Bronx Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[MysteriousBtrain]

Sorry, I missed the 70 ending at PBP but I'm still having a bit of difficulty seeing how this route would be useful heading north. Inside Co-op, its another route which is great but outside The only standalone part is that stint on 241 and it doesn't hit the MN station (If the issue is service on 241, extend the 39 west). I'm not sure who would be dedicated Bx70 riders. If you're commuting to the area east of WPR (Wakefield/Edenwald/Co-op) from Manhattan via the 2, most people aren't going to pass the Bx28/30/38@Gun Hill, Bx31@233 and Bx16@Nereid to get to the Bx70@241. If you take the 5, same thing you have to pass the Bx28/38@Seymour and Bx30 @Baychester before the Bx16/70@Dyre.

 

I had 2 ideas:

1) Swing your Bx70 south @Baychester/233 run it Baychester-Givan-222 and terminate it at 219/WPR. Co-op gets an extra bus that goes to the 2 and 5 trains, 222 gets a crosstown more or less

2) Create a Bx25 from 219/WPR to Pelham Bay via WPR-222-Boston-Baychester-Burke-Gunther-Stillwell-Pelham Parkway. This doesn't help Co-op but it fixes the lack of coverage in N/E Bronx.

These ideas seem interesting, but one reason I revived the Bx70 is because of Westchester riders, not Manhattan riders.

[B35 via Church]

Those 3 co-op ideas MysteriousB posted....

 

1) That Q70.... would be used as just another bus heading to PBP from co-op....

Furthermore, what is the point of running buses up industrial Provost av; there's always trucks running up/down that street over there, slowing things up... You may as well have the thing serving Dyre directly just like the Bx16 does - you already have it paralleling enough of the Bx16 anyway... lol.... The walk from the Dyre subway to catch the Bx30 into co-op is the PITA for those folks.... Getting to Wakefield is much ado about nothing.

 

2) MTA has it right with the Bx30... There's nothing saying all the buses that serve Co-op have to serve it in a clockwise direction....

There is absolutely no plausible reason to run buses on Tillotson, to Baychester, to Co-op.... Taking Peartree gets you from Boston Rd to Co-op faster... and Co-op patrons aren't going to choose over making their way to the @ Gun Hill for the to Wakefield.....

 

3) Your Bx23 I wouldn't bother with... If you want to satisfy co-op patrons as far as running buses to Mt Vernon, I'd rather Bee-line run some number of trips on the #52 to PBP... I would definitely try to tap into that market with that route.... That way, you have #45's running to New Roc' & #52's running to Mt. Vernon, from PBP.... From there, have it (the 52) make 1 stop in section 5, that stop on Bartow/Co-op city blvd (before the turn), and a new stop around co-op city blvd/peartree... then it could go onto making that stop along boston rd (the one shared w/ the Bx16 & 30), enroute to Dyre subway, to regular route....

 

The current Bx23 should be left alone; it gives co-op what they never had with the QBx1 - consistent service between co-op & PBP... QBx1's had too many buses abruptly ending at PBP from Flushing - even though a lot of those trips were scheduled to run to co-op... There's been many a time I've gotten miffed over the fact that I wanted to ride into co-op, from Flushing - only to have the b/o kick off whoever was left on the bus, to have them xfer to another QBx1 actually going to co-op..... I'm not even a co-op resident & I was sick of the BS that used to go on with the QBx1... An absolute mess.... So you don't want to get into a situation where you have Q50's coming from Flushing & Bx23's coming from Mt. Vernon.... That is a market I believe Bee-line should be trying to service, not the MTA.... If they want no part of it (or don't have the resources for it), well hey, that's on them.... But I can absolutely see it being a bit of a cash cow....

------------------

 

 

If there were more of a cohesion b/w the two services, I can think of at least 5 routes (not just co-op based, but just routes running b/w somewhere in the bronx & somewhere in westchester) off the top of my head that should exist... But I'll spare that for the Bee line thread if I ever get around to it....

 

But extending the Bx23, making the Bx30 less efficient, and creating a route to serve a market that doesn't currently exist with one route that is very weak, wouldn't help co-op all too much..... You would actually do more for co-op with having either (or both) the BL-45 & 52 serve it.... Getting to New Roc' & Mt. Vernon is a hassle for co-op patrons.... Again, getting to Wakefield & having yet another route run b/w Co-op & PBP isn't really curing anything for those folks as far as public transit goes.....

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

Now that the Co-op discussion has re-started i'll offer something. 

 

1) I don't believe Bee-Line should be getting involved at all with servicing Co-op. For starters, I'm not the person willing to offer up service between suburban communities and areas on the extreme outskirts of city limits. To me it seems like it would help the Westchester users more and there's not enough of them for Bee-Line to provide a decent level of service on the majority of their routes. If someone can show me the impressive demand for Mount Vernon or New Roc access from within Co-op then fine but otherwise Bee-Line can keep their crappy levels of service away from the Bronx 

 

2) Speaking of other Bee-Line routes that provide shitty levels of service I would take interest in a route (MTA operated) from Bay Plaza to Fordham running via Boston Road.In Co-op I would have it take Co-op City Blvd straight up from the mall onto Conner St. It would provide an alternative to the Bx12 +SBS between Co-op and Fordham and fill in a MTA coverage gap along Boston Road between Gun Hill and Pelham Pkwy that Bee-Line currently serves with shitty levels of service (maybe the 60/61 come to mind) while still preserving the usefulness of the Bx30 given that this route wouldn't interfere with access to the at Gun Hill or with the hospitals on Bainbridge. I don't believe that the Bee-Line 60/61 have any business serving as much of the Bronx as they do and definitely shouldn't be the only service available along the portion of Boston Road they currently serve south of Gun Hill Road. 

 

3) One thing I seem to notice within Co-op is that service seems to be centered around Section 5 far more than necessary. Given the Bx38 vs 28 ridership patterns there and the Bx23 (the ones looping in via Section 5 and out via Section 1) vs Q50 it's pretty clear that the Section 1 folks are putting in the fair share of the usage. I would propose some minor tweaks to in efforts to better serve the Dreiser Loop folks. One would be to modify the Bx28/38 schedule where the Bx38 runs the majority of the service during the rush. I would run the Bx38 every 7-8 minutes during the rush (am and pm) and the Bx28 every 20 minutes during the rush. The other would be to increase service on the Q50 to 10 minutes during the AM Rush. The same idea could be accomplished by adding a couple of trips to the 5-4-3-2-1 Bx23 loop during the AM but a Q50 increase would seem to benefit more users. I feel Section 5 gets too much service in and out during the AM Rush and would be willing to cut service there in favor of more service to Sections 1 and 2 but that might not go to well so i'll leave it at that.

 

4) I don't see the need for Westbound Bx12 +SBS buses to stop inside of the Bay Plaza mall in the AM Rush. None of the stores are open and there's hardly any traffic inside the mall to generate usage. The main usage for the Bx12 within Co-op in the morning comes from the stop it makes on Bartow alongside the smaller Bartow mall. I would have Eastbound SBS trips end at the I-95 exit 11 stop before 8:45 and all westbound trips start at Bartow/Edson until 9:00. Afterwards service would resume as normal. 

[B35 via Church]

....I don't believe Bee-Line should be getting involved at all with servicing Co-op. For starters, I'm not the person willing to offer up service between suburban communities and areas on the extreme outskirts of city limits. To me it seems like it would help the Westchester users more and there's not enough of them for Bee-Line to provide a decent level of service on the majority of their routes. If someone can show me the impressive demand for Mount Vernon or New Roc access from within Co-op then fine but otherwise Bee-Line can keep their crappy levels of service away from the Bronx....

You say this as if NYC residents don't benefit from bus service running to Westchester county.... That's an asinine implication to make, and it seems as if it's clouded by nothing more than hatred of suburban areas....

 

I don't want to hear people like you complaining about fares being too high on the railroads for Bronxites to get to Westchester county.... Or that travel is too indirect.... This stance of [we don't want your city buses in our pristine suburban areas] & [suburban buses have no businesses crossing city lines] are tired, from both sides of the coin... We should be encouraging bus service between county lines, not discouraging it....

 

Speaking of other Bee-Line routes that provide shitty levels of service I would take interest in a route (MTA operated) from Bay Plaza to Fordham running via Boston Road.In Co-op I would have it take Co-op City Blvd straight up from the mall onto Conner St. It would provide an alternative to the Bx12 +SBS between Co-op and Fordham and fill in a MTA coverage gap along Boston Road between Gun Hill and Pelham Pkwy that Bee-Line currently serves with shitty levels of service (maybe the 60/61 come to mind) while still preserving the usefulness of the Bx30 given that this route wouldn't interfere with access to the at Gun Hill or with the hospitals on Bainbridge. I don't believe that the Bee-Line 60/61 have any business serving as much of the Bronx as they do and definitely shouldn't be the only service available along the portion of Boston Road they currently serve south of Gun Hill Road. 

Yeah, an alternative by default, but this would likely result in even more people pushing & forcing & carrying on, onto Bx12's...

 

If the MTA started up a Boston rd route (from Fordham), they may as well run the thing to Ropes av & kick the Bx16 out of there.... The Bx16 can then go on servicing Co-op short of section 5.... Downside is the Bx30 wouldn't exist; it would be deemed as "duplicative" by the MTA.... Not exactly what we should be clamoring for... So with as much disdain that you want to exude for Bee-Line intercounty service, it's keeping a route like the Bx30 alive.

 

...One thing I seem to notice within Co-op is that service seems to be centered around Section 5 far more than necessary. Given the Bx38 vs 28 ridership patterns there and the Bx23 (the ones looping in via Section 5 and out via Section 1) vs Q50 it's pretty clear that the Section 1 folks are putting in the fair share of the usage. I would propose some minor tweaks to in efforts to better serve the Dreiser Loop folks. One would be to modify the Bx28/38 schedule where the Bx38 runs the majority of the service during the rush. I would run the Bx38 every 7-8 minutes during the rush (am and pm) and the Bx28 every 20 minutes during the rush. The other would be to increase service on the Q50 to 10 minutes during the AM Rush. The same idea could be accomplished by adding a couple of trips to the 5-4-3-2-1 Bx23 loop during the AM but a Q50 increase would seem to benefit more users. I feel Section 5 gets too much service in and out during the AM Rush and would be willing to cut service there in favor of more service to Sections 1 and 2 but that might not go to well so i'll leave it at that.

Section 5 is the most vocal when it comes to issues with the buses, but the overall point in this paragraph I agree with... I'm not gonna comment on the Bx28/38 thing because I don't believe the Bx38 should exist... As far as increasing service on the Q50, the problem with that is the Queens end of the route - doesn't warrant an increase in service.... That's not gonna happen anyway with the advent of the Bx23; which I can concur should have slightly more 1-2-3-4-5 service over 5-4-3-2-1 service....

 

....I don't see the need for Westbound Bx12 +SBS buses to stop inside of the Bay Plaza mall in the AM Rush. None of the stores are open and there's hardly any traffic inside the mall to generate usage. The main usage for the Bx12 within Co-op in the morning comes from the stop it makes on Bartow alongside the smaller Bartow mall. I would have Eastbound SBS trips end at the I-95 exit 11 stop before 8:45 and all westbound trips start at Bartow/Edson until 9:00. Afterwards service would resume as normal. 

This is an issue the MTA continues to be stubborn about, and for what reason, I do not know... The only thing the MTA's really done about having AM buses running inside of the mall is having early morning Bx12's stop dead at Bartow.... Later on in the AM, yeah, the issue still persists....

[Q43LTD]

Damn, no love for Co-Op City when it comes to Bee-Line service...

[B35 via Church]

Damn, no love for Co-Op City when it comes to Bee-Line service...

Nope... hence the 52 & 55 riders making their way to Bx30's.

 

Let's not mention the co-op patrons that head down to PBP... to ride up on the 45.

Edited February 22, 2015 by B35 via Church

[Q43LTD]

Nope... hence the 52 & 55 riders making their way to Bx30's.

 

Let's not mention the co-op patrons that head down to PBP... to ride up on the 45.

I see, well when I was reading, I came across your proposal of sending the 52 to Co-Op (forgot the section though), I kind of like it rather than just stopping dead at Boston-Secor houses...

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

You say this as if NYC residents don't benefit from bus service running to Westchester county.... That's an asinine implication to make, and it seems as if it's clouded by nothing more than hatred of suburban areas....

 

I don't want to hear people like you complaining about fares being too high on the railroads for Bronxites to get to Westchester county.... Or that travel is too indirect.... This stance of [we don't want your city buses in our pristine suburban areas] & [suburban buses have no businesses crossing city lines] are tired, from both sides of the coin... We should be encouraging bus service between county lines, not discouraging it....

 

I'm not against routes crossing into and out of suburban lines if there is sufficient demand for such a service to succeed. We shouldn't have a network of Bx24 copycats on city outskirts just to say we're encouraging suburban travel. Given the example of Co-op City to Mount Vernon I can't see such a route succeeding so my stance is rooted in the idea of running service just for the sake of having it available. That is what should not be encouraged and I just used suburban areas in blanket terms because such an idea would seem to be more prevalent with connecting suburbs to inner city areas. 

 

Yeah, an alternative by default, but this would likely result in even more people pushing & forcing & carrying on, onto Bx12's...

 

If the MTA started up a Boston rd route (from Fordham), they may as well run the thing to Ropes av & kick the Bx16 out of there.... The Bx16 can then go on servicing Co-op short of section 5.... Downside is the Bx30 wouldn't exist; it would be deemed as "duplicative" by the MTA.... Not exactly what we should be clamoring for... So with as much disdain that you want to exude for Bee-Line intercounty service, it's keeping a route like the Bx30 alive.

 

As much as I want the Bx30 to survive and believe that the Bx12 +SBS is the best option for Co-op residents to commute to Fordham we have to look at the fact that there is no one seat option from Baychester/Eastchester to Fordham and the route I propose fills that in. If that areas stays as is folks have to xfer to the 41 from the 30, use the 60/61 and put up with Bee-Line's headways (which i've learned not many are willing to do) or use the Bx12 +SBS and walk from Co-op. For the folks who live closer to the bus depot the latter works nicely but that's a small fraction of the commuters in the area. The other question is if Boston Road needs service between Gun Hill Road and Pelham Pkwy which I feel it does. There's lots of residential development in just that portion that has the Bx8 and Bx26 as their closest buses.  This route is meant to benefit these users more than Co-op users and I just picked Bay Plaza as a spot for buses to layover. Those routes don't seem to serve the most useful areas so there's a gap to be filled in and a route traveling to Fordham does it. 

 

Section 5 is the most vocal when it comes to issues with the buses, but the overall point in this paragraph I agree with... I'm not gonna comment on the Bx28/38 thing because I don't believe the Bx38 should exist... As far as increasing service on the Q50, the problem with that is the Queens end of the route - doesn't warrant an increase in service.... That's not gonna happen anyway with the advent of the Bx23; which I can concur should have slightly more 1-2-3-4-5 service over 5-4-3-2-1 service....

 

I can agree with this even down to the Bx38 (as a designation) not existing. I still feel that service should not circle the entirety of Co-op while traveling to "Fordham". The routing patterns within Co-op are fine I would just call all of the buses Bx28's and run the lion's share along the current 38 pattern.

 

This is an issue the MTA continues to be stubborn about, and for what reason, I do not know... The only thing the MTA's really done about having AM buses running inside of the mall is having early morning Bx12's stop dead at Bartow.... Later on in the AM, yeah, the issue still persists....

Edited February 22, 2015 by JubaionBx12+SBS

[B35 via Church]

I'm not against routes crossing into and out of suburban lines if there is sufficient demand for such a service to succeed. We shouldn't have a network of Bx24 copycats on city outskirts just to say we're encouraging suburban travel. Given the example of Co-op City to Mount Vernon I can't see such a route succeeding so my stance is rooted in the idea of running service just for the sake of having it available. That is what should not be encouraged and I just used suburban areas in blanket terms because such an idea would seem to be more prevalent with connecting suburbs to inner city areas. 

You exude an attitude to the contrary, talking about "impressive demand".... Now you watered down that original stance to a "sufficient demand for such a service to succeed"..... You are clearly on the opposite side of the argument of suburbanites defiantly stating keep your city buses out of our suburbs.... I mean, let's not play with words here, either you want services in general running between the Bronx or Westchester county, or you don't..... This isn't about creating bullshit routes just to have any ole service running between the 2 counties & you know it....

 

I already spoke on his Co-op - Mt Vernon route & I don't have anything further to say about it.

 

As much as I want the Bx30 to survive and believe that the Bx12 +SBS is the best option for Co-op residents to commute to Fordham we have to look at the fact that there is no one seat option from Baychester/Eastchester to Fordham and the route I propose fills that in. If that areas stays as is folks have to xfer to the 41 from the 30, use the 60/61 and put up with Bee-Line's headways (which i've learned not many are willing to do) or use the Bx12 +SBS and walk from Co-op. For the folks who live closer to the bus depot the latter works nicely but that's a small fraction of the commuters in the area.

 

The other question is if Boston Road needs service between Gun Hill Road and Pelham Pkwy which I feel it does. There's lots of residential development in just that portion that has the Bx8 and Bx26 as their closest buses.  This route is meant to benefit these users more than Co-op users and I just picked Bay Plaza as a spot for buses to layover. Those routes don't seem to serve the most useful areas so there's a gap to be filled in and a route traveling to Fordham does it.

Yeah I get all that about filling in blanks, but again, any of that won't happen if the current Bx30 remains intact - regardless of how much we want the 30 to stay around.... I don't know what's making you think this agency would be so willing to having Bx30's serve co-op the way it does, en route to 205th , and some other route serving co-op the same way the 30 does, but runs down Boston to get to Fordham.... They're going to make the claim that Boston is over-served... Certainly you know service was cut on the Bx30 back in 2010, so I get the sense that the Bx30 isn't a route the MTA really wants to provide too much service for anyway..... They later restored service, but this was only due to the magical surplus they ended up getting.... Well that, and those defiant section 5 folks....

 

Of course a Boston road route won't solely be for the benefit for Co-op riders, but FWIW:

It's either keep the Bx30 & have the MTA continuing to succumb to having Bee-Line service Boston rd. south of Gun Hill, or get rid of the Bx30 & have the route you're proposing come to fruition.... Much like most patrons that have to rely on public buses in this city, can't have it both ways.... And they're not going to either, especially with this +SBS+ kick the MTA is currently on.... We're going to end up seeing less duplicity, not more of it - regardless of current gaps in service.... Sucks, but it is what it is w/ this agency.

 

I can agree with this even down to the Bx38 (as a designation) not existing. I still feel that service should not circle the entirety of Co-op while traveling to "Fordham". The routing patterns within Co-op are fine I would just call all of the buses Bx28's and run the lion's share along the current 38 pattern.

I don't get caught up with what routes are called/numerated.... I was simply saying the Bx38 service as is should not exist & that all 28 service be reverted & running the way it used to, pre june 2010..... Not that the current Bx38 should be called the Bx28.

I see, well when I was reading, I came across your proposal of sending the 52 to Co-Op (forgot the section though), I kind of like it rather than just stopping dead at Boston-Secor houses...

eastern side of co-op... meaning Boston > Conner > Peartree > Co-op City Blvd (bellamy side) > current 29 to PBP

Edited February 22, 2015 by B35 via Church

[Via Garibaldi 8]

This Co-Op City crappola is insane.  How many bus routes does one Bronx neighborhood need and how many neighborhoods do they need to connect to? They have about 8 local bus routes serving that neighborhood and they're never satisfied.  Let's not forget the BxM7 which runs even later than other express buses such as the BxM9 which serves a far more isolated area in Throggs Neck.  BxM7 ridership has dropped considerably, especially on weekends.  I would consider a reduction in service, as I've been seeing quite a few empty BxM7's on weekends.  I think it's ridiculous to have half hour service running to Manhattan all the way up to 00:00 on Saturdays.

[Q43LTD]

You exude an attitude to the contrary, talking about "impressive demand".... Now you watered down that original stance to a "sufficient demand for such a service to succeed"..... You are clearly on the opposite side of the argument of suburbanites defiantly stating keep your city buses out of our suburbs.... I mean, let's not play with words here, either you want services in general running between the Bronx or Westchester county, or you don't..... This isn't about creating bullshit routes just to have any ole service running between the 2 counties & you know it....

 

I already spoke on his Co-op - Mt Vernon route & I don't have anything further to say about it.

 

Yeah I get all that about filling in blanks, but again, any of that won't happen if the current Bx30 remains intact - regardless of how much we want the 30 to stay around.... I don't know what's making you think this agency would be so willing to having Bx30's serve co-op the way it does, en route to 205th , and some other route serving co-op the same way the 30 does, but runs down Boston to get to Fordham.... They're going to make the claim that Boston is over-served... Certainly you know service was cut on the Bx30 back in 2010, so I get the sense that the Bx30 isn't a route the MTA really wants to provide too much service for anyway..... They later restored service, but this was only due to the magical surplus they ended up getting.... Well that, and those defiant section 5 folks....

 

Of course a Boston road route won't solely be for the benefit for Co-op riders, but FWIW:

It's either keep the Bx30 & have the MTA continuing to succumb to having Bee-Line service Boston rd. south of Gun Hill, or get rid of the Bx30 & have the route you're proposing come to fruition.... Much like most patrons that have to rely on public buses in this city, can't have it both ways.... And they're not going to either, especially with this +SBS+ kick the MTA is currently on.... We're going to end up seeing less duplicity, not more of it - regardless of current gaps in service.... Sucks, but it is what it is w/ this agency.

 

I don't get caught up with what routes are called/numerated.... I was simply saying the Bx38 service as is should not exist & that all 28 service be reverted & running the way it used to, pre june 2010..... Not that the current Bx38 should be called the Bx28.

 

eastern side of co-op... meaning Boston > Conner > Peartree > Co-op City Blvd (bellamy side) > current 29 to PBP

Ok, sections 2-5 basically. Thanks. It could use the same stop as the 45 at Pelham Bay, since it's not that frequent and doesn't run on Sundays

[Q43 Floral Park]

I have a question: Does anyone know why the Bx26/28/29/20/38 signs don't display which sections they are via? 

 

This Co-Op City crappola is insane.  How many bus routes does one Bronx neighborhood need and how many neighborhoods do they need to connect to? They have about 8 local bus routes serving that neighborhood and they're never satisfied.  Let's not forget the BxM7 which runs even later than other express buses such as the BxM9 which serves a far more isolated area in Throggs Neck.  BxM7 ridership has dropped considerably, especially on weekends.  I would consider a reduction in service, as I've been seeing quite a few empty BxM7's on weekends.  I think it's ridiculous to have half hour service running to Manhattan all the way up to 00:00 on Saturdays.

 

Besides Co-op needing the service and PBP being full, it's only place the Bx26/28/29/30/QBx1 (the longtime routes) can realistically terminate. The residents aren't satisfied because all the MTA did over the past decade was split/recombine service and in turn cut off sections from each other. The Bx25 was canned and the 26 took over its route so now Section 1-3 have a 2 seat ride to Allerton. The Bx28 was split from Section 1-3 so thats another 2 seat ride if you coming from S/W of Norwood. They wanted to cut the Bx29 before and I believe both City Island and Co-op complained. Somehow the Bx30 which has the worst service ended up being the only route that hasn't really been screwed with. I agree with B35 the only one they got right was the QBx1=Bx23/Q50 because it was actually less tedious to go via the (5)/28 than deal with the QBx1 at PBP. The Bx28 really just needed some LTD service, with the Norwood-Coop runs as local but LTD service is never on the discussion table up here, look at how long it took to get it on the Bx36. 

 

I can't say if Throggs Neck is more isolated than Co-op because they're both disconnected by I-95 and the runtime on a PM Bxm9 is only about 4 minutes longer than a Bxm7. Throggs Neck is definitely less dense and populated so people are more likely to be out commuting in Co-op at night than TN. From personal experience, I would rather endure a walk from TN to the at Square than from any Section of Co-op to the . I do agree that half hour S/B service is overkill but I wonder if its done to prevent a DH from ECH-23 just for the N/B run.

 

 

As for your older post: you're right but even if the Bx13 ran on 161 outside rush hours you would still have to change as those runs go to GWB not by Yankees-153 

 

Now that the Co-op discussion has re-started i'll offer something. 

 

3) One thing I seem to notice within Co-op is that service seems to be centered around Section 5 far more than necessary. Given the Bx38 vs 28 ridership patterns there and the Bx23 (the ones looping in via Section 5 and out via Section 1) vs Q50 it's pretty clear that the Section 1 folks are putting in the fair share of the usage. I would propose some minor tweaks to in efforts to better serve the Dreiser Loop folks. One would be to modify the Bx28/38 schedule where the Bx38 runs the majority of the service during the rush. I would run the Bx38 every 7-8 minutes during the rush (am and pm) and the Bx28 every 20 minutes during the rush. The other would be to increase service on the Q50 to 10 minutes during the AM Rush. The same idea could be accomplished by adding a couple of trips to the 5-4-3-2-1 Bx23 loop during the AM but a Q50 increase would seem to benefit more users. I feel Section 5 gets too much service in and out during the AM Rush and would be willing to cut service there in favor of more service to Sections 1 and 2 but that might not go to well so i'll leave it at that.

 

20 min rush hour headways on the Bx28? So, would you be adding more Bx10 service to compensate for people getting off the Bx38 at Norwood-206 needing to go west?

[GreatOne2k]

How about swapping the Bx16 and Bx30 north terminals, Co Op City riders will have a direct ride to the train with the Bx16, the Bx30 will duplicate more of the W60/61/62 to Ropes Avenue.

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

I have a question: Does anyone know why the Bx26/28/29/20/38 signs don't display which sections they are via? 

 

 

 

Besides Co-op needing the service and PBP being full, it's only place the Bx26/28/29/30/QBx1 (the longtime routes) can realistically terminate. The residents aren't satisfied because all the MTA did over the past decade was split/recombine service and in turn cut off sections from each other. The Bx25 was canned and the 26 took over its route so now Section 1-3 have a 2 seat ride to Allerton. The Bx28 was split from Section 1-3 so thats another 2 seat ride if you coming from S/W of Norwood. They wanted to cut the Bx29 before and I believe both City Island and Co-op complained. Somehow the Bx30 which has the worst service ended up being the only route that hasn't really been screwed with. I agree with B35 the only one they got right was the QBx1=Bx23/Q50 because it was actually less tedious to go via the (5)/28 than deal with the QBx1 at PBP. The Bx28 really just needed some LTD service, with the Norwood-Coop runs as local but LTD service is never on the discussion table up here, look at how long it took to get it on the Bx36. 

 

I can't say if Throggs Neck is more isolated than Co-op because they're both disconnected by I-95 and the runtime on a PM Bxm9 is only about 4 minutes longer than a Bxm7. Throggs Neck is definitely less dense and populated so people are more likely to be out commuting in Co-op at night than TN. From personal experience, I would rather endure a walk from TN to the at Square than from any Section of Co-op to the . I do agree that half hour S/B service is overkill but I wonder if its done to prevent a DH from ECH-23 just for the N/B run.

 

 

20 min rush hour headways on the Bx28? So, would you be adding more Bx10 service to compensate for people getting off the Bx38 at Norwood-206 needing to go west?

Usage of the 28 south of Norwood 205th isn't all that great and that's basically the headway the 28 has off-peak these days. It's 18 minutes midday (seems like an strange number) and 20 minutes evenings and weekends. I would try with 20 minute rush headways and see if it goes as well as it does off-peak. I've used the 28 down there a few times and was treated to empty buses each time. On a side note the 26 carries well from over there by the at Bedford Park so maybe the odd routing of the 28 is a weakness.

 

To address your earlier paragraph you're right about the issue but even the pre-2010 service patterns presented an issue. Section 5 riders had to endure buses making a full loop (which adds a good 15 minutes to the trip) unless they were seeking the and run-times on the Bx26 and Bx28 were unnecessarily long. A full length Bx28 was scheduled for 75 minutes during the rush which is insane because there are plenty of routes with longer straight line distance between the terminals yet shorter runs. I can only recall only a few of our ridiculously long and unreliable routes running longer trips than pre-6/2010 Bx28. There's been a time where I've used the 26 out of Section 5 to get to Allerton/Eastchester and ended up regretting not walking because the bus made every stop possible in Co-op and hit more red lights than I would expect. We have to remember that the 26 and 28 also serve residents outside of Co-op who would also like more reliable and less crowded buses. I'm not a person that says bring pack the pre-6/2010 routing and call it day, I would rather find a balance between properly serving Sections 1-4 and ensuring Section 5 folks the quickest trip possible out of Co-op City.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I have a question: Does anyone know why the Bx26/28/29/20/38 signs don't display which sections they are via? 

 

 

Besides Co-op needing the service and PBP being full, it's only place the Bx26/28/29/30/QBx1 (the longtime routes) can realistically terminate. The residents aren't satisfied because all the MTA did over the past decade was split/recombine service and in turn cut off sections from each other. The Bx25 was canned and the 26 took over its route so now Section 1-3 have a 2 seat ride to Allerton. The Bx28 was split from Section 1-3 so thats another 2 seat ride if you coming from S/W of Norwood. They wanted to cut the Bx29 before and I believe both City Island and Co-op complained. Somehow the Bx30 which has the worst service ended up being the only route that hasn't really been screwed with. I agree with B35 the only one they got right was the QBx1=Bx23/Q50 because it was actually less tedious to go via the (5)/28 than deal with the QBx1 at PBP. The Bx28 really just needed some LTD service, with the Norwood-Coop runs as local but LTD service is never on the discussion table up here, look at how long it took to get it on the Bx36. 

 

I can't say if Throggs Neck is more isolated than Co-op because they're both disconnected by I-95 and the runtime on a PM Bxm9 is only about 4 minutes longer than a Bxm7. Throggs Neck is definitely less dense and populated so people are more likely to be out commuting in Co-op at night than TN. From personal experience, I would rather endure a walk from TN to the at Square than from any Section of Co-op to the . I do agree that half hour S/B service is overkill but I wonder if its done to prevent a DH from ECH-23 just for the N/B run.

 

I think Co-Op City is much closer to the subway than Throggs Neck and has far better transportation options.

[Q43 Floral Park]

I think Co-Op City is much closer to the subway than Throggs Neck and has far better transportation options.

 

While TN may be further from the train than Co-op, those routes don't face nearly as much traffic as Co-op buses getting to the train especially when 95/Gun Hill are a mess. Throggs Neck/Country Club also seems to be more or less content with current service levels. When they rerouted the Bx8, the entire community complained about too many buses and that route barely runs as is. 

 

 

Usage of the 28 south of Norwood 205th isn't all that great and that's basically the headway the 28 has off-peak these days. It's 18 minutes midday (seems like an strange number) and 20 minutes evenings and weekends. I would try with 20 minute rush headways and see if it goes as well as it does off-peak. I've used the 28 down there a few times and was treated to empty buses each time. On a side note the 26 carries well from over there by the at Bedford Park so maybe the odd routing of the 28 is a weakness.

 

To address your earlier paragraph you're right about the issue but even the pre-2010 service patterns presented an issue. Section 5 riders had to endure buses making a full loop (which adds a good 15 minutes to the trip) unless they were seeking the and run-times on the Bx26 and Bx28 were unnecessarily long. A full length Bx28 was scheduled for 75 minutes during the rush which is insane because there are plenty of routes with longer straight line distance between the terminals yet shorter runs. I can only recall only a few of our ridiculously long and unreliable routes running longer trips than pre-6/2010 Bx28. There's been a time where I've used the 26 out of Section 5 to get to Allerton/Eastchester and ended up regretting not walking because the bus made every stop possible in Co-op and hit more red lights than I would expect. We have to remember that the 26 and 28 also serve residents outside of Co-op who would also like more reliable and less crowded buses. I'm not a person that says bring pack the pre-6/2010 routing and call it day, I would rather find a balance between properly serving Sections 1-4 and ensuring Section 5 folks the quickest trip possible out of Co-op City.

 

With Bx28s on 20 min rush hour headways you would be cutting every other bus. Section 5 riders would have a longer wait to get to the and then what little patronage it has south of Norwood would start to dwindle. The Bx26 carries because it's uphill to the (4)/(D) and the 28 routing actually helps it get to Fordham quickly while serving as an alternate in case the (4)/(D) have an issue.

 

This probably looks like overkill but I would have done a combo of the pre/post 2010 service:

Bx23: Loop local

Bx25: BP to Co-op via 4-5 local rush hours only

Bx26: BP to Co-op via 1-5 local

Bx28: Fordham to Co-op via 1-5 LTD rush hours only

Bx29: City Island to Co-op via PBP & Sec 5 local

Bx30: Norwood to Co-op via 2-1-4-5 local

Bx38: Norwood to Co-op via 4-5 local rush hours only

Q50: Flushing to Co-op via PBP & 1-5 LTD all times

 

Sec 1-3 riders have a LTD to the 2/5 and the 6, Sec 4-5 riders don't have to go through 1-3 during peak to get to Gun Hill or Allerton. LTD on the 28 provides a faster ride along Gun Hill.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

While TN may be further from the train than Co-op, those routes don't face nearly as much traffic as Co-op buses getting to the train especially when 95/Gun Hill are a mess. Throggs Neck/Country Club also seems to be more or less content with current service levels. When they rerouted the Bx8, the entire community complained about too many buses and that route barely runs as is. 

 

So are you saying that Co-Op City needs so much service because it's denser than Throggs Neck?  For the record, Country Club is usually associated with Pelham Bay.

[Q43 Floral Park]

So are you saying that Co-Op City needs so much service because it's denser than Throggs Neck?  For the record, Country Club is usually associated with Pelham Bay.

 

to a certain extent yes. there are also the malls that draw in people from neighboring communities. vs. The lack of venues in TN that would attract outside ridership. 

 

For the record, Throggs Neck and Country Club are in 10465 and S/E of 95 so it depends on how one chooses to associate things.  I didn't mention Middletown-Pelham Bay because whatever local bus service they receive is dependent on what TN and CC allow to happen. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

to a certain extent yes. there are also the malls that draw in people from neighboring communities. vs. The lack of venues in TN that would attract outside ridership. 

 

For the record, Throggs Neck and Country Club are in 10465 and S/E of 95 so it depends on how one chooses to associate things.  I didn't mention Middletown-Pelham Bay because whatever local bus service they receive is dependent on what TN and CC allow to happen. 

Yes, but that's officially the way it's set up.  Country Club is tied to Pelham Bay.  Throggs Neck is tied to Schulyerville and perhaps areas like Silver Beach/Locust Point.

[B35 via Church]

With Bx28s on 20 min rush hour headways you would be cutting every other bus. Section 5 riders would have a longer wait to get to the and then what little patronage it has south of Norwood would start to dwindle. The Bx26 carries because it's uphill to the (4)/(D) and the 28 routing actually helps it get to Fordham quickly while serving as an alternate in case the (4)/(D) have an issue.

 

 

This probably looks like overkill but I would have done a combo of the pre/post 2010 service:

Bx23: Loop local

Bx25: BP to Co-op via 4-5 local rush hours only

Bx26: BP to Co-op via 1-5 local

Bx28: Fordham to Co-op via 1-5 LTD rush hours only

Bx29: City Island to Co-op via PBP & Sec 5 local

Bx30: Norwood to Co-op via 2-1-4-5 local

Bx38: Norwood to Co-op via 4-5 local rush hours only

Q50: Flushing to Co-op via PBP & 1-5 LTD all times

 

Sec 1-3 riders have a LTD to the 2/5 and the 6, Sec 4-5 riders don't have to go through 1-3 during peak to get to Gun Hill or Allerton. LTD on the 28 provides a faster ride along Gun Hill.

I would have thrown LTD service on the Bx28 running to Fordham & had rush hour short turns on the Bx28 at 205th & at Gun Hill rd , before splitting the pre-2010 Bx28 into the Bx28 (as it is today) & the Bx38..... Don't like the idea of balancing service b/w sections 1-4 & This bit about balancing overall service b/w sections 1-4 & coming up with a service to get folks out of section 5 quicker is part of the problem now....

 

As is, the Bx28 south of the isn't nearly as utilized as it used to be - Now the Bx34 done "borrowed"/stole/whatever synonym you wanna use, that ridership b/w Fordham & Gun Hill.... Save for Woodlawn patrons, this is another reason why I think they brought back weekend service on that route....

 

I'll say this much though.... I question why the MTA didn't come out with a Bx38 of sorts (with the exception of terminating at Erskine, instead of Bay Plaza), when the Bx25 existed - Instead of the Bx25 itself..... Simply more patronage for Gun Hill (which for one reason being, since there's no Allerton station on the Dyre line)...

 

As for Allerton service, I would have the Bx26 as one service; in other words, the pre-2010 Bx26......

 

The QBx1 debacle, I'm just glad that mismanaged route done flew the co op coop....

 

Trying to completely/fully balance service between differing sections in co-op is going to open up a can of worms I'm not too sure the MTA wants any part of.... Then each section is going to want "their own" local service; clearly, that's not warranted.... It's a large reason why I thought the pre-2010 setup of having the Bx26/28/30 serve all sections, was the way to go.... IMO, they fixed what wasn't broken.....

Edited February 28, 2015 by B35 via Church

[Q43 Floral Park]

I would have thrown LTD service on the Bx28 running to Fordham & had rush hour short turns on the Bx28 at 205th & at Gun Hill rd , before splitting the pre-2010 Bx28 into the Bx28 (as it is today) & the Bx38..... Don't like the idea of balancing service b/w sections 1-4 & This bit about balancing overall service b/w sections 1-4 & coming up with a service to get folks out of section 5 quicker is part of the problem now....

 

As is, the Bx28 south of the isn't nearly as utilized as it used to be - Now the Bx34 done "borrowed"/stole/whatever synonym you wanna use, that ridership b/w Fordham & Gun Hill.... Save for Woodlawn patrons, this is another reason why I think they brought back weekend service on that route....

 

I'll say this much though.... I question why the MTA didn't come out with a Bx38 of sorts (with the exception of terminating at Erskine, instead of Bay Plaza), when the Bx25 existed - Instead of the Bx25 itself..... Simply more patronage for Gun Hill (which for one reason being, since there's no Allerton station on the Dyre line)...

 

As for Allerton service, I would have the Bx26 as one service; in other words, the pre-2010 Bx26......

 

The QBx1 debacle, I'm just glad that mismanaged route done flew the co op coop....

 

Trying to completely/fully balance service between differing sections in co-op is going to open up a can of worms I'm not too sure the MTA wants any part of.... Then each section is going to want "their own" local service; clearly, that's not warranted.... It's a large reason why I thought the pre-2010 setup of having the Bx26/28/30 serve all sections, was the way to go.... IMO, they fixed what wasn't broken.....

 

The Bx38 would have better than the Bx25 but I think they just wanted to shift the ridership from Gun Hill. It seemed like there was an assumption that the 28/30 service was sufficient on GH/to get to trains (even if the latter meant a roundabout route) and that Sec 4-5 riders would go to WPR/Allerton over WPR/Gun Hill & Seymour/Gun Hill if they didn't have to go through all the Sections first. I can't find the schedule but realistically the only way that would've worked if the Bx25 took less time to reach a train than the Bx28 and if riders wanted the 2 over the 5.  

 

At this point they chopped a good portion of the 28 route off and the run time is still over an hour, Might as well recombine it and add the LTD

 

I kind of wish they would have just replaced the Bx34 with an extended Bx16, short turns Norwood-Mundy La but I'm sure someone will say Woodlawn needs its own dedicated route.

 

 

Yes, but that's officially the way it's set up.  Country Club is tied to Pelham Bay.  Throggs Neck is tied to Schulyerville and perhaps areas like Silver Beach/Locust Point.

I'd rather not endure another roundabout debate about "neighborhood associations" so I'll just reiterate that the Bx8 fiasco is a good example that the Eastern communities will advocate for alterations in their service if needs aren't being met.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I kind of wish they would have just replaced the Bx34 with an extended Bx16, short turns Norwood-Mundy La but I'm sure someone will say Woodlawn needs its own dedicated route.

 

 

I'd rather not endure another roundabout debate about "neighborhood associations" so I'll just reiterate that the Bx8 fiasco is a good example that the Eastern communities will advocate for alterations in their service if needs aren't being met.

Re: Bx34... Damn straight they need their own service... Why should they lose their service when a place like Co-Op City has buses running all over the place?

 

Re: There's nothing to debate because what I stated is a fact. Go look it up if you don't believe it. The Bx8 is a transit issue separate of my comments.

[Q43 Floral Park]

Re: Bx34... Damn straight they need their own service... Why should they lose their service when a place like Co-Op City has buses running all over the place?

 

Re: There's nothing to debate because what I stated is a fact. Go look it up if you don't believe it. The Bx8 is a transit issue separate of my comments.

 

re Bx34: The Bx16 already runs more frequently than the Bx34, with short turns you'd have a service increase

 

re Co-op:  Then use whatever knowledge you have of Co-op City and its routes (the map, the schedules, google) to come up with a solution for the thread. 

 

re Throggs Neck/Country Club:  As I have previously stated, I do not wish to engage in any form of discussion regarding Bronx neighborhood associations. We clearly don't share the same view of the Bronx so I'd rather just keep the conversation light and on the topic of the transit issues. Only care to hear your remarks on why you think Throggs Neck needs more service or the Bx8.

Edited March 1, 2015 by Q43 Floral Park

[Via Garibaldi 8]

re Bx34: The Bx16 already runs more frequently than the Bx34, with short turns you'd have a service increase

 

re Co-op:  Then use whatever knowledge you have of Co-op City and its routes (the map, the schedules, google) to come up with a solution for the thread. 

 

re Throggs Neck/Country Club:  As I have previously stated, I do not wish to engage in any form of discussion regarding Bronx neighborhood associations. We clearly don't share the same view of the Bronx so I'd rather just keep the conversation light and on the topic of the transit issues. Only care to hear your remarks on why you think Throggs Neck needs more service or the Bx8.

Woodlawn fought hard to regain weekend service on the Bx34.  For the elderly in need of the Bx34, and Woodlawn residents coming from the train, they avoid overcrowding issues on the Bx16, not to mention that the Bx34 is much safer since it goes directly from the subway to Woodlawn.  Safety is one reason why Woodlawn residents like using the Metro-North or the express bus where possible.  You cut their Bx34 and they would go crazy.

 

I don't have any proposals for Co-Op aside from wanting the to stop pandering to them.  They already get more than their fair share of bus service, and there is definitely waste there.  There shouldn't be any more bus service than what they have now.  I would also cut back on the BxM7.  Far too many empty buses.  20 minute headways on Saturday would only exist where necessary.  They can have bus service every 30 minutes.

 

As for the Bx8, if residents need more service, the should fine a way to get it to them, otherwise, keep it the way it is.

[Q43 Floral Park]

Woodlawn residents coming from the   train, they avoid overcrowding issues on the Bx16, not to mention that the Bx34 is much safer since it goes directly from the subway to Woodlawn.  Safety is one reason why Woodlawn residents like using the Metro-North or the express bus where possible.  You cut their Bx34 and they would go crazy.

 

if overcrowding is an issue as you say then all the more reason to add short turns on the 16

 

Any copy of a Bronx bus map post 1980s will prove the bold part is false, the Bx16/34 share the same route from 233/Katonah to Woodlawn and Norwood . If the 16 were to replace the 34 it would clearly be via Katonah...

 

Let me know when you ride the route Norwood-Eastchester and I'll consider taking your opinions seriously. 

 

I don't have any proposals for Co-Op aside from wanting the   to stop pandering to them.  They already get more than their fair share of bus service, and there is definitely waste there.  There shouldn't be any more bus service than what they have now.  I would also cut back on the BxM7.  Far too many empty buses.  20 minute headways on Saturday would only exist where necessary.  They can have bus service every 30 minutes.

 

So you want MTA to stop pandering to Co-op when all residents want them to do is rectify the service issues the TA created? I mean that would give them more free time to pander to Riverdale about the need for more and more service....

 

I've seen "empty"  weekend buses on all Bronx express routes because overall ridership is down (except on the 2 and 11). What times would the Bxm7 have 20 min headways and when would it be 30 mins?

 

As for the Bx8, if residents need more service, the   should fine a way to get it to them, otherwise, keep it the way it is.

 

You were the one who stated that Co-op had better transportation options than Throggs Neck which would imply a need for better service in the latter. You wanted to know why the Bxm7 runs later than the 9 and I simply told you the Bx8/40/42/Bxm9 do a sufficient job as is and if anymore service was needed, East Bronx residents would request it. In other words, you're wrong. 

 

Edited March 1, 2015 by Q43 Floral Park