Via Garibaldi 8 Posted February 8, 2013 Share #26 Posted February 8, 2013 I don't see how this would replace the B83 extension. If they didn't want to use Shore Parkway in the first place, they wouldn't have done it. More likely, they will save money by operating this route by running fewer B6s to New Lots and more to Rockaway Parkway. Of course they won't tell you this. Anyway, I think it is a good idea, but it should run every 20 minutes, not every 30 minutes, which is ridiculous and assures low ridership. Hey you and few others around here have been complaining about them not cutting bus service, so this is what we get... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted February 8, 2013 Share #27 Posted February 8, 2013 Great, all that I said didn't take when I hit the post button? I'm not typing all of what I said again, so this is a shorter version..... I don't see how this would replace the B83 extension. If they didn't want to use Shore Parkway in the first place, they wouldn't have done it. More likely, they will save money by operating this route by running fewer B6s to New Lots and more to Rockaway Parkway. Of course they won't tell you this. Anyway, I think it is a good idea, but it should run every 20 minutes, not every 30 minutes, which is ridiculous and assures low ridership. I do.... You serve more passengers on flatlands than you do on shore pkwy.... The MTA will find a way to serve starrett city & that newly developed area in spring creek with one route.... Today's B83 & the up & coming "B84" would bring gateway riders to the - the 84 would just go about it in a quicker fashion.... They would simply fuse this 84 into the 83 instead of running them both separately if the 84 underperforms.... I don't think the general idea behind the "B84" is a bad one; but I do see where they'd consolidate it with something else - considering the way they chose to run this B84 (according to that map in the OP).... I'm questioning the running of buses on Flatlands... Something's being set up for something else here.... So you seem to think it's with the B6 service-wise (which I have no comment on).... I think it'll be with the B83 routing-wise AND service-wise.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future ENY OP Posted February 9, 2013 Share #28 Posted February 9, 2013 Looks like another B100 or B74 type route. Or Ulmer Park if that's the case. East New York Yes. Easier headway. Ulmer Park (NO). Unless they are willing interline the B6. If they interline. Definitely Ulmer Park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted February 9, 2013 Share #29 Posted February 9, 2013 IMO, there should be a tweaking of the route within Spring Creek...instead of Jerome and then Flatlands, the route should serve Elton and then Vandalia...which would greatly reduce running time in the westbound direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T J Trainman Posted February 9, 2013 Share #30 Posted February 9, 2013 What is it that with these new routes being created that they must have 30 min headways? Why bother?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XcelsiorBoii4888 Posted February 9, 2013 Share #31 Posted February 9, 2013 What is it that with these new routes being created that they must have 30 min headways? Why bother?? Because its A NEW ROUTE...why give a bus 10-15 headways when no one knows about it?...thats wasting gas/buses...it will start off with 30min headways then when the route gets ridership, they will determine the headways then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted February 9, 2013 Share #32 Posted February 9, 2013 Great, all that I said didn't take when I hit the post button? I'm not typing all of what I said again, so this is a shorter version..... I do.... You serve more passengers on flatlands than you do on shore pkwy.... The MTA will find a way to serve starrett city & that newly developed area in spring creek with one route.... Today's B83 & the up & coming "B84" would bring gateway riders to the - the 84 would just go about it in a quicker fashion.... They would simply fuse this 84 into the 83 instead of running them both separately if the 84 underperforms.... I don't think the general idea behind the "B84" is a bad one; but I do see where they'd consolidate it with something else - considering the way they chose to run this B84 (according to that map in the OP).... I'm questioning the running of buses on Flatlands... Something's being set up for something else here.... So you seem to think it's with the B6 service-wise (which I have no comment on).... I think it'll be with the B83 routing-wise AND service-wise.... I'm still not sure what you are getting at by saying they will fuse the B84 into the B83. Anyway I think the main purpose of both the B83 extension and the B84 is to provide local service to Gateway. The transfer to the IRT is secondary. I don't think anyone who uses the B83 to access Gateway would switch to the B84 because of the 30 minute headway even if the ride is shorter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metro CSW Posted February 9, 2013 Author Share #33 Posted February 9, 2013 Hopefully the route will progress more in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted February 9, 2013 Share #34 Posted February 9, 2013 I'm still not sure what you are getting at by saying they will fuse the B84 into the B83. Anyway I think the main purpose of both the B83 extension and the B84 is to provide local service to Gateway. The transfer to the IRT is secondary. I don't think anyone who uses the B83 to access Gateway would switch to the B84 because of the 30 minute headway even if the ride is shorter. Not sure what you're still not sure about.... I'm saying I could see a situation where the MTA would attempt to fuse/combine/consolidate the two routes.... It's how today's B61 park slope - downtown brooklyn (via red hook) was formed, for example..... If this is you playing devil's advocate, let's not waste each other's time..... But if you're seriously unsure, then I'll continue.... I mean, you say you don't think anyone that uses the 83 to gateway would switch to the 84 (if said ppl. are coming off the subway, I actually do, but anyway)... With what I'm saying though, it's the reverse of what you think I'm thinking (judging by that last statement of yours).... Instead of the MTA continuing to run buses b/w gateway & new lots via ashford st, they'd find a way to have gateway mall shoppers & spring creek residents (yes, the same ones this 84 will half-ass serve) take 83's... If said riders need the subway, they'll have to catch it at pennsylvania av (instead of at new lots ).... To boot, I think this is setting up for a "pennsylvania av" route, but at a bit of a cost/detriment to current B83 riders (and B20 riders also).... ^^ In other words, the 83 would be prolonged by taking a different course to get to gateway mall; serving even more riders than what it does now.... They'd still serve starrett, just not the length of it down to seaview; probably loop B83's in starrett somewhere (much like B70's do down in the bay ridge area).... Meaning, buses completely off shore pkwy. I do not see them continuing to run the 83 as is, plus this 84 @ 30 min headways on any long-term basis..... Back to the example of the B61... look at how short-lived that ikea - downtown brooklyn rendition was.... I think this B84 will suffer that very fate.... Let me be crystal clear here too - This is not something I'm proposing.. I do not want the two routes to be combined.... The MTA has the right idea in general w/ this B84, but the execution is rather.... off... If they want to serve those spring creek residents down there better, buses should be taking vandalia instead of flatlands.... If you're still unsure what I'm saying after this point, then don't bother trying to figure it out any further.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted February 9, 2013 Share #35 Posted February 9, 2013 Not sure what you're still not sure about.... I'm saying I could see a situation where the MTA would attempt to fuse/combine/consolidate the two routes.... It's how today's B61 park slope - downtown brooklyn (via red hook) was formed, for example..... If this is you playing devil's advocate, let's not waste each other's time..... But if you're seriously unsure, then I'll continue.... I mean, you say you don't think anyone that uses the 83 to gateway would switch to the 84 (if said ppl. are coming off the subway, I actually do, but anyway)... With what I'm saying though, it's the reverse of what you think I'm thinking (judging by that last statement of yours).... Instead of the MTA continuing to run buses b/w gateway & new lots via ashford st, they'd find a way to have gateway mall shoppers & spring creek residents (yes, the same ones this 84 will half-ass serve) take 83's... If said riders need the subway, they'll have to catch it at pennsylvania av (instead of at new lots ).... To boot, I think this is setting up for a "pennsylvania av" route, but at a bit of a cost/detriment to current B83 riders (and B20 riders also).... ^^ In other words, the 83 would be prolonged by taking a different course to get to gateway mall; serving even more riders than what it does now.... They'd still serve starrett, just not the length of it down to seaview; probably loop B83's in starrett somewhere (much like B70's do down in the bay ridge area).... Meaning, buses completely off shore pkwy. I do not see them continuing to run the 83 as is, plus this 84 @ 30 min headways on any long-term basis..... Back to the example of the B61... look at how short-lived that ikea - downtown brooklyn rendition was.... I think this B84 will suffer that very fate.... Let me be crystal clear here too - This is not something I'm proposing.. I do not want the two routes to be combined.... The MTA has the right idea in general w/ this B84, but the execution is rather.... off... If they want to serve those spring creek residents down there better, buses should be taking vandalia instead of flatlands.... If you're still unsure what I'm saying after this point, then don't bother trying to figure it out any further.... I think I get what you are saying and agree that they are not revealing their entire plan and you may be right about that straight Pennsylvania Av route. I'm not sure you know the history of the B83, so I will tell you. The B83 and the original B84 were started in response to development of Starrett City. The residents needed a way to get to a subway Station. So the B83 was started direct up Pennsylvania to Broadway Junction and the B84 served Canarsie Station. Neither route offered any free transfers. They were viewed solely as feeders to the subway. But Starrett City residents were not satisfied. They needed to get places other than the subway for a single fare. The MTA was not about to change its transfer policies at that time so they combined the B84 with the B6 to provide additional one fare access. (It was not their original intention.) In 1975, when I was at the Department of City Planning, we studied bus routes in East New York and met with Community Board 5. They petitioned the MTA for a new north south route between Pennsylvania Av and Crescent Street because of the gap in north south service. They MTA refused stating there were no suitable streets for a bus route and it would cost too much because they only considered operating costs refusing to project revenue from riders who would use the route, assuming the buses would run empty. The compromise they came back with was to reroute the B83 from Pennslvania to Van Siclen which helped some but also hurt those wanting to just go straight on Pennsylvania which they no longer could do directly. The community was against it but figured it was better than nothing because as all MTA proposals at the time, it was take it or leave everything the way it is. If you are correct that they are setting up a straight Pennsylvania route, then they would have to double the service on the B84 to every 15 minutes and they would do this in conjunction with eliminating the B20. They would say there is no need to run both the B84 and the B6 to New Lots and would reroute it to the Post Office. Then they could say there is no need for the B20. The goal in all this would be to provide fewer route miles, not to improve service, but I think it would be a good change nonetheless. The problem is they are not straight forward by releasing all their intentions at once by making all the changes at the same time. I guess they figure it is easier to get approval by doing it a little at a time, but rewriting those schedules extra times also costs extra money. It should all be done at once if that is their plan. But they are too timid, to make a group of changes at once like I had them do in 1978. This wouldn't be nearly as complicated. By first starting the B84 at every 30 minutes, when they increase service to every 15 minutes, it looks like they are constantly increasing service. The other possibility is that no one will wait 30 minutes for the B84, and they declare it a failure for lack of ridership citing no demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted February 9, 2013 Share #36 Posted February 9, 2013 I think I get what you are saying and agree that they are not revealing their entire plan and you may be right about that straight Pennsylvania Av route. I'm not sure you know the history of the B83, so I will tell you. The B83 and the original B84 were started in response to development of Starrett City. The residents needed a way to get to a subway Station. So the B83 was started direct up Pennsylvania to Broadway Junction and the B84 served Canarsie Station. Neither route offered any free transfers. They were viewed solely as feeders to the subway. But Starrett City residents were not satisfied. They needed to get places other than the subway for a single fare. The MTA was not about to change its transfer policies at that time so they combined the B84 with the B6 to provide additional one fare access. (It was not their original intention.) In 1975, when I was at the Department of City Planning, we studied bus routes in East New York and met with Community Board 5. They petitioned the MTA for a new north south route between Pennsylvania Av and Crescent Street because of the gap in north south service. They MTA refused stating there were no suitable streets for a bus route and it would cost too much because they only considered operating costs refusing to project revenue from riders who would use the route, assuming the buses would run empty. The compromise they came back with was to reroute the B83 from Pennslvania to Van Siclen which helped some but also hurt those wanting to just go straight on Pennsylvania which they no longer could do directly. The community was against it but figured it was better than nothing because as all MTA proposals at the time, it was take it or leave everything the way it is. If you are correct that they are setting up a straight Pennsylvania route, then they would have to double the service on the B84 to every 15 minutes and they would do this in conjunction with eliminating the B20. They would say there is no need to run both the B84 and the B6 to New Lots and would reroute it to the Post Office. Then they could say there is no need for the B20. The goal in all this would be to provide fewer route miles, not to improve service, but I think it would be a good change nonetheless. The problem is they are not straight forward by releasing all their intentions at once by making all the changes at the same time. I guess they figure it is easier to get approval by doing it a little at a time, but rewriting those schedules extra times also costs extra money. It should all be done at once if that is their plan. But they are too timid, to make a group of changes at once like I had them do in 1978. This wouldn't be nearly as complicated. By first starting the B84 at every 30 minutes, when they increase service to every 15 minutes, it looks like they are constantly increasing service. The other possibility is that no one will wait 30 minutes for the B84, and they declare it a failure for lack of ridership citing no demand. That very last sentence is one reason why I think they'd combine the 83 & the 84... I am skeptical of any new routes the MTA proposes, especially when they claim to be so hard up on funds.... I don't know what you wanna call it, but I see it as something like a doppelganger effect, or better yet a strawman - where they create a route (under the guise of good intentions) to obliterate it at some later date & go on to worsen some other route in the process.... Oh, I know all about the MTA not wanting to make a plethora of changes all in one shot & the covertness of their real intentions with these changes.... They are in it to provide a service; you wanna know what's secondary - yep, the actual passengers that gotta rely on these services they provide..... Which is why I say something's rotten in the state of denmark with the way they're opting to run these 84's..... As far as eliminating the 20, I just got through PM-ing someone stating that I think they really wanna cut service/trips on that route anyway... Let them throw artics on the 15 & I'm going to carefully notice how 20 service is gonna wane.... They're already having more & more buses during the rush end @ broadway junction from the mail facility; it's a PITAA (pain in the absolute ass) trying to catch a 20 out of Ridgewood during the PM rush; it's supposed to be every 20 mins, but it's more like every 30-40, it's ridiculous.... This is one reason why the 13 is prevalent out there over the 20..... With what you're saying though, I don't think they would send 6's to the mail facility, get rid of the 20, and double service on the 84 to run 83's along penn.... it's cheaper to provide more service on the 83 than it is on the 6 (unless you think they'd plan on having a bunch of short-turn trips on the 6; more than what currently is anyway)..... I personally don't see the 20 going nowhere, but if it does, I think it would have more to do w/ whatever's done w/ the 15 moreso than whatever's done w/ the 83..... The only way I see them doubling 84 service is if just about every trip is packed to the absolute brim; which I cannot see happening. Thanks for stating the history of the 83 & the (old) 84 btw..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted February 10, 2013 Share #37 Posted February 10, 2013 Personally, I don't like the idea of the B84 running as a shuttle from New Lots to Gateway. I'd restructure it as follows. B20 takes Pennsylvania-New Lots-Ashford-Linden (B35 suggested this a while back) B83 goes straight down Pennsylvania B84 takes Vandalia-Elton-Flatlands-Jerome-Wortman-Penn, and then terminates at Livonia Avenue for a connection to the . This way, the B84 actually serves more neighborhoods, and helps straighten out the overall network in East NY (of course, it would run much more often than every 30 minutes). If there are enough riders by Wortman looking to go to Broadway Junction, it can be extended there (but I think having the B20/83/84 all down Penn is overkill). I mean, I guess maybe you could reduce B83 service a little, or only have a few B84s going down to Broadway Junction to cut costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkupf Posted February 10, 2013 Share #38 Posted February 10, 2013 If it would come out of Spring Creek, it would be an MTA Bus Route, and the route number would have been in the 100's. But it will be an NYCT route, which is why it's labelled the B84. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted February 10, 2013 Share #39 Posted February 10, 2013 If it would come out of Spring Creek, it would be an MTA Bus Route, and the route number would have been in the 100's. But it will be an NYCT route, which is why it's labelled the B84. That isn't necessarily true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted February 10, 2013 Share #40 Posted February 10, 2013 If it would come out of Spring Creek, it would be an MTA Bus Route, and the route number would have been in the 100's. But it will be an NYCT route, which is why it's labelled the B84. Not necessarily. Now that there are no more privately operated companies, there s nothing stopping them from running it as an MTA Bus route and calling it B84, unless the City subsidy agreement with MTA Bus does not allow MTA Bus to create new bus routes. As I be said before, the whole subsidy issue has to be reexamined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted February 10, 2013 Share #41 Posted February 10, 2013 Not necessarily. Now that there are no more privately operated companies, there s nothing stopping them from running it as an MTA Bus route and calling it B84, unless the City subsidy agreement with MTA Bus does not allow MTA Bus to create new bus routes. As I be said before, the whole subsidy issue has to be reexamined. Obviously MTA Bus can create new routes, because the Q52 took time and community pressure to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transit222 Posted February 10, 2013 Share #42 Posted February 10, 2013 If there planning on operating this route at thirty minute intervals would be a waste of funds. No one likes waiting out in the cold thirty minutes for a bus plus this bus requires at least a ten minute to fifteen walk from the new housing along Vandalia Avenue and Fountain Street where the new housing development is. Bus service is not neeeded along the eastern end of Flatlands Avenue because this is mostly a commercial/trucking area. Instead why don't they just extend the B13 and Q8 routes from the Gateway Center Mall to the Spring Creek Educational Center via Erskine Street, Vandalia Avenue and Elton Street but terminate these two routes at either Elton Street/Flatlands Avenue or at Elton Street/Cozine Avenue. In the opposite direction these two routes ( B13 & Q8) could ( travel up from Flatlands Avenue to Cozine Avenue if routes terminate at Flatlands Avenue ) make a right turn at Cozine Avenue than a right turn at Linwood Street back to Flatlands Avenue, a right turn at Flatlands Avenue, than a left turn at Elton Street back to Vandalia Avenue where the bus would make a left turn and head back to Fountain Avenue or Eskine Street depending upon bus stops around the Gateway Mall Loop. ( i.e. new B13 & Q8 bus stops would need to also be placed on the opposite side of the Gateway Center Mall loop or separate eastbound and westbound bus stops would be required if these buses enter the loop the same way thru Fountain Avenue.) The MTA should also provide a three legged (two or three block waliking transfer) between the Q8 route and the B6/B6 Limited route as well as between the B13 and the B6/B6 Limited routes so that B13 and Q8 passengers from the new housing developments as well as other passengers would be able to transfer a second time once on the B6/B6 Limited route. If these two routes terminate at the Spring Creek Educational Campus Elton Street/Flatlands Avenue would also allow the bus drivers to use any bathroom facilities if necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa Fe via Willow Posted February 10, 2013 Share #43 Posted February 10, 2013 Metro CSW, on 07 Feb 2013 - 22:31, said:Read more : Source Interesting. I like it. But what's the community's thoughts about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transit222 Posted February 10, 2013 Share #44 Posted February 10, 2013 Don't know yet will have to see what happens at the hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted February 11, 2013 Share #45 Posted February 11, 2013 I'm not gonna waste my time with this. I don't think this route should've been made. It looks too duplicative to the B83 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted February 11, 2013 Share #46 Posted February 11, 2013 I'm not gonna waste my time with this. I don't think this route should've been made. It looks too duplicative to the B83 It will be duplicative until the B83 is moved back to Pennsylvania. I believe B35 via Church is correct and that is their ultimate plan. That's why it is dumb to make these changes piecemeal and not all at once. They will end up eliminating the B20. Just wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transit222 Posted February 11, 2013 Share #47 Posted February 11, 2013 There ultimate plan for what? What do you think they will do with the B35 bus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted February 11, 2013 Share #48 Posted February 11, 2013 There ultimate plan for what? What do you think they will do with the B35 bus? He's not saying anything will happen to the B35 bus route.... He's referring to me.... "B35 via Church" is my handle/name on this forum.... I'm not gonna waste my time with this. I don't think this route should've been made. It looks too duplicative to the B83 Basically.... Checkmatechamp13 said: Personally, I don't like the idea of the B84 running as a shuttle from New Lots to Gateway. I'd restructure it as follows. B20 takes Pennsylvania-New Lots-Ashford-Linden (B35 suggested this a while back) B83 goes straight down Pennsylvania B84 takes Vandalia-Elton-Flatlands-Jerome-Wortman-Penn, and then terminates at Livonia Avenue for a connection to the . This way, the B84 actually serves more neighborhoods, and helps straighten out the overall network in East NY (of course, it would run much more often than every 30 minutes). If there are enough riders by Wortman looking to go to Broadway Junction, it can be extended there (but I think having the B20/83/84 all down Penn is overkill). I mean, I guess maybe you could reduce B83 service a little, or only have a few B84s going down to Broadway Junction to cut costs. I would also do more with the B84, and I also don't care too much for how the upcoming one will be structured (basic shuttle to the 3).... As I told you earlier, I would use the route to connect Brownsville to Spring Creek & City Line (via gateway estates & gateway mall)..... They could go about better addressing the hole(s) in service that exists down there.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted February 11, 2013 Share #49 Posted February 11, 2013 If they do send the B83s straight on Pennsylvania, I think they will still keep the extension on the Belt Parkway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted February 11, 2013 Share #50 Posted February 11, 2013 It will be duplicative until the B83 is moved back to Pennsylvania. I believe B35 via Church is correct and that is their ultimate plan. That's why it is dumb to make these changes piecemeal and not all at once. They will end up eliminating the B20. Just wait and see. The B20 will not be eliminated, the B83 can't handle Penn Avenue ridership on it's own, and the B20 has strong ridership in East New York. It'd be a pretty dumb idea to eliminate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.