The Official Bee-Line Thread

[B35 via Church]

13 hours ago, Lex said:

That sounds more like an attempt to get more people on the bus than anything else, especially with that bit to/from Stew Leonard's to consider.

To have the current BL-78 making LTD stops is definitely an attempt to get more people on the bus.... The old BL-78 didn't do all that shit it does now, east of the Thruway....

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

What did the BL-78 used to do, and what does it do now? I thought the only non-stop portion was along I-87 up to Stew Leonard's.

Being brief, it used to basically parallel the BL-8 routing from Getty Sq. to I-87, to then run up to the Home Depot & then the Stew Leonard's, where it ended..... The whole route was a LTD (felt more like an express, to be honest)....

Now it parallels the BL-3 routing from Getty Sq. to I-87., still serves said Home Depot & Stew Leonards, then descends down & over to serve Ridge Hill, to go on to end at Tuckahoe Rd/Central Park av.... The route got extended & on top of it, it makes local stops along the current routing, along the way....

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I just realized, does anybody think there might be some demand for the BL-77 to make a stop off around the Westchester Medical Center? Or would it just serve to steal some riders from the BL-15?

Probably.... But I don't think it would make a real difference either way.... Last couple inbound BL-77's I saw (incoming) at the Transcenter had less than a handful of people on the thing

26 minutes ago, Mtatransit said:

I still don't know what ridership base 18 bus is suppose to serve that is not served by the 16. Is it from peekskill RR to the area around Crompond? Could service be reallocated to the 16 instead?

The BL-16's that run straight to the RR station in the morning, don't serve Hudson Valley Hospital (Crompond rd. area) like they normally do.... This is where the BL-18 fills the void.... So the answer to your first question is yes.

To the second question, given the current BL-16 routing b/w [Downtown Peekskill & Cortlandt Town Center], I don't see how you'd go about doing that....

[Mtatransit]

9 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The BL-16's that run straight to the RR station in the morning, don't serve Hudson Valley Hospital (Crompond rd. area) like they normally do.... This is where the BL-18 fills the void.... So the answer to your first question is yes.

To the second question, given the current BL-16 routing b/w [Downtown Peekskill & Cortlandt Town Center], I don't see how you'd go about doing that....

Yeah, I didn't realize the 16 serves Peekskill RR in the morning, which is why I thought the 18 bus was redundant. But it all makes sense now.

[Lawrence St]

3 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

Probably not to be honest. Bee Line essentially killed the route back in 2010.

Some things I expect Bee Line to do

- Service between 241st and Yonkers will probably be combined somehow. 

- Service between White Plains and Yonkers. 1W is a easy candidate to be eliminated or reduced. Service on other routes will probably be combined or streamlined or rerouted

- I'm not sure how long they will continue to servicing the entire Boston Rd especially with NYCT service in the Bronx redesign. There is nothing preventing them to just end the route at Dyre Avenue

- That area between WCC and Weschester Med Center will probably be streamlined somehow. 

 

I still don't know what ridership base 18 bus is suppose to serve that is not served by the 16. Is it from peekskill RR to the area around Crompound? Could service be reallocated to the 16 instead?

I don't see why not. 15 is not frequent and 77 could supplement service there. 

 

 

The only thing they can do with the 60/61/62 is make it closed door along Boston Post Road, as people still do use it to get to the Fordham Railroad Station. However the 62 routing still does not make sense, as it starts and ends at Fordham Road and Tiebout Av, but the 60 and 61 end at 189th St/Washington Av.

If it were up to me, I would make the 61 the LTD route and have it make LTD stops along Boston Post Road, and reroute the 62 to make those same LTD stops instead of making all the local stops since it is an express route. 

In terms of the 78, making it local was a way to try and get people on the bus, however all it did was make the route worse. Not to me to mention people repeatedly get on the wrong bus at Costco and Stew Leonard's since both directions of the 78 stop at the same stop.

The 20X actually used to be a true express route, before it was renumbered to the 21 and then made a limited stop route when they started adding more stops to it. The 20X designation was then reused to signify that it was a 20 trip that did not stop at Cross County. Interesting enough, back around 2015, those 20 trips that ran to Fort Hill Road and Yonkers Av never used the 20X designation until sometime later.

And speaking of the 20, dear God is the schedule a mess. I dont know who is making these schedules, but Jesus. They have an inbound 20 trip from Cross County starting at the same exact time as an inbound 20X trip is leaving Central Park Ave / Staunton St which them causes those buses to bunch up.

[40MntVrn]

5 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

And speaking of the 20, dear God is the schedule a mess. I dont know who is making these schedules, but Jesus. They have an inbound 20 trip from Cross County starting at the same exact time as an inbound 20X trip is leaving Central Park Ave / Staunton St which them causes those buses to bunch up.

This duplication is met with merit. It allows for consistent frequency on the return trips and some drivers will switch to the 4 or deadhead to the start of another route. Similar to on Sundays, the 7 runs from Yonkers to Mount Vernon and that same bus will turn to a 40 and run to White Plains.

 

[B35 via Church]

8 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

Some things I expect Bee Line to do

- Service between 241st and Yonkers will probably be combined somehow. 

- Service between White Plains and Yonkers. 1W is a easy candidate to be eliminated or reduced. Service on other routes will probably be combined or streamlined or rerouted

- I'm not sure how long they will continue to servicing the entire Boston Rd especially with NYCT service in the Bronx redesign. There is nothing preventing them to just end the route at Dyre Avenue

- That area between WCC and Weschester Med Center will probably be streamlined somehow. 

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The only thing they can do with the 60/61/62 is make it closed door along Boston Post Road, as people still do use it to get to the Fordham Railroad Station.

However the 62 routing still does not make sense, as it starts and ends at Fordham Road and Tiebout Av, but the 60 and 61 end at 189th St/Washington Av.

I'd say the days of Bee-Line running service that deep into the Bronx (Fordham) will be numbered....

The "number" of Bronx/Yonkers routes panning to/from central Westchester county will be lessened....

A complete re-configuring of the network in southern Westchester (namely, Yonkers-Mt. Vernon-New Roc'), in conjunction with supplying adequate frequencies to whatever modified routes they'd end up concocting in this region of the county, would be in order - which I can see being a good thing, TBH....

--------

Since the Boston rd. corridor is a focal point in this discussion at the moment, quite frankly I think the BL-62 (as is) will be eliminated, the BL-61 truncated to running b/w Mamaroneck & Port Chester (bonus chuckles points if they end up having it serve Playland, to do away with that god-awful BL-13 extension over the part of the old BL-76), and the BL-60 being cut back to either New Roc' Transcenter or Dyre from White Plains... Whether buses will take the current BL-60 routing, the current BL-61 routing, the current BL-66 routing (or some mixing & matching of trips alternating to serve either) b/w Larchmont & New Roc' remains to be seen..... Whether they keep the BL-62 route number also remains to be seen, but I do think some sort of LTD or express variant would be had on the (said, truncated) BL-60 to/from White Plains - similar to how the BL-41 operates....

[Lex]

1 hour ago, 40MntVrn said:

This duplication is met with merit. It allows for consistent frequency on the return trips and some drivers will switch to the 4 or deadhead to the start of another route. Similar to on Sundays, the 7 runs from Yonkers to Mount Vernon and that same bus will turn to a 40 and run to White Plains.

 

And yet, it becomes painfully easy for one to get scraps while the other fills up.

Have I mentioned that both trips are extremely likely to use artics?

[checkmatechamp13]

What are the ridership patterns like on the BL-9 & BL-32? I'm thinking of creating a route that combines the eastern portion of the BL-32 with the southern portion of the BL-9 (in other words, it would run from Broadway & Carlyle up to Getty Square via Rumsey Road, and then continue up Nepperhan-Walsh-Palisade-Ashburton-Park-Glenwood-Ridge-Lake-Morningside and terminate at Convent Place (on the return trip, buses would run down Voss/Ridge and then run the same route in reverse)

Not sure what a good turnaround scenario would be on the southern end, but worse-case it could always go to the BL-8 terminal at the College of Mount Saint Vincent. 

The BL-2 can be extended to Executive & Nepperhan if access to Executive Plaza from the Nepperhan corridor is a concern.

[Lawrence St]

3 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

What are the ridership patterns like on the BL-9 & BL-32? I'm thinking of creating a route that combines the eastern portion of the BL-32 with the southern portion of the BL-9 (in other words, it would run from Broadway & Carlyle up to Getty Square via Rumsey Road, and then continue up Nepperhan-Walsh-Palisade-Ashburton-Park-Glenwood-Ridge-Lake-Morningside and terminate at Convent Place (on the return trip, buses would run down Voss/Ridge and then run the same route in reverse)

Not sure what a good turnaround scenario would be on the southern end, but worse-case it could always go to the BL-8 terminal at the College of Mount Saint Vincent. 

The BL-2 can be extended to Executive & Nepperhan if access to Executive Plaza from the Nepperhan corridor is a concern.

The (current) 9 was designed so that people in the retirement homes along the route had an easier way of getting to & from Getty Square and Executive Park. The old 9 wasn't a loop route, it ran to Bolmer Av and had little to no ridership which is why they changed it.

 

5 hours ago, 40MntVrn said:

This duplication is met with merit. It allows for consistent frequency on the return trips and some drivers will switch to the 4 or deadhead to the start of another route. Similar to on Sundays, the 7 runs from Yonkers to Mount Vernon and that same bus will turn to a 40 and run to White Plains.

 

Only sometimes. Most of the time it's wasted milage, just convert that 20X trip into a 20 trip and call it a day.

[B35 via Church]

19 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

What are the ridership patterns like on the BL-9 & BL-32? I'm thinking of creating a route that combines the eastern portion of the BL-32 with the southern portion of the BL-9 (in other words, it would run from Broadway & Carlyle up to Getty Square via Rumsey Road, and then continue up Nepperhan-Walsh-Palisade-Ashburton-Park-Glenwood-Ridge-Lake-Morningside and terminate at Convent Place (on the return trip, buses would run down Voss/Ridge and then run the same route in reverse)

Not sure what a good turnaround scenario would be on the southern end, but worse-case it could always go to the BL-8 terminal at the College of Mount Saint Vincent. 

The BL-2 can be extended to Executive & Nepperhan if access to Executive Plaza from the Nepperhan corridor is a concern.

I'm not understanding how you're getting buses from Rumsey rd.... to Getty Sq.... then back over to those apartments up along Walsh rd..... That type of routing sounds very convoluted.

 

[checkmatechamp13]

8 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

I'm not understanding how you're getting buses from Rumsey rd.... to Getty Sq.... then back over to those apartments up along Walsh rd..... That type of routing sounds very convoluted.

This is the routing I was proposing.

Basically, my issue with both the BL-32 and BL-9 is that they're one-way loop routes that duplicate other busier routes for a significant distance. The western half of the BL-32 basically duplicates the BL-8 (it's a block away and the elevation difference isn't too substantial). So I figured it would be better to have it focus on the eastern portion, and serve it bidirectionally.

For the BL-9, it's a similar situation (it duplicates the BL-2 northbound, and the BL-5/BL-78 southbound). The "unique" area is just the Walsh Road corridor, and the pocket in between Nepperhan & Park (Vineyard Avenue, Ridge Avenue, etc). But the problem is that those two corridors by themselves don't really warrant their own route, so I had to think of something coming from the south to pair it up to, and the only one I could think of was the BL-32 (Since the BL-4 is obviously way too busy).

And of course, the other issue is that the duplication is only in one direction (So it's not as if the BL-9 & BL-32 really supplement the other routes)

What was the original BL-9 route? IIRC, it involved running down Morsemere. Was it basically Tudor Woods - Yonkers MNRR via Morsemere, Vineyard, and Walsh in both directions?

Edited January 23, 2021 by checkmatechamp13

[Lawrence St]

What about combining the 8 and the 45?

[checkmatechamp13]

11 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

What about combining the 8 and the 45?

I would extend the BL-8 to Eastchester Square (via Main Street), and extend the BL-45 to Stew Leonard's (via Fisher Avenue, Columbus Avenue, Tuckahoe Road, and Ridge Hill Blvd). The BL-78 would be cut back to run from Stew Leonard's to Getty Square.

[Don Brown]

It just dawned on me that Bee Lines has a relatively old bus fleet now, with half of it being mostly Orion 5s and a few Orion 7 OG hybrids. Any plans to replace those remaining DD50 Orion Vs and the Cummins ISM units as well?

[40MntVrn]

1 hour ago, Don Brown said:

It just dawned on me that Bee Lines has a relatively old bus fleet now, with half of it being mostly Orion 5s and a few Orion 7 OG hybrids. Any plans to replace those remaining DD50 Orion Vs and the Cummins ISM units as well?

Yes. WDOT plans on migrating the entire fleet to hybrid-electric by 2025.

[B35 via Church]

16 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

This is the routing I was proposing.

Basically, my issue with both the BL-32 and BL-9 is that they're one-way loop routes that duplicate other busier routes for a significant distance. The western half of the BL-32 basically duplicates the BL-8 (it's a block away and the elevation difference isn't too substantial). So I figured it would be better to have it focus on the eastern portion, and serve it bidirectionally.

For the BL-9, it's a similar situation (it duplicates the BL-2 northbound, and the BL-5/BL-78 southbound). The "unique" area is just the Walsh Road corridor, and the pocket in between Nepperhan & Park (Vineyard Avenue, Ridge Avenue, etc). But the problem is that those two corridors by themselves don't really warrant their own route, so I had to think of something coming from the south to pair it up to, and the only one I could think of was the BL-32 (Since the BL-4 is obviously way too busy).

And of course, the other issue is that the duplication is only in one direction (So it's not as if the BL-9 & BL-32 really supplement the other routes)

What was the original BL-9 route? IIRC, it involved running down Morsemere. Was it basically Tudor Woods - Yonkers MNRR via Morsemere, Vineyard, and Walsh in both directions?

...that's the convoluted routing I was worried about. Thought you may have had something else in mind.

Regardless, I wouldn't bother combining portions of either of the two routes.... That said, I wouldn't leave the BL-32 intact either; never cared for having one route serving [Park & Nodine Hills] & Ludlow..... All you really have to do for the Hawthorne portion of the BL-32 is to have a select amt. of BL-8's turn off at Valentine for Hawthorne.... Everything the BL-32 does on that side of the route b/w [after it turns off Hawthorne] & [MNRR Yonkers itself] I would eliminate.... Total waste of time... Buses would turn off Hawthorne right after serving the Highland stop & continue doing the rest of the BL-8... BL-8 could use more service anyway....

As for the Park Hill/Nodine Hill portion of the BL-32, I would narrow the unidirectional nature of the (so-called) "Yonkers Loop" by having it serve these two areas only & calling it a day.... You can get away with "Bx18-ing" the route.... Just like with the current BL-32 routing, this also averts the concern of  terminating buses around Caryl/S. Broadway....

The old BL-9, yeah, you got the gist of it..... Went from the RR station to Cross Hill Academy.... Served those apartments along Walsh in both directions.... It never took Vineyard though (buses went Ashburton-Park instead of Ashburton-Vineyard like they do currently)....

7 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I would extend the BL-8 to Eastchester Square (via Main Street), and extend the BL-45 to Stew Leonard's (via Fisher Avenue, Columbus Avenue, Tuckahoe Road, and Ridge Hill Blvd). The BL-78 would be cut back to run from Stew Leonard's to Getty Square.

Nah, it's real wasteful to have both the BL-8 & (an extended) BL-45 running b/w Eastchester Sq. & Ridge Hill Blvd, even if their routings b/w White Plains rd & MNRR Tuckahoe are different..... Hell, MNRR Tuckahoe gets too much service with the current BL-8 as it is..... Way I see it, Bee-Line has it right with ending BL-78's at Central Park av... Where they have it wrong is having tinkered with the BL-78 (routing-wise, b/w [Getty Sq. & the LL garage], and the discontinuation of LTD service in the process) in an attempt to balance the loads b/w the BL-8 & the BL-78..... People are going to continue to bombard BL-8's, since it connects you to the Bronx routes & what not, down at Mt. St. Vincent..... This is why I've been saying for the longest that the BL-8 & the BL-78 operations should be combined, with LTD service being brought back in the process... Of course, this would require Bee-Line to boost service on the resultant line.... If there are to be trips short turning at Getty Sq., there would be very very few of them throughout the say (so, the vast majority of trips would run down to the county line)... On the opposite end of the route, service would be basically equally divided to [serving Stew Leonards & Ridge Hill; a la the current BL-78] or [continuing straight along Tuckahoe rd; a la the current BL-8], before serving points east..... Personally, I would have more buses short turning at Central Park av & less buses ending at MNRR Tuckahoe.

[checkmatechamp13]

 

On 1/22/2021 at 9:47 AM, B35 via Church said:

I'd say the days of Bee-Line running service that deep into the Bronx (Fordham) will be numbered....

The "number" of Bronx/Yonkers routes panning to/from central Westchester county will be lessened....

A complete re-configuring of the network in southern Westchester (namely, Yonkers-Mt. Vernon-New Roc'), in conjunction with supplying adequate frequencies to whatever modified routes they'd end up concocting in this region of the county, would be in order - which I can see being a good thing, TBH....

--------

Since the Boston rd. corridor is a focal point in this discussion at the moment, quite frankly I think the BL-62 (as is) will be eliminated, the BL-61 truncated to running b/w Mamaroneck & Port Chester (bonus chuckles points if they end up having it serve Playland, to do away with that god-awful BL-13 extension over the part of the old BL-76), and the BL-60 being cut back to either New Roc' Transcenter or Dyre from White Plains... Whether buses will take the current BL-60 routing, the current BL-61 routing, the current BL-66 routing (or some mixing & matching of trips alternating to serve either) b/w Larchmont & New Roc' remains to be seen..... Whether they keep the BL-62 route number also remains to be seen, but I do think some sort of LTD or express variant would be had on the (said, truncated) BL-60 to/from White Plains - similar to how the BL-41 operates....

I remember a while back, you had a proposal that involved restructuring the Yonkers-White Plains routes. IIRC, it involved having the BL-6 run to the  train instead of the BL-1, and eliminating the BL-1W. Can you refresh my memory on the details?

Also, while we're on this topic, what do you think of the following:

- Add a stop on the BL-1X & BL-3 at Nepperhan & Ashburton, and Nepperhan & Montague

- Make the BL-3 a full-time route

- Eliminate the BL-1W (And run those trips as BL-1T trips instead, with some extra service added to the BL-13). 

You could take it a step further and eliminate the BL-1C and have the BL-5 run up to WMC, but I think that would go too far, since the Warburton Avenue corridor would then lose access to both White Plains & WMC and would have to make do with the BL-1T for points north.

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

...that's the convoluted routing I was worried about. Thought you may have had something else in mind.

Regardless, I wouldn't bother combining portions of either of the two routes.... That said, I wouldn't leave the BL-32 intact either; never cared for having one route serving [Park & Nodine Hills] & Ludlow..... All you really have to do for the Hawthorne portion of the BL-32 is to have a select amt. of BL-8's turn off at Valentine for Hawthorne.... Everything the BL-32 does on that side of the route b/w [after it turns off Hawthorne] & [MNRR Yonkers itself] I would eliminate.... Total waste of time... Buses would turn off Hawthorne right after serving the Highland stop & continue doing the rest of the BL-8... BL-8 could use more service anyway....

As for the Park Hill/Nodine Hill portion of the BL-32, I would narrow the unidirectional nature of the (so-called) "Yonkers Loop" by having it serve these two areas only & calling it a day.... You can get away with "Bx18-ing" the route.... Just like with the current BL-32 routing, this also averts the concern of  terminating buses around Caryl/S. Broadway....

The old BL-9, yeah, you got the gist of it..... Went from the RR station to Cross Hill Academy.... Served those apartments along Walsh in both directions.... It never took Vineyard though (buses went Ashburton-Park instead of Ashburton-Vineyard like they do currently)....

Nah, it's real wasteful to have both the BL-8 & (an extended) BL-45 running b/w Eastchester Sq. & Ridge Hill Blvd, even if their routings b/w White Plains rd & MNRR Tuckahoe are different..... Hell, MNRR Tuckahoe gets too much service with the current BL-8 as it is..... Way I see it, Bee-Line has it right with ending BL-78's at Central Park av... Where they have it wrong is having tinkered with the BL-78 (routing-wise, b/w [Getty Sq. & the LL garage], and the discontinuation of LTD service in the process) in an attempt to balance the loads b/w the BL-8 & the BL-78..... People are going to continue to bombard BL-8's, since it connects you to the Bronx routes & what not, down at Mt. St. Vincent..... This is why I've been saying for the longest that the BL-8 & the BL-78 operations should be combined, with LTD service being brought back in the process... Of course, this would require Bee-Line to boost service on the resultant line.... If there are to be trips short turning at Getty Sq., there would be very very few of them throughout the say (so, the vast majority of trips would run down to the county line)... On the opposite end of the route, service would be basically equally divided to [serving Stew Leonards & Ridge Hill; a la the current BL-78] or [continuing straight along Tuckahoe rd; a la the current BL-8], before serving points east..... Personally, I would have more buses short turning at Central Park av & less buses ending at MNRR Tuckahoe.

Your BL-32 loop route looks just about perfect. I'd just make a slight tweak to have buses run straight down Elm rather than making that dip up to Oliver (Since the hill tends to plateau around that area)

My reasoning with sending the BL-45 that way was to provide a connection to Stew Leonard's from points east. How big of a destination is Stew Leonard's? (And also, is there pretty much 100% turnover at Stew Leonard's or do people take it from Getty Square to Downtown Yonkers if it comes before the BL-8?)

[Lawrence St]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

 

I remember a while back, you had a proposal that involved restructuring the Yonkers-White Plains routes. IIRC, it involved having the BL-6 run to the  train instead of the BL-1, and eliminating the BL-1W. Can you refresh my memory on the details?

Also, while we're on this topic, what do you think of the following:

- Add a stop on the BL-1X & BL-3 at Nepperhan & Ashburton, and Nepperhan & Montague

- Make the BL-3 a full-time route

- Eliminate the BL-1W (And run those trips as BL-1T trips instead, with some extra service added to the BL-13). 

You could take it a step further and eliminate the BL-1C and have the BL-5 run up to WMC, but I think that would go too far, since the Warburton Avenue corridor would then lose access to both White Plains & WMC and would have to make do with the BL-1T for points north.

Your BL-32 loop route looks just about perfect. I'd just make a slight tweak to have buses run straight down Elm rather than making that dip up to Oliver (Since the hill tends to plateau around that area)

My reasoning with sending the BL-45 that way was to provide a connection to Stew Leonard's from points east. How big of a destination is Stew Leonard's? (And also, is there pretty much 100% turnover at Stew Leonard's or do people take it from Getty Square to Downtown Yonkers if it comes before the BL-8?)

Extending the 6 to 242nd St is a horrible idea, especially with how long the route already is.

In terms of restructuring the southern routes, this is what I would do;

1W & 2 combined; new route 2 operating from 242nd St to White Plains via Tudor Woods.

1T: Eliminated

5: Rerouted via Dobbs Ferry Road, service east of White Plains Eliminated.

6: Eliminated

25: Extended to Executive Park via Broadway.

42: Eliminated

61: Rerouted over #42 route to 238 St Subway

65: New Route between Pleasantville and White Plains (over former #6 route), then via former route 5 routing from White Plains to Harrison, then via former 76 routing to Port Chester.

[Lex]

I'm not necessarily against a bus route between Tarrytown and Ossining, but why use the 13 for that? Unless there's substantial use between that leg and the one between Tarrytown and Port Chester (mostly as far as White Plains), I'd argue it's almost as tacked-on as the backtrack to Rye.

[checkmatechamp13]

5 hours ago, Lex said:

I'm not necessarily against a bus route between Tarrytown and Ossining, but why use the 13 for that? Unless there's substantial use between that leg and the one between Tarrytown and Port Chester (mostly as far as White Plains), I'd argue it's almost as tacked-on as the backtrack to Rye.

There's a decent amount of people who use it interchangably with the BL-14 to White Plains. I don't think it's an issue.

[40MntVrn]

10 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

42: Eliminated

61: Rerouted over #42 route to 238 St Subway

I get what you're saying here but I can't see how this would drive efficiency. The 42 has ~120 daily trips, compared to the 61's ~50. 

If you were to extended the 42 north full-time, almost all runs would be nearly empty north of New Rochelle.

If you were to extended the 42 north part-time, creating some sort of 42P variant,  you'd most likely net the same amount of runs as it currently stands.

[Lawrence St]

3 hours ago, 40MntVrn said:

I get what you're saying here but I can't see how this would drive efficiency. The 42 has ~120 daily trips, compared to the 61's ~50. 

If you were to extended the 42 north full-time, almost all runs would be nearly empty north of New Rochelle.

If you were to extended the 42 north part-time, creating some sort of 42P variant,  you'd most likely net the same amount of runs as it currently stands.

Youd be doing neither, service would run with the same route, but alternate between Port Chester & New Rochelle.

[40MntVrn]

2 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Youd be doing neither, service would run with the same route, but alternate between Port Chester & New Rochelle.

Help me understand, how is this not a 42 that is just extended to Port Chester with runs that short-turn at New Rochelle (a variant)?

[Lawrence St]

2 hours ago, 40MntVrn said:

Help me understand, how is this not a 42 that is just extended to Port Chester with runs that short-turn at New Rochelle (a variant)?

Oh I thought you were talking about a setup similar to how the 45 and 45Q are.

[checkmatechamp13]

I just realized: Would the BL-77 get more people if it were routed through Yorktown Heights (take Underhill up and then follow the BL-10 route)? Would the BL-14/17 dynamic work with the BL-15/77, or does the BL-15 have too low ridership that it needs more "unique" areas to attract sufficient ridership?

[Lex]

Is it really okay to have so little coverage north of the 13's cross-county stint? Sure, WCC and the Medical Center get a good number of routes, but beyond that, the most significant coverage is practically hugging the Hudson until a fairly short distance from Putnam County, where the 16 comes the closest to covering what appear to be gaping holes.