BrooklynBus Posted October 11, 2017 Share #1 Posted October 11, 2017 https://bklyner.com/rally-bring-back-new-improved-b71-bus-service-friday/ i like this idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B22viaAtlanticAv Posted October 11, 2017 Share #2 Posted October 11, 2017 To be honest I always thought the B71 went nowhere so, when it got cut back 2010, I was like oh okay not realizing its use...But, this proposal highlighted the B71 ridership base to which I was oblivious to;the Lower Manhattan link would also be a boon to this route if the MTA approves any of this...my only fear is they might give it the B37 treatment and run it every 20 minutes or something along that line... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysteriousBtrain Posted October 11, 2017 Share #3 Posted October 11, 2017 3 minutes ago, B22viaAtlanticAv said: To be honest I always thought the B71 went nowhere so, when it got cut back 2010, I was like oh okay not realizing its use...But, this proposal highlighted the B71 ridership base to which I was oblivious to;the Lower Manhattan link would also be a boon to this route if the MTA approves any of this...my only fear is they might give it the B37 treatment and run it every 20 minutes or something along that line... Yeah the South Ferry/City Hall connection got my eyes. That's one of the main things needed, a Brooklyn-south ferry connector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted October 11, 2017 Share #4 Posted October 11, 2017 Oh, man... I could see this B71 needing articulateds if this really takes off ridershipwise, especially considering the state of the subway recently... Ending at Fulton Center rather than South Ferry only helps matters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted October 11, 2017 Share #5 Posted October 11, 2017 37 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said: Yeah the South Ferry/City Hall connection got my eyes. That's one of the main things needed, a Brooklyn-south ferry connector. Well, from the waterfront area anyway (further east, you have the train). 24 minutes ago, Around the Horn said: Oh, man... I could see this B71 needing articulateds if this really takes off ridership-wise, especially considering the state of the subway recently... Ending at Fulton Center rather than South Ferry only helps matters... I like the fact that it managers to serve both Park Slope/Carroll Gardens and Red Hook (instead of two separate routes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted October 12, 2017 Author Share #6 Posted October 12, 2017 3 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said: Yeah the South Ferry/City Hall connection got my eyes. That's one of the main things needed, a Brooklyn-south ferry connector. It was first proposed by Bloomberg if congestion pricing were approved, but died when that was rejected. It was proposed to run every 30 minutes which was just ridiculous but I doubt it if the MTA would try it more frequently because they don't consider potential ridership when creating new routes, only operating expenses. The assumption is no one will ride the route. They do not consider net operating costs. 3 hours ago, Around the Horn said: Oh, man... I could see this B71 needing articulateds if this really takes off ridershipwise, especially considering the state of the subway recently... Ending at Fulton Center rather than South Ferry only helps matters... Which is why i believe the MTA never started this route. They were afraid it might be successful. They do not want people to shift from the train to the bus even if it means a quicker trip. They do not care about the passengers, only the costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysteriousBtrain Posted October 12, 2017 Share #7 Posted October 12, 2017 2 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said: It was first proposed by Bloomberg if congestion pricing were approved, but died when that was rejected. It was proposed to run every 30 minutes which was just ridiculous but I doubt it if the MTA would try it more frequently because they don't consider potential ridership when creating new routes, only operating expenses. The assumption is no one will ride the route. They do not consider net operating costs. Which is why i believe the MTA never started this route. They were afraid it might be successful. They do not want people to shift from the train to the bus. I know the B71/77 Extension was proposed back in 2008 (almost 10 years ago) when we got the "teaser" for the other extensions and routes, so them has took at least a look at it. Whether or not they were the ones that thought of it from scratch I don't know. I do believe the fact that Bloomberg started this. And yeah, I think if this route goes through, it would need to run more than 20 min, but the MTA would probably make it "half-fast" (pun intended) and we would either get large headways and/or a lot of bunching will occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted October 12, 2017 Share #8 Posted October 12, 2017 I'm sure they'll send out Kevin Ortiz like a bulldog who will tell the media that the is not considering the service and then come up with some BS excuse as to why. They will have to fight tooth and nail for this, and they should to stop the from forcing the damn subway down everyone's throat despite it being atrocious. If they put in some bus lanes it would probably be quite successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted October 12, 2017 Share #9 Posted October 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said: I'm sure they'll send out Kevin Ortiz like a bulldog who will tell the media that the is not considering the service and then come up with some BS excuse as to why. They will have to fight tooth and nail for this, and they should to stop the from forcing the damn subway down everyone's throat despite it being atrocious. If they put in some bus lanes it would probably be quite successful. And that's why those of us who want to see this through should keep a very close eye on the proceedings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted October 12, 2017 Author Share #10 Posted October 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said: I'm sure they'll send out Kevin Ortiz like a bulldog who will tell the media that the is not considering the service and then come up with some BS excuse as to why. They will have to fight tooth and nail for this, and they should to stop the from forcing the damn subway down everyone's throat despite it being atrocious. If they put in some bus lanes it would probably be quite successful. I agree with what you are saying except for the bus lanes. I can't see anywhere where they would be appropriate. But I would return Union Street to two way operation over Gowanus Canal. No reason for that detour. 51 minutes ago, Around the Horn said: And that's why those of us who want to see this through should keep a very close eye on the proceedings... MTA will still do whatever they damn please even if they contradict themselves with non-sensical statements. They answer to no one except Cuomo. He would have to instruct them to do it. Lander has his work cut out for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 12, 2017 Share #11 Posted October 12, 2017 I don't feel like quoting right now, but generally speaking, a bus route from that pocket of Brooklyn (Red Hook, Carroll Gdns., Park Slope) to Lwr. Manhattan is long overdue..... Soon as I saw that map/rendition, I chuckled - they've basically infused the old suggestion for an express route (which they had an even lesser chance of getting) into this B71 revival suggestion (because originally, it went up to Brooklyn Bridge Park/Pier 6).... However, the eastern portion of the route I don't particularly care for.... Virtually nobody's gonna take it to/from the Children's Museum, I don't see much of anyone east of Grand Army Plz. taking the thing over the (2)(3) (which also runs to Lwr. Manhattan), and the only actual usage I can maybe see past the main library, is for the Brooklyn Museum (which would likely also be quite low)..... The population around the western portion of the route has grown & I have no reason to believe that the route wouldn't garner more patronization towards as far east as Grand Army/main library at the most, but what always bothered me about the B71's discontinuation was that ridership was steadily growing on the western portion.... Rather than sever & eliminate the eastern portion of the route, they eliminated the whole goddamn thing (but yet routes like the Bx46 & B84 were created after the fact & continue to fester in the city's bus network by not showing much of any promise... I would easily get rid of those two routes & revive the B71 instead)..... So in sum, and still, this proposed route is trying to accomplish one too many things (and I'm inclined to believe these proposers know it too).... I would suggest that a B71 revival either stay "in house" (intra-borough), or serve that market that's sorely in need of direct access (Brooklyn CB6 territory) to Lwr. Manhattan..... When you start talking about sending local routes to Manhattan, you really have to factor in runtime more-so than anything now... Lastly, that's a bit of smart advertising there - That '+' in the B71+ is no accident.... They know the MTA's use of SBS is what's hot right now, in terms of "improving" bus service city-wide.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future ENY OP Posted October 12, 2017 Share #12 Posted October 12, 2017 Okay. I got a chance to skim through this and I will say this. As a current Crown Heights Resident now. It's needed to have another bus route along with the B45/B65 corridor. This B71 proposal can hopefully bring some reliability issues. I see that they want to end at the children's museum and travel down St. John's Place following the B45. Only thing i would possibly change is have the 71 travel down Bergen to Vanderbilt with direct to Grand Army Plaza into Union thus avoiding the gridlock along Eastern Parkway. Just don't like the St. John's Place traffic and it tends to get tight at time Another thing, I agree with B35 on the lines of keep this intra-borough only. Downtown/Red Hook/Carroll Gardens/Park Slope/Crown Heights. Although, people want a South Ferry to Brooklyn line. You have the train for direct access to the ferry. I see potiential with this new route if marketed CORRECTLY. As for control of this route i say: East New York. However, if it's scheduled to have good run times than back to Gleason it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted October 12, 2017 Share #13 Posted October 12, 2017 58 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said: Okay. I got a chance to skim through this and I will say this. As a current Crown Heights Resident now. It's needed to have another bus route along with the B45/B65 corridor. This B71 proposal can hopefully bring some reliability issues. I see that they want to end at the children's museum and travel down St. John's Place following the B45. Only thing i would possibly change is have the 71 travel down Bergen to Vanderbilt with direct to Grand Army Plaza into Union thus avoiding the gridlock along Eastern Parkway. Just don't like the St. John's Place traffic and it tends to get tight at time Another thing, I agree with B35 on the lines of keep this intra-borough only. Downtown/Red Hook/Carroll Gardens/Park Slope/Crown Heights. Although, people want a South Ferry to Brooklyn line. You have the train for direct access to the ferry. I see potiential with this new route if marketed CORRECTLY. As for control of this route i say: East New York. However, if it's scheduled to have good run times than back to Gleason it goes. I have to ask this. Where exactly are you from? Your English is very interesting and contradictory at times/hard to follow. I think you meant to write that hopefully the B71 could help improve reliability rather than "bring some reliability issues". lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted October 12, 2017 Author Share #14 Posted October 12, 2017 13 hours ago, B35 via Church said: I don't feel like quoting right now, but generally speaking, a bus route from that pocket of Brooklyn (Red Hook, Carroll Gdns., Park Slope) to Lwr. Manhattan is long overdue..... Soon as I saw that map/rendition, I chuckled - they've basically infused the old suggestion for an express route (which they had an even lesser chance of getting) into this B71 revival suggestion (because originally, it went up to Brooklyn Bridge Park/Pier 6).... However, the eastern portion of the route I don't particularly care for.... Virtually nobody's gonna take it to/from the Children's Museum, I don't see much of anyone east of Grand Army Plz. taking the thing over the (2)(3) (which also runs to Lwr. Manhattan), and the only actual usage I can maybe see past the main library, is for the Brooklyn Museum (which would likely also be quite low)..... The population around the western portion of the route has grown & I have no reason to believe that the route wouldn't garner more patronization towards as far east as Grand Army/main library at the most, but what always bothered me about the B71's discontinuation was that ridership was steadily growing on the western portion.... Rather than sever & eliminate the eastern portion of the route, they eliminated the whole goddamn thing (but yet routes like the Bx46 & B84 were created after the fact & continue to fester in the city's bus network by not showing much of any promise... I would easily get rid of those two routes & revive the B71 instead)..... So in sum, and still, this proposed route is trying to accomplish one too many things (and I'm inclined to believe these proposers know it too).... I would suggest that a B71 revival either stay "in house" (intra-borough), or serve that market that's sorely in need of direct access (Brooklyn CB6 territory) to Lwr. Manhattan..... When you start talking about sending local routes to Manhattan, you really have to factor in runtime more-so than anything now... Lastly, that's a bit of smart advertising there - That '+' in the B71+ is no accident.... They know the MTA's use of SBS is what's hot right now, in terms of "improving" bus service city-wide.... I am also not crazy about the Children's museum part. I would rather see it extended to Utica Avenue looping down Schenectady, east on Eastern Parkway and north on Utica. They should be able to slightly reduce B45 service to pay for the operating it further east than proposed. But that assumes better than 30 minute headways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotham Bus Co. Posted October 12, 2017 Share #15 Posted October 12, 2017 Given the current bus shortage, one must ask... Which route(s) should get service cuts to pay for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtatransit Posted October 13, 2017 Share #16 Posted October 13, 2017 Double Post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtatransit Posted October 13, 2017 Share #17 Posted October 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Gotham Bus Co. said: Given the current bus shortage, one must ask... Which route(s) should get service cuts to pay for this? That's MTA's problem. The solution is order more buses... can't have a shortage forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JubaionBx12+SBS Posted October 13, 2017 Share #18 Posted October 13, 2017 2 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said: Given the current bus shortage, one must ask... Which route(s) should get service cuts to pay for this? Will you stop with this tired talking point? Spare buses are kept on hold during rush hour and the shortage in question relates to depots holding less spares then they would reasonably want to. No route is getting reduced service to make room for new routes unless said route is likely to have ridership affected by the new ones. There are other reasons why service is being cut on many routes but this shortage you keep harping on is off the mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted October 13, 2017 Share #19 Posted October 13, 2017 2 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said: Given the current bus shortage, one must ask... Which route(s) should get service cuts to pay for this? Did you not read? Some people suggested the B45 since the new B71 would cover part of the route. Also, if there's a bus shortage, they should either hold off on retiring some buses, or order new ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 13, 2017 Share #20 Posted October 13, 2017 6 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said: Did you not read? Some people suggested the B45 since the new B71 would cover part of the route. Also, if there's a bus shortage, they should either hold off on retiring some buses, or order new ones. I also brought up the B84 & the Bx46..... Him parroting the same talking points year in & year out & never responding whenever someone comes up with legitimate answers to his sarcastic remarks - is his way of trolling.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotham Bus Co. Posted October 13, 2017 Share #21 Posted October 13, 2017 20 hours ago, Mtatransit said: That's MTA's problem. The solution is order more buses... can't have a shortage forever. Buses aren't an off-the-shelf item like car batteries. They have to be specified and funded and ordered. You can't increase service tomorrow with buses that haven't been built yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotham Bus Co. Posted October 13, 2017 Share #22 Posted October 13, 2017 20 hours ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said: Will you stop with this tired talking point? Spare buses are kept on hold during rush hour... Unfortunately, they can't simply use all the spares for service because Federal law requires a 15% spare factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share #23 Posted October 13, 2017 21 hours ago, Mtatransit said: That's MTA's problem. The solution is order more buses... can't have a shortage forever. A bus shortage is one of the MTA's standard excuses why they can't provide more service. In the mid 1970s when I was at the Department of City Planning and we proposed additional bus service, the MTA used the excuse of a bus shortage. Several years later when there was no more shortage, they changed the excuse to a shortage of bus operators. But they never have an excuse why they can't reduce service which they are always willing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted October 15, 2017 Share #24 Posted October 15, 2017 After reading the B71 and Q75 revivals, I'd rather revive the B71 first. Maybe the B23 could be next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.