 60 it carries air mostly there are rare occasions when it bucks that but it barely runs for a reason.

 

The 7 is perfect as it is. It's a crosstown transfer bus.

[B35 via Church]

Instafix just extend the 7 to larchmont via 5th a.k.a 61's routing. More to 61 is just wasteful. Only reason I used to use it was MTA'S broken rush hour setup with Harrison Shorturns. 61 doesn't need Sunday service outside the parts it shares with the 60 it carries air mostly there are rare occasions when it bucks that but it barely runs for a reason.

New Rochelle, Mt Vernon, and Yonkers patrons would like to have a word with you.... The BL-7 is "the" crosstown route in lower Westchester..... Larchmont would do nothing for it...

 

....and don't suggest that Yonkers-New Roc' (or vice versa) riders take the BL-30 either, because that route is much too slow making the myriad of turns it makes to get b/w the two points (aside from the fact that it doesn't serve Mt. Vernon; which is about as perfect a midway point of a route you can have (regarding the BL-7)).....

 

I agree w/ not adding more service on the BL-61 though.....

 

I see I can see why now that I think about it. As for rte 35 crosstown either peekskill or verplanck to port chester via 684 to armonk and the airport and king street OR to rye/playland via SUNY purchase I am not decided on the final route but if it doesn't skip SUNY purchase it would look like a local bus version of the old 84 only difference is it won't bother with white plains or duplicate MNRR like the 84 did. Some trivia for ya I met a guy who worked for bee-line and he told me about why the 84 got axed which was due to the fact most riders in Putnam county used it as a shuttle to MNRR rather than stay on to white plains which meant 84 was going on the highway empty and skipping major destinations as well.

I don't know why I bother with you sometimes;. A route ending in Verplanck heading east...... smdh...

The rest of that babble about 684 & armonk & the airport (from a route ending in peekskill or verplanck) is just plain stupid......

 

As a person who used the 62 frequently, I can't say this is true. Yes, ridership would dip in the bronx if the MTA handled Boston Road differently, but there are still people who rely on the 60/61/62 who need their destinations north, and sometimes Metro North can't foot that bill.

Original post should have read:

"....there's a good chance the 61 would end in New Roc, the 60 would have less service than it does now, and the 62 wouldn't exist"

(in other words, direct fordham-white plains service would be retained... just at a lesser rate/frequency)

 

Regardless, the basic point I was making is that barebone (or pretty dam close to it) bee-line service would exist along Boston road, towards Fordham.... Metro North had nothing to do with what I was trying to convey.... Also, it isn't a matter of true or false, due to it being an opinion... What you seem to be alluding to, about (the amt. of) Bronx riders riding to Westchester is not what I'm disputing; my point isn't based on ridership... I get the sense that you think I'm saying that the BL-62 is hardly use - since you mention what you can't deem/say as true (which isn't what I was getting at all, just to be clear.... I know those 62's are used)....

 

My point is based on the fact that Bee-line fills a void (if you will) along Boston Road, and they are getting that much more riders in/from the Bronx b/c of it - So much so that they use BL-61 service to supplement BL-60 service b/w Fordham & downtown New Roc' (at the very least)' or Mamaroneck (where the two routes diverge)... Smart move on their part.... They successfully exploited a gap/hole/whatever you wanna call it.....

 

side note: I find that b/w Mamaroneck & Port Chester, the amt. of ppl. riding it to (anywhere) within the Bronx is almost slim to none.... Most those riders are off the bus by Larchmont, coming from the north..... Downtown Mamaroneck is where I would notice a couple riders or so riding out to the Bronx..... That's one of the main reasons I say the 61 is supplemental service, heading to/from the Bronx....

[qjtransitmaster]

As a person who used the 62 frequently, I can't say this is true. Yes, ridership would dip in the bronx if the MTA handled Boston Road differently, but there are still people who rely on the 60/61/62 who need their destinations north, and sometimes Metro North can't foot that bill.

 

 

 

The 7 is perfect as it is. It's a crosstown transfer bus.

Does the 7 have reliability issues? 

[qjtransitmaster]

New Rochelle, Mt Vernon, and Yonkers patrons would like to have a word with you.... The BL-7 is "the" crosstown route in lower Westchester..... Larchmont would do nothing for it...

 

....and don't suggest that Yonkers-New Roc' (or vice versa) riders take the BL-30 either, because that route is much too slow making the myriad of turns it makes to get b/w the two points (aside from the fact that it doesn't serve Mt. Vernon; which is about as perfect a midway point of a route you can have (regarding the BL-7)).....

 

I agree w/ not adding more service on the BL-61 though.....

 

I don't know why I bother with you sometimes;. A route ending in Verplanck heading east...... smdh...

The rest of that babble about 684 & armonk & the airport (from a route ending in peekskill or verplanck) is just plain stupid......

 

Original post should have read:

"....there's a good chance the 61 would end in New Roc, the 60 would have less service than it does now, and the 62 wouldn't exist"

(in other words, direct fordham-white plains service would be retained... just at a lesser rate/frequency)

 

Regardless, the basic point I was making is that barebone (or pretty dam close to it) bee-line service would exist along Boston road, towards Fordham.... Metro North had nothing to do with what I was trying to convey.... Also, it isn't a matter of true or false, due to it being an opinion... What you seem to be alluding to, about (the amt. of) Bronx riders riding to Westchester is not what I'm disputing; my point isn't based on ridership... I get the sense that you think I'm saying that the BL-62 is hardly use - since you mention what you can't deem/say as true (which isn't what I was getting at all, just to be clear.... I know those 62's are used)....

 

My point is based on the fact that Bee-line fills a void (if you will) along Boston Road, and they are getting that much more riders in/from the Bronx b/c of it - So much so that they use BL-61 service to supplement BL-60 service b/w Fordham & downtown New Roc' (at the very least)' or Mamaroneck (where the two routes diverge)... Smart move on their part.... They successfully exploited a gap/hole/whatever you wanna call it.....

 

side note: I find that b/w Mamaroneck & Port Chester, the amt. of ppl. riding it to (anywhere) within the Bronx is almost slim to none.... Most those riders are off the bus by Larchmont, coming from the north..... Downtown Mamaroneck is where I would notice a couple riders or so riding out to the Bronx..... That's one of the main reasons I say the 61 is supplemental service, heading to/from the Bronx....

I was thinking about people from CT who commute to those business parks in rye and a few from different areas in northern Westchester also connections with MNRR allow access to new Rochelle and Greenwich,CT later not so sure. However to be fair WP does have the I-bus and those people can prop up the 77 or fill up 17s to get to that bus for quick access. Now I have some questions how many use 14 in croton vs ossining? I did notice that more Hudson line express trains to Poughkeepsie now stop at ossining and Tarrytown making them look more like LTD stop trains. And frequency has gone way up over the years.

[B35 via Church]

Now I have some questions how many use 14 in croton vs ossining?

 

I did notice that more Hudson line express trains to Poughkeepsie now stop at ossining and Tarrytown making them look more like LTD stop trains. And frequency has gone way up over the years.

Ossining garners more usage on the BL-14......