Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
checkmatechamp13

Public Hearing For New Brooklyn Navy Yard & Kent Avenue routes

Recommended Posts

http://www.subchat.com/buschat/readflat.asp?Id=274398

 

Planned to begin operation in fall 2013.

 

Does anybody remember a while back when we were discussing sending the B69 to Williamsburg instead of Downtown Brooklyn? Well, this vaguely reminds me of the discussion (except obviously, it's a messed-up version of it).

 

SMH, the perfect chance to get rid of the B57 stint along Court Street (by just attaching it to the Navy Yard route), and they come up with this. (This route also stops short of WBP, missing the connection to the (J)(M)(Z))

 

Also, back during the 2009 proposed cuts, they wanted to extend the B67 to DUMBO when they wanted to eliminate the B25 (to appease the people in that area), so I guess the MTA got what they wanted (B67 through DUMBO)

 

The new Kent Avenue route would be called the B32 (which makes sense because it runs near the B62). But it makes you wonder if as B35 said back then (regarding the Bx6/46 and B83/84), if they plan on doing any sort of restructuring in the future, and as BrooklynBus said, why they don't just come out and do it.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the 67 is not gonna get much ridership except outside Division Avenue and a few riders from DUMBO, I'll tell you that. Especially if this B67 is weekdays (which is stupid, the people that visit the navy yard visit it on weekends). That B67 is gonna be a fail that will strech down to Kensington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the 67 is not gonna get much ridership except outside Division Avenue and a few riders from DUMBO, I'll tell you that. Especially if this B67 is weekdays (which is stupid, the people that visit the navy yard visit it on weekends). That B67 is gonna be a fail that will strech down to Kensington.

Dude B67 has weekend service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude B67 has weekend service.

 

The new service would operate every 30 minutes between 5:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays.

 

The B67 has weekend service, but the extension to Williamsburg would be weekdays only.

 

Out of curiosity, before the B69 got its weekend service back, were B67 headways every 20 minutes or what? And do they still have that problem with bunching that they had when they first did the 2010 reductions (I assume so, considering the traffic the B67 deals with on Flatbush and whatnot).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new service would operate every 30 minutes between 5:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays.

 

The B67 has weekend service, but the extension to Williamsburg would be weekdays only.

 

Out of curiosity, before the B69 got its weekend service back, were B67 headways every 20 minutes or what? And do they still have that problem with bunching that they had when they first did the 2010 reductions (I assume so, considering the traffic the B67 deals with on Flatbush and whatnot).

thanks for clearing that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, so the LIC - Williamsburg route is gonna be called the B32... good to know.

 

Secondly.... So wait a second, they're fusing that proposed downtown - DUMBO - Navy Yard route (they never posted an exact routing for) into the B67 now? This is ridiculous how the B67's done gotten marred since June 2010...

 

The stubbornness in having the B69 continue terminating at Jay/Sands is amazing... I mean, just have the B69 run through the cumberland gate to access the navy yard, to exit on the williamsburg side of it, to then run up to WBP... kill two three birds with one stone that way.... The hell's the point of stopping buses dead on/around division anyway....

 

 

SMH, the perfect chance to get rid of the B57 stint along Court Street (by just attaching it to the Navy Yard route), and they come up with this.

I understand why they wouldn't have the 57 run through the navy yard, since it's coming from Woodhull & areas due east....

Although I'd even prefer having the 57 run up to the washington gate through the navy yard & out the sands gate (bypassing the traffic along flushing av; those stops are seldom used anyway), over having 67's extended through the navy yard...

 

If it were up to me, I'd have the 57 run along park up there & removed off flushing from west of tompkins.... Having 69's service the navy yard en route to Williamsburg (WBP) is even better than having the route redundantly parallel the 62 to get there (of anyone that suggested the 69 run to williamsburg - myself included).....

 

Basically what I'm saying with all this is, they had the perfect chance to boost usage on the B69.....

Now that they have 57's going to IKEA/Red Hook PJ's, they're not gonna do anything w/ the 57 on that end, unfortunately....

 

 

...Out of curiosity, before the B69 got its weekend service back, were B67 headways every 20 minutes or what?

 

And do they still have that problem with bunching that they had when they first did the 2010 reductions

(I assume so, considering the traffic the B67 deals with on Flatbush and what not).

Yeah, every 20 mins most of the day & every 30 during the earlier & later hours....

 

Not sure if that problem w/ bunching still exists though.....

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, so the LIC - Williamsburg route is gonna be called the B32... good to know.

 

Secondly.... So wait a second, they're fusing that proposed downtown - DUMBO - Navy Yard route (they never posted an exact routing for) into the B67 now? This is ridiculous how the B67's done gotten marred since June 2010...

 

The stubbornness in having the B69 continue terminating at Jay/Sands is amazing... I mean, just have the B69 run through the cumberland gate to access the navy yard, to exit on the williamsburg side of it, to then run up to WBP... kill two three birds with one stone that way.... The hell's the point of stopping buses dead on/around division anyway....

 

 

I understand why they wouldn't have the 57 run through the navy yard, since it's coming from Woodhull & areas due east....

Although I'd even prefer having the 57 run up to the washington gate through the navy yard & out the sands gate (bypassing the traffic along flushing av; those stops are seldom used anyway), over having 67's extended through the navy yard...

 

If it were up to me, I'd have the 57 run along park up there & removed off flushing from west of tompkins.... Having 69's service the navy yard en route to Williamsburg (WBP) is even better than having the route redundantly parallel the 62 to get there (of anyone that suggested the 69 run to williamsburg - myself included).....

 

Basically what I'm saying with all this is, they had the perfect chance to boost usage on the B69.....

Now that they have 57's going to IKEA/Red Hook PJ's, they're not gonna do anything w/ the 57 on that end, unfortunately....

 

 

Yeah, every 20 mins most of the day & every 30 during the earlier & later hours....

 

Not sure if that problem w/ bunching still exists though.....

BINGO dude couldn't say it better. B69 would be better off in williamsburg. Is flushing and BQE traffic so bad that going through the NAVY yard is faster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BINGO dude couldn't say it better. B69 would be better off in williamsburg. Is flushing and BQE traffic so bad that going through the NAVY yard is faster?

I would say so, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of backroad shit they got the B67 doing? That line gets hammered during rush hours (Methodist hospital crowd, traffic on Flatbush/7 Avs) and its gonna be hell with this new routing.

 

As for that turn from Pearl St onto that little side street and back onto Jay St, that's gonna be a problem. Its not that bad of a turn (been back there with a bus before, gotta be careful on that side street) but you gotta worry about traffic letting you turn onto Jay St. That bridge to BQE traffic going north on Jay will not give you room to make that right turn unless you throw yourself into their lane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of backroad shit they got the B67 doing? That line gets hammered during rush hours (Methodist hospital crowd, traffic on Flatbush/7 Avs) and its gonna be hell with this new routing.

 

As for that turn from Pearl St onto that little side street and back onto Jay St, that's gonna be a problem. Its not that bad of a turn (been back there with a bus before, gotta be careful on that side street) but you gotta worry about traffic letting you turn onto Jay St. That bridge to BQE traffic going north on Jay will not give you room to make that right turn unless you throw yourself into their lane.

BQE to brooklyn bridge? or manhattan if manhattan won't they just use flatbush to tillary? Brooklyn bridge has ramps directly into the BQE.

 

I would say so, yes.

But navy yard gates aren't always open they close after a certain time how will buses get around that problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand why they wouldn't have the 57 run through the navy yard, since it's coming from Woodhull & areas due east....

Although I'd even prefer having the 57 run up to the washington gate through the navy yard & out the sands gate (bypassing the traffic along flushing av; those stops are seldom used anyway), over having 67's extended through the navy yard...

 

If it were up to me, I'd have the 57 run along park up there & removed off flushing from west of tompkins.... Having 69's service the navy yard en route to Williamsburg (WBP) is even better than having the route redundantly parallel the 62 to get there (of anyone that suggested the 69 run to williamsburg - myself included).....

 

Basically what I'm saying with all this is, they had the perfect chance to boost usage on the B69.....

Now that they have 57's going to IKEA/Red Hook PJ's, they're not gonna do anything w/ the 57 on that end, unfortunately....

 

Yeah, every 20 mins most of the day & every 30 during the earlier & later hours....

 

Not sure if that problem w/ bunching still exists though.....

 

Nah, I meant splitting it at Downtown Brooklyn and attaching the Court Street segment to the new route. So you'd have:

B57: Maspeth-Downtown Brooklyn

B58 (for instance): Red Hook-Williamsburg via Navy Yard

 

And gotcha with the B67 headways.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, I meant splitting it at Downtown Brooklyn and attaching the Court Street segment to the new route. So you'd have:

B57: Maspeth-Downtown Brooklyn

B58 (for instance): Red Hook-Williamsburg via Navy Yard

 

And gotcha with the B67 headways.

I would have done it differently remember how brooklyn heights has little to no service what about them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about extending this B32 to serve Navy Yard? I'd leave the B67 untouched

 

I guess it wouldn't be much worse than the B62 is right now (LIC-Downtown Brooklyn).

 

If it were up to me, I'd have the 57 run along park up there & removed off flushing from west of tompkins.... Having 69's service the navy yard en route to Williamsburg (WBP) is even better than having the route redundantly parallel the 62 to get there (of anyone that suggested the 69 run to williamsburg - myself included).....

 

The only possible issue would be that you'd lose the direct (planned) connection to Downtown Brooklyn from the Navy Yard, and it wouldn't serve as much of DUMBO as they'd like. But if that's such an issue, then like you said, they could send the B57 through there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BQE to brooklyn bridge? or manhattan if manhattan won't they just use flatbush to tillary? Brooklyn bridge has ramps directly into the BQE.

 

 

But navy yard gates aren't always open they close after a certain time how will buses get around that problem?

I'm not talking about the Brooklyn Bridge, I'm talking about the Manhattan Bridge...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what does that have to do with jay street? you mean turning onto tillary?

Jeezus H. Christ...

 

If you're driving on the Manny B coming into Brooklyn, one of the exits dumps into Jay St, right across the street from City Tech by Sands St. Drivers use Sands St (right under the bridge) to get onto the BQE to go in either direction they want to go.

 

During rush hours, it gets pretty bad over yet to the point where they have traffic cops out there.

 

Take a field trip out there one day and you'll see what I mean...

Edited by Fresh Pond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of backroad shit they got the B67 doing? That line gets hammered during rush hours (Methodist hospital crowd, traffic on Flatbush/7 Avs) and its gonna be hell with this new routing.

lol @ backroad shit....

 

As far as the rest of the reply, exactly... It's like they're tryna do anything possible to try to deter riders from taking the 67...

 

...But navy yard gates aren't always open they close after a certain time how will buses get around that problem?

PDF From the MTA site....

The new service would operate every 30 minutes between 5:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays.

 

That's not by accident.

 

Nah, I meant splitting it at Downtown Brooklyn and attaching the Court Street segment to the new route.

 

So you'd have:

B57: Maspeth-Downtown Brooklyn

B58 (for instance): Red Hook-Williamsburg via Navy Yard

Aight, gotcha...

 

....remember how brooklyn heights has little to no service what about them?

It's bad enough the B25 travels on brick roads up in DUMBO.... don't need any buses doing that in Bklyn. Hgts. also....

Regardless of that, a lot of those streets in Brooklyn Hgts. barely have room for cars to drive along em, much less a bus.....

 

..The only possible issue would be that you'd lose the direct (planned) connection to Downtown Brooklyn from the Navy Yard, and it wouldn't serve as much of DUMBO as they'd like. But if that's such an issue, then like you said, they could send the B57 through there.

True....

 

In all honesty though, I don't know why they even want to connect downtown to DUMBO and the Navy Yard with one route in the first place (that's yet another reason I think this 67 reason is stupid, for lack of a better word).... It all sounds like something some private operator should delve in, over a public transportation provider......

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This 67 extension is so much like the old 61. Maybe they should [re]extend that one instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to ask (rhetorically of course) as who makes these decisions as to where a new route will terminate?

This is the third route this year that is being proposed for Brooklyn that I must question in terms of its routing. 

 

Who would propose terminating a new bus route three blocks from a major transit junction that would generate a considerable amount of ridership namely the Marcy Avenue Subway Station and Williamsburgh Bridge Plaza? Who made that decision? The Planning department?, The Budget Department? The Scheduling Department? Who?  Someone who never looked at a Brooklyn Bus Map even after being told to draw this bus route? A person who is more concerned about the costs of operation as compared with the increased ridership that would accrue from the proposed extension? Or someone who has never lived in the area and was placed in that position to satisfy a politician and will receive a promotion for creating this route?

 

It seems that the MTA is just going through the motion of creating routes that are "guaranteed to fail" in the long run.  Long headways, routes that do not make connections with other major traffic generators are not the way to generate the ridership for the route to be sustainable in terms of viability. What is the MTA afraid of here? The route will become quite popular and more service will be required? I thought that was the purpose in creating the route in the first place.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, where exactly is this B32 gonna terminate at? There's no room in the plaza unless it shares a lane with another route (only ones with low enough service is the B24 and B39).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends upon what you are looking at in terms of information that enables you to draw your conclusion.

 

The point that you raised may be the reason that the proposed Navy Yard  route was to terminate not at the Williamsburgh Bridge Plaza but at Broadway - Kent Avenue. When you are looking at the route in terms of space at that location, it is a valid reason as there is no space for additional bus routes to terminate there. Then the question is what is the most important factor in determining the terminal of the proposed route.

 

If the factor is revenue generation and passenger levels, then the route termination at the Plaza or at the subway station is the reason for the extension. This is the method that I used in drawing my conclusion as the proposed Navy Yard route as connecting with other East Williamsburgh routes such as the Q/54 and the B/60 along with existing connections to the Q/59, B/24 and B/61 will provide the passenger counts and the revenue to make the route viable. If we add the connection to the M and J at Marcy Avenue then the route will be a winner. If it means that the route will terminate a couple of blocks east of Marcy Avenue, then let it happen as long as the route stops at or near the plaza and the station.

 

Let me add one more point as making the Navy Yard Service as an extension of the B/67 is one of the reasons that I posted my comments on this change. Anyone who has taken the subway over the Manhattan Bridge can attest to the traffic problems in downtown Brooklyn and can tell you that extending the B/67 will not work. It will destroy the B/67 and insure that the proposed route will fail. Making the Navy Yard Route as either a separate route or a merger with the proposed B/32 will insure its viability.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.