Jump to content

Designing Bus Routes to Attract Passengers and Reverse the Decline in Ridership


BrooklynBus

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Nah, piece-mealing bus service on QB won't solve much of anything... You'll just have 2 routes with less individual service either overlapping each other for some significant stint , or having some mutual terminal... Then there'll be an even greater push (from the MTA) to have people (esp. on the eastern resultant split) take the subway.... The way I see it, they've been trying to mar Q60 service over the years (esp. on weekends) to have that be the case.....

Of course, with as many weekends of bustitution on the (E) (or the (J)) on the Queens end (Jamaica end) lately, people are still taking buses anyway :lol:

I agree though with having more Q60 trips ending at Archer... Too bad Sutphin/Archer's such a shitshow - made worse with the propping up those hotels or whatever, with which I wish they hurry up with....

Your point about the Q6 should happen anyway, but I'm not seeing the connection between a service level improvement for it & increasing the amount of short turns on that end of the Q60....

That's just it - on the western end of the route (in Queens), it isn't done on any consistent basis... It being whimsically, or erratically done doesn't cut it AFAIC - Just as they have some Q60's, in a solidified fashion, short turning on the other end of the route at Archer, the same should be the case at QBP as well..... What should be two, simple short left hand turns from the terminal onto the bridge approach is a PITA & IMO, it's the catalyst for the notorious bunching the thing suffers from....

Probably should have been clearer with that, but by split, I meant any type of split (does not have to necessarily have to be an even split). The way I was thinking it was, the Q60 becomes two routes, split in Jamaica. 

The reason the Q6 gets involved is because under such a split, the southern split of the Q60 would basically almost resemble the Q6 (except for the portion when it heads off Sutphin Boulevard in South Jamaica). Don't know how many people take the Q60 in that area compared to walking to the Q6, but since the current headways tend to be infrequent, I would prefer to allocate those resources into running more Q6 service. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 11/23/2018 at 7:07 PM, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Ok, what else do you suggest? 

 

Alright, but Queensboro Plaza is congested 24/7, the Q101 would need to turn around at 21st Street to then start another run. An alternative solution should be considered but I'll put more thought into that later. 

I suggest that you should leave the Q101 the way it is because Astoria area at night uses these buses, especially at night between 2-3:30a both the Q60/101 end at the same spot and go thru the same bridge. It’s the only two non TA buses that connect to the M15 SBS near 57th St & 2nd Ave. the Q32 does not. 

Btw: the Q60 is very slow. But they have no other choice. The (E)(M)(R) trains are too crowded. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

I suggest that you should leave the Q101 the way it is because Astoria area at night uses these buses, especially at night between 2-3:30a both the Q60/101 end at the same spot and go thru the same bridge. It’s the only two non TA buses that connect to the M15 SBS near 57th St & 2nd Ave. the Q32 does not. 

If that's the case, then add a stop on the Q32 so that it'll not only connect with the M15 SBS, but also the Roosevelt Tramway, that solves the issue of the Lack of Q101 in Midtown East. Either that or do one of the 2 following:

Operate the Q101 as a slipt route between 12-6 AM. With one set of buses connecting to the ferry and another set of buses terminating at Midtown East. 

Increase overnight (N) service by 5-8TPH between Ditmars and Coney Island or Whitehall Street. 

Basically what you're saying is that if we take away Late Night Q101 service to Manhattan, then were left with a "Pick Your Poison" situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, FLX9304 said:

I suggest that you should leave the Q101 the way it is because Astoria area at night uses these buses, especially at night between 2-3:30a both the Q60/101 end at the same spot and go thru the same bridge. It’s the only two non TA buses that connect to the M15 SBS near 57th St & 2nd Ave. the Q32 does not. 

Btw: the Q60 is very slow. But they have no other choice. The (E)(M)(R) trains are too crowded. 

The M15 SBS does not run overnight, so that point is moot.

Even in the daytime, is there really demand to/from the M15 SBS? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Probably should have been clearer with that, but by split, I meant any type of split (does not have to necessarily have to be an even split). The way I was thinking it was, the Q60 becomes two routes, split in Jamaica. 

The reason the Q6 gets involved is because under such a split, the southern split of the Q60 would basically almost resemble the Q6 (except for the portion when it heads off Sutphin Boulevard in South Jamaica). Don't know how many people take the Q60 in that area compared to walking to the Q6, but since the current headways tend to be infrequent, I would prefer to allocate those resources into running more Q6 service. 

So, a split of an extension....

You're basically saying run the Q60 to Sutphin/Rockaway & split the resultant of that, so the portion of the Q6 b/w Jamaica av & Sutphin/Rockaway Blvd gets more service...

I suppose the split that would travel the current Q60 short turn route (the northern split) would be left intact (i.e. East Midtown - Sutphin/Archer).... However, for the (southern) split emanating from Sutphin/Rockaway, where would those buses terminate at in Jamaica? With the Q6 at 165th? With the Q40? Somewhere else in Jamaica....

1 minute ago, Around the Horn said:

I would assume they're additional.

I'd be shocked if they added service to the Q32 (even if it's to make up for the fact that they were unwise to take the M4 away from Penn).... Even before the 2010 cuts (back when a lot of folks on RD, SC, and the early stages of this forum were on that combine the Q32 with the Q33 shit - when the Q33 used to run inside LGA), I always gotten the sense that they want to completely do away with that route....

1 minute ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The M15 SBS does not run overnight, so that point is moot.

Beat me to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

1. Routes need to be straightened so that a direct north-south bus route serves Maimonides Medical Center. (AGREED) Create a bus route between Maimonides and Bay Ridge or Downtown Brooklyn via 3rd Avenue and 2nd Avenue

2. Service on 16th Avenue discontinued in 2010 needs to be restored using better routings serving additional areas so that it does not merely duplicate a nearby route with better service. (AGREED) Return the B23 and improve connections to the (2)(5) to the Junction.

3. Improved east-west access is needed across Bensonhurst and Marine Park and Gerritsen Beach. (AGREED) Changes need to be made to existing B31 and creation of a new route for this area

4. New shopping centers have been built in Spring Creek and in Canarsie that remain largely inaccessible by public transit. A 20-minute car trip from southern Brooklyn to Spring Creek should not take between 90 minutes and two hours by bus. (AGREED) * In addition Shopping center being created on Kings Highway and Foster Avenue.

5. Service gaps on Empire Boulevard, Clarkson, and Albany Avenue require indirect travel to make simple trips accounting for the huge numbers of cabs outside Kings County Medical Center. (AGREED). Albany Avenue and Clarkson Avenue desperately needs bus routes to improve KCMC connection

6. Several new routes are needed to serve JFK Airport for employees as well as visitors. A single route from Bedford Stuyvesant is grossly inadequate and converting it to SBS is not a solution. (AGREED). The B15 plus additional existing and new routes throughout Brooklyn should cure the problem.

7. Improved access is needed between Sheepshead Bay and the Rockaways, also a 20-minute trip by car, but up to a two-hour trip by bus. (AGREED) I think the Q22 should be a candidate for Brooklyn Service at least during rush-hours since the 35 sure does need help.

8. The B44 SBS should have a branch to Kingsborough Community College when school is in session, operating non-stop from Avenue X. (DISAGREE)

Source: http://www.gothamgazette.com/opinion/8099-designing-bus-routes-to-attract-passengers-and-reverse-declining-ridership-part-3

@BrooklynBus: I agree with points 1-7 my answers in italics.

However, number 8 has been discussed on numerous occasions that the B44SBS cannot travel to KCC since the routing from WBP to KCC on a good day can average up to 2 hours and in light of the speed limit and vision zero. It is unable that the 44SBS can travel to KCC.  We already have the B49 going to KCC (FB) and B1 (UP). Now, my suggestion would be to possibly have a bus start from the Junction-Flatbush/Nostrand to KCC. This can possibly be a market generator for the people who live in Flatbush and points via Nostrand & Sheepshead Bay. Since the junction has connections to the (2)(5) , B6, B11, B41, Q35, B103 and BM2. These connections will provide essential service for patrons using the new bus line to KCC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

@BrooklynBus: I agree with points 1-7 my answers in italics.

However, number 8 has been discussed on numerous occasions that the B44SBS cannot travel to KCC since the routing from WBP to KCC on a good day can average up to 2 hours and in light of the speed limit and vision zero. It is unable that the 44SBS can travel to KCC.  We already have the B49 going to KCC (FB) and B1 (UP). Now, my suggestion would be to possibly have a bus start from the Junction-Flatbush/Nostrand to KCC. This can possibly be a market generator for the people who live in Flatbush and points via Nostrand & Sheepshead Bay. Since the junction has connections to the (2)(5) , B6, B11, B41, Q35, B103 and BM2. These connections will provide essential service for patrons using the new bus line to KCC.

I am glad you agree with points 1 to 7. I stated numerous times why I thought number 8 is a good idea and won't repeat myself other than saying, I previously stated that before a decision is made to extend the route, it would first have to be semi-reliable, not twice the schedule allotment. 

Funny, before SBS, I never heard anyone saying it takes twice as long as the scheduled running time to go from one end of the route to the other. Especially strange since SBS was supposed to increase reliability. Wondering now if the same is true for the B46. 

The only other thing I will add is the following. You suggest a possible route from the Junction to KCC. I think you would first have to do a study to determine where the KCC students are coming from. My feeling is that most who could benefit from this route live north of the Junction area than south of it. That is not to say that some routes terminating at the Junction and going south would be a bad idea by itself especially during rush hours. That study would be easy enough to do because KCC has all this data where their students live and could easily ascertain if it wanted to the routes used by them. 

On another note, I heard that KCC has the highest percentage of students who drive to school among the City colleges, greater than Staten Island and Queens. I suspect that many of those students who drive are coming from Canarsie and the East New York area since bus travel times from those areas are like 90 minutes to 2 hours usually with three buses and two fares while a car ride can take 20 minutes on the Belt Parkway without traffic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

 

2 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

These parts of your article were really great and worth reading! I really like the point ou made about (MTA) and operating costs. Though, I feel as if it’s going to take a lot of people and political will for the (MTA) to change their practices. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I am glad you agree with points 1 to 7. I stated numerous times why I thought number 8 is a good idea and won't repeat myself other than saying, I previously stated that before a decision is made to extend the route, it would first have to be semi-reliable, not twice the schedule allotment. 

Funny, before SBS, I never heard anyone saying it takes twice as long as the scheduled running time to go from one end of the route to the other. Especially strange since SBS was supposed to increase reliability. Wondering now if the same is true for the B46. 

The only other thing I will add is the following. You suggest a possible route from the Junction to KCC. I think you would first have to do a study to determine where the KCC students are coming from. My feeling is that most who could benefit from this route live north of the Junction area than south of it. That is not to say that some routes terminating at the Junction and going south would be a bad idea by itself especially during rush hours. That study would be easy enough to do because KCC has all this data where their students live and could easily ascertain if it wanted to the routes used by them. 

On another note, I heard that KCC has the highest percentage of students who drive to school among the City colleges, greater than Staten Island and Queens. I suspect that many of those students who drive are coming from Canarsie and the East New York area since bus travel times from those areas are like 90 minutes to 2 hours usually with three buses and two fares while a car ride can take 20 minutes on the Belt Parkway without traffic. 

Point #7 is something I had a heated discussion with the (MTA) about in my previous meeting, but you're right. That's exactly their attitude. We can't really improve service because we don't control traffic, so how can you expect us to maintain such "high standards"? LMAO I countered that with them having BusTrek now. I told them, I said before you had to have buses do dry runs to get an idea of the time points, but now you have BusTrek, so you have no excuse. The room was quiet. lol The other issue is I think they try to lobby the DOT, but the DOT does what it wants to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The other issue is I think they try to lobby the DOT, but the DOT does what it wants to.

This part sounds like a lack of communication and co-operation between 2 agencies. If DOT were thrown into this, then it wouldn’t be an excuse for either company to not bring reliable bus service. But that’s a different discussion for a different time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

 

These parts of your article were really great and worth reading! I really like the point ou made about (MTA) and operating costs. Though, I feel as if it’s going to take a lot of people and political will for the (MTA) to change their practices. 

Thanks. We can only hope that Byford reads this and is willing to change their practices instead of being guided by the same people who got us in the mess we are in today. 

I even got a mention by name on Streetsblog without any negative commentary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

@BrooklynBus: I agree with points 1-7 my answers in italics.

However, number 8 has been discussed on numerous occasions that the B44SBS cannot travel to KCC since the routing from WBP to KCC on a good day can average up to 2 hours and in light of the speed limit and vision zero. It is unable that the 44SBS can travel to KCC.  We already have the B49 going to KCC (FB) and B1 (UP). Now, my suggestion would be to possibly have a bus start from the Junction-Flatbush/Nostrand to KCC. This can possibly be a market generator for the people who live in Flatbush and points via Nostrand & Sheepshead Bay. Since the junction has connections to the (2)(5) , B6, B11, B41, Q35, B103 and BM2. These connections will provide essential service for patrons using the new bus line to KCC.

I'm going to have to agree with @BrooklynBus on why a B44 SBS to Kingsborough is a good idea. However, to ease concerns about reliability, I would suggest possibly ending it at Fulton Street instead of going all the way to Williamsburg. That way, if the buses get bogged down in traffic in Crown Heights, then it can turn around and make the trip south without affecting service in Bed-Stuy and Williamsburg.

 

In addition, I also have ideas to serve the new shopping centers. To start, I would like to make service serve Canarsie Plaza. This proposal would be tacked onto the @BrooklynBus proposals from 2004, specifically route changes in Flatbush and East Flatbush. To start, the B7 would not be eliminated. Instead, this service would be merged with the B82 (but keep the B7 designation), and operate via Foster Avenue to Canarsie Plaza. B7 and B82 service would me modified to operate every 8 minutes, with 4 minute service combined between Coney Island and Flatbush Avenue for most of the day. The B7 would be staffed as part of the B82 and operate out of the East New York Depot. Also, back in 2004, you proposed the B23 be renamed the B21 with service along 13th Avenue to 86th Street. While your plans had the route end at Kings Hwy and Beverly Road, in my plans, the B21 would keep the B23 designation, but have your proposed routing, and make a 5 minute extension along Beverly Road, Avenue B and Remsen Avenue to Canarsie Plaza.

 

Next up is Gateway Center. To solve this, extend the B82 SBS to Gateway Center via the B83 routing. Extend it on the western end to Coney Island. This would ensure that Coney Island (as well as parts of Southern Brooklyn) gets one- or two-bus rides to the shopping mall. A three-legged transfer would be provided between Local and Limited/SBS variants of a route so that passengers with pay-per-ride cards can transfer between the variants without a third transfer. This would be effective on the B44 Local and SBS and B82 Local and SBS.

 

Your proposed B22 LTD route would be modified. Under my new plans, the route would be renumbered the B34 and become an actually-feasible and workable SBS route. The B34 SBS would remain mostly the same, but with a few modifications. Several new stops would be made in Sheepshead Bay and in Canarsie. More Specifically, here are the list of stops in Brooklyn:

  • Bay Ridge/86th Street
  • 4th Avenue and 95th Street
  • 4th Avenue and Shore Road
  • Shore Pkwy and Bay Pkwy
  • Shore Pkwy and Knapp Street
  • Knapp Street and Avenue W
  • Avenue U and Gerritsen Avenue
  • Avenue U and East 33rd Street
  • Avenue U and Flatbush Avenue
  • Avenue U and East 57th Street
  • Avenue U and Mill Avenue
  • Ralph Avenue and Avenue N
  • Ralph Avenue and Avenue L
  • Flatlands Avenue and Ralph Avenue
  • Flatlands Avenue and East 80th Street
  • East 80th Street and Avenue L
  • Seaview Avenue and East 80th Street
  • Seaview Avenue and East 87th Street
  • Seaview Avenue and Remsen Avenue
  • Seaview Avenue and Rockaway Pkwy
  • Rockaway Pkwy and Canarsie Pier
  • Spring Creek Towers Loop
  • Gateway Mall

 

Some stops were added for service coverage, since most stops are in areas where the B34 SBS is the only route on the street (Seaview Avenue). In addition, I also proposed deviations from the parkway at Penn Avenue and at Gateway Mall for coverage reasons. By having the route exit at Penn Av, Spring Creek Towers would be directly served, saving the residents there who desire the airport at least 15 minutes. I also proposed the deviation to the mall for potential transfers to routes serving the mall, allowing transfers to the B13, B14 (if extended), B82 SBS (if extended), B83, B84 and Q8, and also relieve crowding on the B15. It would also allow for a potential park-n-ride at the Gateway Mall for commuters as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I'm going to have to agree with @BrooklynBus on why a B44 SBS to Kingsborough is a good idea. However, to ease concerns about reliability, I would suggest possibly ending it at Fulton Street instead of going all the way to Williamsburg. That way, if the buses get bogged down in traffic in Crown Heights, then it can turn around and make the trip south without affecting service in Bed-Stuy and Williamsburg.

Fam, I'm not going to go back and forth with this. However, I stand with my position about the B44SBS vs Kingsborough Community College. It has been argued so many times that the 44 doesn't need to go to KCC. I completely understand that you and a few people on here would like a KCC extension from Williamsburg or Bed-Stuy. However, from the way you talk you live more towards the 46 like I do. I take the 44 on various occasions to Crown Heights + Williamsburg and at times to the junction and Sheepshead Bay- Avenue X. So me on a regular good day KCC to Williamsburg and vice versa is about 95-120 mins in traffic. There is no way in hell I want to be on a bus ride in either direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

Fam, I'm not going to go back and forth with this. However, I stand with my position about the B44SBS vs Kingsborough Community College. It has been argued so many times that the 44 doesn't need to go to KCC. I completely understand that you and a few people on here would like a KCC extension from Williamsburg or Bed-Stuy. However, from the way you talk you live more towards the 46 like I do. I take the 44 on various occasions to Crown Heights + Williamsburg and at times to the junction and Sheepshead Bay- Avenue X. So me on a regular good day KCC to Williamsburg and vice versa is about 95-120 mins in traffic. There is no way in hell I want to be on a bus ride in either direction.

I didn’t say it would go to Williamsburg. I was proposing this weekday-only branch would end at Fulton Street to ease reliability concerns. That way, if traffic can get bad in Crown Heights, then they can turn around before reaching Bed-Stuy. If they can remove the B46 SBS from Broadway in Bed-Stuy, then why would you oppose a similar plan to cut this branch from Williamsburg?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I'm going to have to agree with @BrooklynBus....

There's a shock.....

17 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

Fam, I'm not going to go back and forth with this. However, I stand with my position about the B44SBS vs Kingsborough Community College. It has been argued so many times that the 44 doesn't need to go to KCC. I completely understand that you and a few people on here would like a KCC extension from Williamsburg or Bed-Stuy. However, from the way you talk you live more towards the 46 like I do. I take the 44 on various occasions to Crown Heights + Williamsburg and at times to the junction and Sheepshead Bay- Avenue X. So me on a regular good day KCC to Williamsburg and vice versa is about 95-120 mins in traffic. There is no way in hell I want to be on a bus ride in either direction.

Had it not been for your post extracting those bullet points from the third part of the article, I wasn't going to bother checking it out..... Parts 1 & 2 were good reads... Not that 3 was sub-par or anything, but I already know where BrooklynBus stands when it comes to what alterations & additions he believes should be made.... We've had enough discussions/back & forths/whatever.....

As for BrooklynBusC99. all dude is doing is using BrooklynBus' expertise & prior status with the MTA as a shield - much like ole boy (can't recall his handle right this second) was doing w/ DJ Hammers.... You would think BrooklynBus' 2004 plan was the solution to world peace & the universal cure for damn cancer with as much as he references it... Jesus Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

There's a shock.....

Had it not been for your post extracting those bullet points from the third part of the article, I wasn't going to bother checking it out..... Parts 1 & 2 were good reads... Not that 3 was sub-par or anything, but I already know where BrooklynBus stands when it comes to what alterations & additions he believes should be made.... We've had enough discussions/back & forths/whatever.....

As for BrooklynBusC99. all dude is doing is using BrooklynBus' expertise & prior status with the MTA as a shield - much like ole boy (can't recall his handle right this second) was doing w/ DJ Hammers.... You would think BrooklynBus' 2004 plan was the solution to world peace & the universal cure for damn cancer with as much as he references it... Jesus Christ.

I never pretended it was any universal cure, but a point for starting a discussion which it has done. But I do admit, I strongly believe in them and am honored the way Jeremiah believes in them so much. I sort of ignored Northern Brooklyn because the route system is better there and I only have a few ideas there. I know you have some ideas for that area which you have mentioned. I admit I have not really looked at them that closely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I never pretended it was any universal cure....

That was in reference to BrooklynBusC99. not you.... I know you seldom reference your site/plan; ole boy however references it like it's gospel.... There's a fine line between an admiration & an idée fixe... Personally, I wouldn't want anybody constantly co-signing me like that..... Anyway, we've had enough discussions about your ideas over the years, yet I get this guy directing me to it like I'm nescient of it.... It's irritating.....

7 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

....but a point for starting a discussion which it has done. But I do admit, I strongly believe in them and am honored the way Jeremiah believes in them so much. I sort of ignored Northern Brooklyn because the route system is better there and I only have a few ideas there. I know you have some ideas for that area which you have mentioned. I admit I have not really looked at them that closely. 

Of course you're going to back your own ideas; I wouldn't expect anything less..... I mean, I don't have to tell you that Southern Brooklyn has some very conspicuous gaps in service (among other things).... Northern Brooklyn IMO (especially when you start hitting Williamsburg & Bushwick) has serious problems with antiquity - It's not much of a wonder why you have as many people walking and/or biking to the (J)/(M), (L), or the (G)..... Even with the advent of the B32 (which I'm glad is being patronized by those folks in Greenpoint, at least) & the route it siphoned riders from (the B62), the amount of people hoofing it over the Pulaski bridge shouldn't be the case.... Unlike the Brooklyn (especially) and the Manhattan bridges (to a lesser extent), those don't be tourists either.... Something else I don't exactly buy, is all of that walking being voluntary either; more like it's a symptom of something not being fulfilled....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

 

Had it not been for your post extracting those bullet points from the third part of the article, I wasn't going to bother checking it out..... Parts 1 & 2 were good reads... Not that 3 was sub-par or anything, but I already know where BrooklynBus stands when it comes to what alterations & additions he believes should be made.... We've had enough discussions/back & forths/whatever.....

For me I'm cool with points 1-7 all b/c they are all valid to an extent. Some of my answers are in italics. The growth of Brooklyn is a big reason that these services are needed and essential. However, I just cannot stand with Kingsborough Community College via the B44SBS/LCL. To me it's nerve wrecking. Whether it's in Bed-Stuy/Williamsburg or In Flatbush. If KCC needed additional bus service help a study would need to be formed before such service would be valid.

Another issue is that (MTA) buses aren't allowed at KCC main campus So I wonder how service will be effective.  At least at CSI (MTA) buses are allowed in the main facility in Willowbrook.

I'm also tired of the kid taking Brooklyn bus words for gospel. I totally understand Brooklyn bus planning capabilities. However, there are times I tend to disagree with him but puts up good arguments to state his position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

For me I'm cool with points 1-7 all b/c they are all valid to an extent. Some of my answers are in italics. The growth of Brooklyn is a big reason that these services are needed and essential. However, I just cannot stand with Kingsborough Community College via the B44SBS/LCL. To me it's nerve wrecking. Whether it's in Bed-Stuy/Williamsburg or In Flatbush. If KCC needed additional bus service help a study would need to be formed before such service would be valid.

Another issue is that (MTA) buses aren't allowed at KCC main campus So I wonder how service will be effective.  At least at CSI (MTA) buses are allowed in the main facility in Willowbrook.

I'm also tired of the kid taking Brooklyn bus words for gospel. I totally understand Brooklyn bus planning capabilities. However, there are times I tend to disagree with him but puts up good arguments to state his position. 

Not only are (MTA) buses not allowed on the KCC campus, the college stopped allowing the school buses on campus either. And it isn't even the MTA's fault. They offered to extend the routes like ten years ago and the college wouldn't let them. They would have needed additional space to do it but it could have been worked out. With the exsting setup, the subway shuttles should be allowed. That would give students more of an incentive to use them if they could rather than loading up the live haul buses forcing them to skip stops to the subway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

Not only are (MTA) buses not allowed on the KCC campus, the college stopped allowing the school buses on campus either. And it isn't even the MTA's fault. They offered to extend the routes like ten years ago and the college wouldn't let them. They would have needed additional space to do it but it could have been worked out. With the existing setup, the subway shuttles should be allowed. That would give students more of an incentive to use them if they could rather than loading up the live haul buses forcing them to skip stops to the subway. 

For both depots: Ulmer Park and Flatbush ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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