The Official Bee-Line Thread

[checkmatechamp13]

48 minutes ago, Lex said:

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.

Do you have any suggestions for any particular corridors that need coverage? Remember you also have the BL-19 (which in some ways is more of a crosstown than the BL-16, because it connects to MNRR stations on both ends). The only major gap I see is between Yorktown Heights and points east (basically, the old BL-12 corridor back when it used to run to Jefferson Valley Mall). Even to points west, they at least have the BL-10 to Croton.

On a side note, Bee Line has some interesting interline combinations (as per Google Maps). The BL-10 & BL-11 interline in both directions, and the BL-27 trip that extends to Peekskill in the morning comes back down as a BL-15. 

[Lex]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Do you have any suggestions for any particular corridors that need coverage? Remember you also have the BL-19 (which in some ways is more of a crosstown than the BL-16, because it connects to MNRR stations on both ends). The only major gap I see is between Yorktown Heights and points east (basically, the old BL-12 corridor back when it used to run to Jefferson Valley Mall). Even to points west, they at least have the BL-10 to Croton.

On a side note, Bee Line has some interesting interline combinations (as per Google Maps). The BL-10 & BL-11 interline in both directions, and the BL-27 trip that extends to Peekskill in the morning comes back down as a BL-15. 

That's just it. I have no idea what it's like, but I don't like the idea of having so little coverage.

I deliberately left the 19 out, which was in no small part due to it being the only thing east of the 15 and 77 for a good stretch of the county (and because it hangs around the Harlem Line for a fair bit, though even it approaches the river).

[checkmatechamp13]

1 hour ago, Lex said:

That's just it. I have no idea what it's like, but I don't like the idea of having so little coverage.

I deliberately left the 19 out, which was in no small part due to it being the only thing east of the 15 and 77 for a good stretch of the county (and because it hangs around the Harlem Line for a fair bit, though even it approaches the river).

By the way, there's a survey (that closes tomorrow) that gives you the option of ranking priorities, and one of them is new east-west service (doesn't specify where exactly within Westchester).

[B35 via Church]

On 1/24/2021 at 9:20 PM, 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.

Sure, no problem:

• BL-1C & BL-1X operations would be combined (as in, the BL-1c itself would be an express service running b/w The Bronx & WCC/WMC during peak & off-peak hrs)
  • Peak service would run via the current BL-1x route...
  • Midday service would run the BL-1C route from The Bronx to Prospect St, (Yonkers), then go Prospect - S. Broadway - to then run the BL-5 route to Ardsley Sq., to go on to doing the current BL-1C route north of Ardsley Sq..... No stops would be made b/w Getty Sq. & Ardsley Sq.)
• BL-1T unchanged routing-wise... Undergoes a span expansion & a slight frequency increase in the process... Some trips would short turn in Dobbs Ferry (call it the "BL-1D", IDRC)... Nothing would short turn at the Yonkers-Hastings border.
• BL-1W eliminated
• BL-2 unchanged.... This essentially takes the place of the BL-1 Yonkers City Line short turns for shorter distance trips b/w The Bronx & Yonkers
• BL-3 cut back to E.J. Conroy dr. (White Plains)
• BL-6 extended to 242nd , but cut back to E.J. Conroy dr. (White Plains)... There is more demand for the BL-6 than there is for the BL-1 services b/w Getty Sq. & the northern Yonkers border
• BL-63 extended (over the current BL-6 routing) b/w WP Transcenter & Pleasantville for coverage purposes.

My problem with the current setup out of 242nd is that it has too much service running over Warburton av. (BL-1/1c/1t/1w) & too much service running over N/S Broadway in Irvington (BL-1t/1w)....

=============================

As for your suggestions, I agree with adding a stop at Neps & Ashburton; wouldn't bother w/ Montague.... I thought about making the BL-3 a full time route, but I would just frontload the hell out of service on the aforementioned BL-6 instead.... I have the BL-1W eliminated & I would add service on the BL-13 anyway (aside from anything involving reallocating service on the BL-1 branches)..... Given how I'm re-structuring the BL-1c, I would leave the BL-5 as-is....

On 1/24/2021 at 9:20 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

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?)

That's what the current BL-32 does up there, so I just left that as-is.... I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying though.

The demand for Stew Leonards itself (outside of shift workers, that is) is not nearly as strong as it used to be in recent years.... There's isn't 100% turnover at Stew Leonards; there are people that do take BL-78's if it comes first or whatever from Getty Sq./Downtown Yonkers to get to Central Park av. (if that's what you're asking with that question)....

On 1/25/2021 at 2:38 AM, 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.

Tarrytown - Ossining leg is more patronized than the Port Chester - Rye leg, so I don't have a problem with the former....

On 1/25/2021 at 9:38 AM, 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.

Right, much of nobody from off the BL-42 is really trying to get to points along the BL-61 up towards Port Chester.... I would leave the BL-42 alone & cut the BL-61 back to New Roc' (from Port Chester) before extending the BL-42 over that part of the BL-61.... Yeah, the demand for the BL-60 past New Roc' is greater than than of for the BL-61 past New Roc' from Fordham & the rest of the Bronx those two routes serve (60/61), but running the BL-61 over the BL-42 just so that the BL-60 & the BL-61 are differentiable south/west of New Roc' isn't the way to go about it (for reasons you point out, and others)....

Edited January 27, 2021 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Right, much of nobody from off the BL-42 is really trying to get to points along the BL-61 up towards Port Chester.... I would leave the BL-42 alone & cut the BL-61 back to New Roc' (from Port Chester) before extending the BL-42 over that part of the BL-61.... Yeah, the demand for the BL-60 past New Roc' is greater than than of for the BL-61 past New Roc' from Fordham & the rest of the Bronx those two routes serve (60/61), but running the BL-61 over the BL-42 just so that the BL-60 & the BL-61 are differentiable south/west of New Roc' isn't the way to go about it (for reasons you point out, and others)....

I just thought of something: With the BL-42 if you had it go down Sandford & Nereid, across to McClean, you could then have it run down Central Park Avenue to connect to the (4) train. Not only does it connect Mount Vernon (and New Rochelle) to the (4) train, but it also gives southern Mount Vernon direct access to the BL-20. Of course, that would mean the BL-40/41 would need to run to Wakefield full-time.

I thought of a few more things to restructure in Mount Vernon

·         BL-7 takes Prospect Avenue – North Columbus Avenue – Lincoln Avenue (the only issue might be the tighter turns it has to make with artics)

·         BL-55 takes Stevens Avenue – South 5th Avenue – 3rd Street – South Columbus Avenue

·         Later evening service added to both the BL-52 & BL-55 to maintain connection to (general) Petrillo Plaza area (since the BL-42 would run straight into The Bronx). Sunday service added on the BL-52

[40MntVrn]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I just thought of something: With the BL-42 if you had it go down Sandford & Nereid, across to McClean, you could then have it run down Central Park Avenue to connect to the train. Not only does it connect Mount Vernon (and New Rochelle) to the train, but it also gives southern Mount Vernon direct access to the BL-20. Of course, that would mean the BL-40/41 would need to run to Wakefield full-time.

I thought of a few more things to restructure in Mount Vernon

·         BL-7 takes Prospect Avenue – North Columbus Avenue – Lincoln Avenue (the only issue might be the tighter turns it has to make with artics)

·         BL-55 takes Stevens Avenue – South 5th Avenue – 3rd Street – South Columbus Avenue

·         Later evening service added to both the BL-52 & BL-55 to maintain connection to (general) Petrillo Plaza area (since the BL-42 would run straight into The Bronx). Sunday service added on the BL-52

No this I don't hate. If there there was a bit adjustments with the traffic lights along Sanford, you'd 1- decrease travel time on the route and 2- remove all of the tight turns the 42 makes and 3- connect to 2 lines vs just the 1. Dont know if Westchester would have the latitude with NYCDOT to have a line connecting two lines tho.

 

I dont think you'd need to make that many modifications with the 7 and 55. I'd just shift the 52 to the areas where the 42 used to serve.

[checkmatechamp13]

8 hours ago, 40MntVrn said:

No this I don't hate. If there there was a bit adjustments with the traffic lights along Sanford, you'd 1- decrease travel time on the route and 2- remove all of the tight turns the 42 makes and 3- connect to 2 lines vs just the 1. Dont know if Westchester would have the latitude with NYCDOT to have a line connecting two lines tho.

I dont think you'd need to make that many modifications with the 7 and 55. I'd just shift the 52 to the areas where the 42 used to serve.

I wouldn't do that to the BL-52. I'd definitely want to leave it as a straight shot from the Petrillo Plaza area to the . (Plus, the idea is to eliminate some of these tight turns like you said. If it's just the BL-52 doing it instead of the BL-42, you don't gain much. Plus you lose more coverage. Having routes along 5th & Columbus is a better spacing than having routes along Fulton & Columbus)

Ideally MTA/NYCT would coordinate and make it smoother (since arguably you can shift the Bx16 to run across 233rd Street if you let the BL-42 run across Nereid. You just need something connecting that pocket with the train) but I'm not holding my breath. The other possibility is a BL-25/BL-42 combination. I could picture the resultant route being even busier than the BL-7 (which reminds me, I hope that as part of this process, they release some ridership data, both pre-COVID and post-COVID)

Edited January 28, 2021 by checkmatechamp13

[B35 via Church]

On 1/26/2021 at 8:28 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

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?

To your ultimate question, it's the latter.... The BL-15 for a decent amt. of people in northern Westchester County is BL-14 backup.... Another way of putting this is that the patronage of the "unique" portions of the BL-15 sorely pales in comparison to the unique portions of the BL-14.... So if you have the BL-77 steal a portion of that unique BL-15 patronage (as in, that of from Yorktown Heights), you may as well have some select BL-14 trips cover Hawthorne & Pleasantville & do away with the BL-15 entirely..... Even (I should say especially) if you increase service on the BL-77, you're never going to create the cohesion/dynamic that exists with the BL-14/17 by having it (77) cover Yorktown Hgts & having the BL-15 act as a formidable local in the network.... At that point, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, as the saying goes....

((btw, you can bring up the ideas/discussion we had earlier, regarding restructuring the BL-15, and everything else we talked about, about northern Westchester...))

On 1/26/2021 at 10:21 PM, Lex said:

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.

On 1/27/2021 at 12:46 AM, Lex said:

That's just it. I have no idea what it's like, but I don't like the idea of having so little coverage.

I deliberately left the 19 out, which was in no small part due to it being the only thing east of the 15 and 77 for a good stretch of the county (and because it hangs around the Harlem Line for a fair bit, though even it approaches the river).

Between running service in quote-unquote old money areas of northern Westchester that don't even want bus service and, well.... wildlife, there isn't much of anyone/anything being screwed.....

On 1/27/2021 at 2:43 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

By the way, there's a survey (that closes tomorrow) that gives you the option of ranking priorities, and one of them is new east-west service (doesn't specify where exactly within Westchester).

Food for thought......

- BL-66 diverted to Mamaroneck?

- BL-30 diverted to Larchmont?

- An extension of the BL-8 to Eastchester (as you previously mentioned)?

- A McLean-Nereid-Sandford route running b/w Yonkers & New Roc'? (I think this is going to be a mistake, because if they go this "route", the BL-4 is toast....)

- The BL-7 getting split, to where it would run between New Roc' & Cross County via Petrillo Plaza
(as in, current BL-7 b/w New Roc' & Petrillo Plaza, then go Gramatan-Broad (which eventually turns into Midland)-to go on to do the BL-55 routing on into Cross County)....

• A variant of this would be to have buses bypass Petrillo Plaza & take the Cross County Pkwy. from Columbus av to Kimball.... The current BL-25 b/w Downtown Yonkers & Cross County could be appended to such a variant.... Either way, I do see some sort of a split of the BL-7 happening....
• The western split would likely be left as the current routing b/w Yonkers & Mt. Vernon....

- *something* connecting Port Chester to Yonkers?

- A Mt. Kisco - Pleasantville - Tarrytown route via Sleepy Hollow & rt. 117? (I guess that counts as east-west)

19 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I just thought of something: With the BL-42 if you had it go down Sandford & Nereid, across to McClean, you could then have it run down Central Park Avenue to connect to the train. Not only does it connect Mount Vernon (and New Rochelle) to the train, but it also gives southern Mount Vernon direct access to the BL-20. Of course, that would mean the BL-40/41 would need to run to Wakefield full-time.

I actually think that would be a deterrent for anyone wanting the ... I don't get the sense that the demand for the BL-20/21 in-particular is that high from that pocket of Mt. Vernon....

[Lawrence St]

I wonder if theres demand for a west-east service to Bay Plaza Shopping Center.

[Lex]

4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I wonder if theres demand for a west-east service to Bay Plaza Shopping Center.

To/from Westchester? I'd sooner expect everyone to go to Cross County than dip into the Bronx for that. (Stuff coming with even higher prices in NYC -- especially when factoring sales tax into the equation -- does nothing to help.) At best, I could maybe see the north-south 52 serving it.

[B35 via Church]

6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I wonder if theres demand for a west-east service to Bay Plaza Shopping Center.

Not enough to run a Bee-Line route there, that's for sure....

Bee Line would be far better off running a route out to Palisades, over some Bay Plaza shopping ctr... To hell with these Hudson LInk routes.

Edited January 29, 2021 by B35 via Church

[Lawrence St]

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Not enough to run a Bee-Line route there, that's for sure....

Bee Line would be far better off running a route out to Palisades, over some Bay Plaza shopping ctr... To hell with these Hudson LInk routes.

LMAO don't get me started on Hudson Link, those routes are fuel wasters for no reason.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

17 hours ago, Lex said:

To/from Westchester? I'd sooner expect everyone to go to Cross County than dip into the Bronx for that. (Stuff coming with even higher prices in NYC -- especially when factoring sales tax into the equation -- does nothing to help.) At best, I could maybe see the north-south 52 serving it.

Agreed. No point in going to the City (any borough for that). Prices tend to be higher in the City than in the suburbs. Some things I buy in New Jersey are a $1.00 or more cheaper than the same exact product in NYC.

[Lawrence St]

18 hours ago, Lex said:

To/from Westchester? I'd sooner expect everyone to go to Cross County than dip into the Bronx for that. (Stuff coming with even higher prices in NYC -- especially when factoring sales tax into the equation -- does nothing to help.) At best, I could maybe see the north-south 52 serving it.

It was more so of a way to have an extension to Orchard Beach during the summer, because in Westchester its surprisingly difficult to get to a beach via transit.

Tibbets Brook has no bus service (even though it used to, route 24) which is partially because of a "weight restriction" along Midland Avenue, even though I see trucks use Midland Avenue all the time.

 

[checkmatechamp13]

On 1/28/2021 at 10:05 AM, B35 via Church said:

To your ultimate question, it's the latter.... The BL-15 for a decent amt. of people in northern Westchester County is BL-14 backup.... Another way of putting this is that the patronage of the "unique" portions of the BL-15 sorely pales in comparison to the unique portions of the BL-14.... So if you have the BL-77 steal a portion of that unique BL-15 patronage (as in, that of from Yorktown Heights), you may as well have some select BL-14 trips cover Hawthorne & Pleasantville & do away with the BL-15 entirely..... Even (I should say especially) if you increase service on the BL-77, you're never going to create the cohesion/dynamic that exists with the BL-14/17 by having it (77) cover Yorktown Hgts & having the BL-15 act as a formidable local in the network.... At that point, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, as the saying goes....

((btw, you can bring up the ideas/discussion we had earlier, regarding restructuring the BL-15, and everything else we talked about, about northern Westchester...))

Good point. 

To loop everyone else in, the thing that sparked this discussion was attempting to find a way to provide full-time bus service to the Peekskill Metro-North station. My initial suggestion was an extension of the BL-15 (since that's the only route that terminates in Downtown Peekskill), but upon further discussion, we decided that routing the BL-16 to the Peekskill MNRR station full-time (rather than just a few rush hour trips) would be the best solution, and the BL-14 can be diverted to Crompond Road to serve the hospital.

Our discussion then turned to the ridership habits of the BL-15 in general, and how the majority of its riders in Peekskill only use it as a backup to the BL-14. (Both locally to/from the Cortlandt Town Center, and all the way to White Plains) and don't really use it to access areas like Yorktown Heights. Since the only real ridership along Crompond Road is from the BJs, and most of that ridership is heading towards Yorktown Heights and points south, he came up with a routing that catered more to the needs of riders in that part of Westchester. (Basically, buses would start at Cortlandt Town Center, run to the JVM, head down Old Yorktown Road, backtrack to the BJs, and then continue to Yorktown Heights. To gain back some of the time from the backtrack, buses would run on the Taconic State Parkway and bypass Millwood. 

There's two things that I've thought of since that discussion though (Pretty much as I was typing this post)

- What impact would a BL-12 extension to JVM have on this proposal (if any)? Since it would connect Yorktown Heights to the JVM (but not to the commercial areas between JVM and Cortlandt Town Center). The other thing of course, is that it connects the JVM to the Harlem Line and (through a roundabout route) to White Plains. 

- I just realized that Crompond Road (in Peekskill) is at a significantly higher elevation than Main Street (not just in the vicinity of the hospital but all the way to Downtown Peekskill. Part of me is thinking to give it a shot at putting the BL-15 along Crompond Road and seeing if that gives it enough of a unique ridership base (especially since the BL-14 doesn't directly connect to an MNRR station until Croton-Harmon, and it makes a lot of diversions between Croton-Harmon & Peekskill). The other thing I'm thinking is maybe have it swing down to Hudson Avenue to provide a bit of extra coverage in that area, en route to the MNRR station. (In other words, I'm thinking there might be potential to salvage the BL-15 in Peekskill).

On 1/28/2021 at 10:05 AM, B35 via Church said:

Food for thought......

- BL-66 diverted to Mamaroneck?

Thinking about this, I actually like the idea of a White Plains - New Rochelle route via Weaver Street, and a Dobbs Ferry - Mamaroneck route (running via the BL-63 route east of Scarsdale, but making a right turn from Crossway onto Mamaroneck Road, taking the Hutchinson River Parkway for one exit, and then paralleling the BL-60 to Mamaroneck.

The BL-63 serves the denser parts of White Plains, compared to the BL-60, and it's basically a straight shot to Larchmont/New Rochelle. The only issue of course, is that running down Weaver Street means you still need the BL-60 to serve Mamaroneck. 

On 1/28/2021 at 10:05 AM, B35 via Church said:

- BL-30 diverted to Larchmont?

Via 5th Avenue (BL-61 route)? I suppose that would be one way of cutting back the BL-61 to Mamaroneck.

On 1/28/2021 at 10:05 AM, B35 via Church said:

- A McLean-Nereid-Sandford route running b/w Yonkers & New Roc'? (I think this is going to be a mistake, because if they go this "route", the BL-4 is toast....)

- The BL-7 getting split, to where it would run between New Roc' & Cross County via Petrillo Plaza
(as in, current BL-7 b/w New Roc' & Petrillo Plaza, then go Gramatan-Broad (which eventually turns into Midland)-to go on to do the BL-55 routing on into Cross County)....

• A variant of this would be to have buses bypass Petrillo Plaza & take the Cross County Pkwy. from Columbus av to Kimball.... The current BL-25 b/w Downtown Yonkers & Cross County could be appended to such a variant.... Either way, I do see some sort of a split of the BL-7 happening....
• The western split would likely be left as the current routing b/w Yonkers & Mt. Vernon....

The BL-25 rerouted to New Rochelle (via Cross County Parkway) would be a solid route, but the problem is that at that point, you're pretty much setting yourself up for a McLean-Nereid-Sandford route (which is also a solid route in and of itself) because you need to maintain the connection from Yonkers to the . And then at that point, like you said, the BL-4 is toast. (Also, the Kimball portion of the BL-25 would likely be turned into a loop route with the BL-26 at that point). 

Unless maybe you divert something from 242nd Street? Since the BL-2 & BL-6 serve nearby areas of Yonkers (and the BL-6 is being extended to 242nd under your proposal), maybe the BL-2 can be diverted to serve the ? That way you give NW Yonkers the choice of both the  and the  ? 

On 1/28/2021 at 10:05 AM, B35 via Church said:

- A Mt. Kisco - Pleasantville - Tarrytown route via Sleepy Hollow & rt. 117? (I guess that counts as east-west)

How about a BL-19 extension down to Tarrytown? The BL-13 runs roughly once per hour north of Tarrytown, so if the BL-19 were coordinated with it, you can have 30 minute headways between Ossining & Tarrytown without having to extend more BL-13 trips (And of course, you get the east-west service out to Pleasantville & Mount Kisco).

On 1/28/2021 at 10:05 AM, B35 via Church said:

I actually think that would be a deterrent for anyone wanting the ... I don't get the sense that the demand for the BL-20/21 in-particular is that high from that pocket of Mt. Vernon....

Good point. The other thing is, I wanted to close up that gap on McLean Avenue without having to resort to a full McClean-Nereid-Sandford route. (Though at that time, it didn't occur to me that there might be a way to salvage the Getty Square - Bedford Park route)

[B35 via Church]

7 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Good point. 

-----------

To loop everyone else in, the thing that sparked this discussion was attempting to find a way to provide full-time bus service to the Peekskill Metro-North station. My initial suggestion was an extension of the BL-15 (since that's the only route that terminates in Downtown Peekskill), but upon further discussion, we decided that routing the BL-16 to the Peekskill MNRR station full-time (rather than just a few rush hour trips) would be the best solution, and the BL-14 can be diverted to Crompond Road to serve the hospital.

Our discussion then turned to the ridership habits of the BL-15 in general, and how the majority of its riders in Peekskill only use it as a backup to the BL-14. (Both locally to/from the Cortlandt Town Center, and all the way to White Plains) and don't really use it to access areas like Yorktown Heights. Since the only real ridership along Crompond Road is from the BJs, and most of that ridership is heading towards Yorktown Heights and points south, he came up with a routing that catered more to the needs of riders in that part of Westchester. (Basically, buses would start at Cortlandt Town Center, run to the JVM, head down Old Yorktown Road, backtrack to the BJs, and then continue to Yorktown Heights. To gain back some of the time from the backtrack, buses would run on the Taconic State Parkway and bypass Millwood. 

-----------

There's two things that I've thought of since that discussion though (Pretty much as I was typing this post)

- What impact would a BL-12 extension to JVM have on this proposal (if any)? Since it would connect Yorktown Heights to the JVM (but not to the commercial areas between JVM and Cortlandt Town Center). The other thing of course, is that it connects the JVM to the Harlem Line and (through a roundabout route) to White Plains. 

- I just realized that Crompond Road (in Peekskill) is at a significantly higher elevation than Main Street (not just in the vicinity of the hospital but all the way to Downtown Peekskill. Part of me is thinking to give it a shot at putting the BL-15 along Crompond Road and seeing if that gives it enough of a unique ridership base (especially since the BL-14 doesn't directly connect to an MNRR station until Croton-Harmon, and it makes a lot of diversions between Croton-Harmon & Peekskill). The other thing I'm thinking is maybe have it swing down to Hudson Avenue to provide a bit of extra coverage in that area, en route to the MNRR station. (In other words, I'm thinking there might be potential to salvage the BL-15 in Peekskill).

Good summary.... Matter fact, it's perfect (I know you're not one to distort details, but this is merely further confirmation on my end as to what that particular discussion entailed).

To address your two more recent points/concerns, I'd say this.... If such a proposed BL-15 were to come to fruition in conjunction with a revival of the old BL-12 routing to JVM (which is where I'm assuming you're going with it), it wouldn't really impact anything... At that point, you're just swapping having the BL-12 running along that scenic portion (b/w 7 bridges rd./Saw Mill River rd. & Yorktown Hgts. proper) instead of having the (real) BL-15 do that..... That, and being that service in northern Westchester county is *shit* anyway (generally speaking). I don't see a diversion to the BJ's in Yorktown Hgts. (proposed BL-15) before serving JVM being much of a deterrent over patronizing (the reverted) BL-12 to JVM via the old routing b/w Yorktown Hgts. & JVM..... The attitude of *I'm not taking that bus, because reasons* will be rarer than *cool, a bus - as long as it's going to JVM (in this case)*...

Remember, people are taking BL-14's & BL-15's interchangeably b/w White Plains & Peekskill, so the displacement b/w Yorktown Hgts. & JVM is menial compared to that... Lol.... But yeah, the serving of MNRR Mt. Kisco was a bit of a throwaway bonus (I guess you can say); it's hardly a selling point... It isn't like people were taking MNRR to Mt. Kisco for the BL-12 to JVM back then, like many enough NYC patrons do with taking MNRR to White Plains for the Galleria & all the other shopping areas within WP, for example.....  You were far more prone to seeing people ride the whole BL-12 to JVM (or having done the BL-15 to the BL-12 to JVM, depending on scheduling or whatever).... The patronage of the old BL-12/current BL-19 in Mt. Kisco consisted/consists of people actually wanting to get to the establishments, etc. within the town... Kind of like Tarrytown & Mamaroneck in that regard.....

In regards to your second point/concern (which is definitely valid; elevation differences & what not), the issue I'm taking with it is the opting to use the BL-15 in particular to address it... It still all goes back to the BL-14 hitting more areas of interest for more people b/w [northern Westchester county] & [White Plains]... If you have the BL-14 retain the current routing b/w Peekskill & Cortlandt Town Ctr. & have the BL-15 from Cortlandt Town Ctr go something like Main - Conklin - Crompond - Wells - Hudson - on in to MNRR Peekskill, I don't see too many people that would specifically gun for the BL-15 (to still get anywhere to, or between Valhalla (the whole complex surrounding NY Medical College) & White Plains) if it did that, over continuing to take BL-14's.... You'd get the intra-Peekskill riders & those seeking service as far as Cortlandt Town Ctr. from Peekskill, but that's about it.... Sure, Peekskill is "suburban" dense, but in the grand scheme of things, still not that dense overall to where a rerouting like that would drive enough people into abandoning BL-14's / attempting to make *more* of a balance b/w BL-14 usage & BL-15 usage b/w their respective terminus'.... I'd like to see something of the sort work, but I think it's futile & people would still continue to hoof it over to Washington to catch the BL-14.....

 

10 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

* Thinking about this, I actually like the idea of a White Plains - New Rochelle route via Weaver Street, and a Dobbs Ferry - Mamaroneck route (running via the BL-63 route east of Scarsdale, but making a right turn from Crossway onto Mamaroneck Road, taking the Hutchinson River Parkway for one exit, and then paralleling the BL-60 to Mamaroneck.

The BL-63 serves the denser parts of White Plains, compared to the BL-60, and it's basically a straight shot to Larchmont/New Rochelle. The only issue of course, is that running down Weaver Street means you still need the BL-60 to serve Mamaroneck. 

* Via 5th Avenue (BL-61 route)? I suppose that would be one way of cutting back the BL-61 to Mamaroneck.

* The BL-25 rerouted to New Rochelle (via Cross County Parkway) would be a solid route, but the problem is that at that point, you're pretty much setting yourself up for a McLean-Nereid-Sandford route (which is also a solid route in and of itself) because you need to maintain the connection from Yonkers to the . And then at that point, like you said, the BL-4 is toast. (Also, the Kimball portion of the BL-25 would likely be turned into a loop route with the BL-26 at that point). 

Unless maybe you divert something from 242nd Street? Since the BL-2 & BL-6 serve nearby areas of Yonkers (and the BL-6 is being extended to 242nd under your proposal), maybe the BL-2 can be diverted to serve the ? That way you give NW Yonkers the choice of both the  and the  ? 

* How about a BL-19 extension down to Tarrytown? The BL-13 runs roughly once per hour north of Tarrytown, so if the BL-19 were coordinated with it, you can have 30 minute headways between Ossining & Tarrytown without having to extend more BL-13 trips (And of course, you get the east-west service out to Pleasantville & Mount Kisco).

Just to be clear, in that little "food for thought" series, those weren't routes I was proposing.... When you brought up (one of their options for) prioritization in the redesign being that of (improved) east-west service, those were possible voids that I think they may consider filling.... With that said:

- I like the idea of connecting Dobbs Ferry (or just western Westchester county in general) to Mamaroneck & the New Haven line, as I do see a decent amt. people taking advantage of that; for CT bound RR service that is.... The thing about a route of sorts is, I can see them doing away with the rest of that service along Weaver St as a result, instead of running a Weaver st. route up to White Plains.... The BL-66 is basically an old folks shuttle that carries very very light (even for Bee-Line standards) north & west of Larchmont... I'm actually being optimistic by even bringing a Dobbs Ferry - Mamaroneck route up, because I can also see them completely doing away with the thing (66), to use those resources to improve (as in, frequency wise) east - west travel in southern Westchester county..... The routing you drew up (east-west route) I'd say is the best way to go about it; having it use the Hutch. to Mamaroneck av, instead of via Fenimore rd., etc....

- If they were to improve east-west connections by creating a Yonkers - New Roc' route (via Cross County, via the Yonkers portion of the BL-25), I don't see how that's necessarily a precursor for a McLean-Nereid-Sandford route.... I don't necessarily believe they have to maintain a direct connection to Downtown Yonkers/Getty Sq. from the either... A filling of that gap on McLean I think is going to happen regardless (of such a would-be newfound Yonkers-New Roc' route).... Too many SW Yonkers patrons ride up to Getty Sq. to basically get anywhere else/elsewhere within Westchester.....

I would LMAO if Bee-Line formulates a loop route out of the BL-25 & BL-26 b/w Cross County & the .... However they'll end up going about it though, yeah, they'll still minimally maintain some sort of connection b/w Cross County and the .... What I ultimately want to say here though is that the crux of the matter is the current network that has buses funneling in/out of downtown Mt. Vernon/Petrillo Plaza the way they currently do (of course, the street grid/layout exacerbates matters)....

I don't want to have what I think will happen with anything involving an actual redesign of Bee-Line's network conflated with my actual proposals.... That's how confusion arises around these parts.... As far as my actual proposal of having the BL-6 running b/w the & White Plains, I wouldn't have the BL-2 running down to Bedford Park (although that doesn't sound like a bad idea on the surface)..... With my proposals, I'd leave the BL-2 & the BL-25 alone....

- If they end up having the BL-19 serving Tarrytown & Ossining, the BL-13's getting cut back to Tarrytown full time.... They have BL-13's running at appx. an hourly clip b/c they got BL-14's (better) catering to the needs of Ossining patrons...... If they don't leave BL-19's put, I'd be shocked if they were to have buses running every 30 b/w Tarrytown & Ossining with the BL-13/19.....

[checkmatechamp13]

4 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Good summary.... Matter fact, it's perfect (I know you're not one to distort details, but this is merely further confirmation on my end as to what that particular discussion entailed).

To address your two more recent points/concerns, I'd say this.... If such a proposed BL-15 were to come to fruition in conjunction with a revival of the old BL-12 routing to JVM (which is where I'm assuming you're going with it), it wouldn't really impact anything... At that point, you're just swapping having the BL-12 running along that scenic portion (b/w 7 bridges rd./Saw Mill River rd. & Yorktown Hgts. proper) instead of having the (real) BL-15 do that..... That, and being that service in northern Westchester county is *shit* anyway (generally speaking). I don't see a diversion to the BJ's in Yorktown Hgts. (proposed BL-15) before serving JVM being much of a deterrent over patronizing (the reverted) BL-12 to JVM via the old routing b/w Yorktown Hgts. & JVM..... The attitude of *I'm not taking that bus, because reasons* will be rarer than *cool, a bus - as long as it's going to JVM (in this case)*...

Remember, people are taking BL-14's & BL-15's interchangeably b/w White Plains & Peekskill, so the displacement b/w Yorktown Hgts. & JVM is menial compared to that... Lol.... But yeah, the serving of MNRR Mt. Kisco was a bit of a throwaway bonus (I guess you can say); it's hardly a selling point... It isn't like people were taking MNRR to Mt. Kisco for the BL-12 to JVM back then, like many enough NYC patrons do with taking MNRR to White Plains for the Galleria & all the other shopping areas within WP, for example.....  You were far more prone to seeing people ride the whole BL-12 to JVM (or having done the BL-15 to the BL-12 to JVM, depending on scheduling or whatever).... The patronage of the old BL-12/current BL-19 in Mt. Kisco consisted/consists of people actually wanting to get to the establishments, etc. within the town... Kind of like Tarrytown & Mamaroneck in that regard.....

In regards to your second point/concern (which is definitely valid; elevation differences & what not), the issue I'm taking with it is the opting to use the BL-15 in particular to address it... It still all goes back to the BL-14 hitting more areas of interest for more people b/w [northern Westchester county] & [White Plains]... If you have the BL-14 retain the current routing b/w Peekskill & Cortlandt Town Ctr. & have the BL-15 from Cortlandt Town Ctr go something like Main - Conklin - Crompond - Wells - Hudson - on in to MNRR Peekskill, I don't see too many people that would specifically gun for the BL-15 (to still get anywhere to, or between Valhalla (the whole complex surrounding NY Medical College) & White Plains) if it did that, over continuing to take BL-14's.... You'd get the intra-Peekskill riders & those seeking service as far as Cortlandt Town Ctr. from Peekskill, but that's about it.... Sure, Peekskill is "suburban" dense, but in the grand scheme of things, still not that dense overall to where a rerouting like that would drive enough people into abandoning BL-14's / attempting to make *more* of a balance b/w BL-14 usage & BL-15 usage b/w their respective terminus'.... I'd like to see something of the sort work, but I think it's futile & people would still continue to hoof it over to Washington to catch the BL-14.....

I think another thing is the increased interaction of the BL-15 with the BL-16 (since it's going all the way out to JVM) and how that can be taken advantage of. For example, the BL-16 runs every 60 minutes, but rush hour MNRR trains arrive every 30 minutes. So you can try to arrange the schedules so that passengers are getting a bus to JVM every 30 minutes at the height of rush hour. (I know the BL-15 has a weird span of service, but for example, the 4:52pm and 5:52pm northbound arrivals can be met with a BL-16, and the 5:21pm northbound arrival can be met with a BL-15). And then off-peak, the southbound trains typically leave around :35 while the northbound trains arrive around :52, so if you want to avoid having a super-long layover for the BL-16, you can have the BL-16 meet all of the trains heading inbound, and then outbound, some trains will be met with a BL-15 (Unfortunately not all of them, since the BL-15 is less frequent than the BL-16).

And then of course, you have the fact that the BL-15 would be serving different portions of Peekskill itself, compared to the BL-16 (Crompond Road/Hudson Street vs. Division Street/Downtown Peekskill), so it might get some unique riders from the BL-16's ridership base, rather than the BL-14's. (Also, not that it would make much of a difference, but I would have the BL-15 cover the Strawberry Road diversion of the BL-16...honestly I think some Sunday service might be in order...I don't think 3 trips each way will break the bank)

(**On a side note, I see a few typos in the BL-16 schedule. Apparently the 5:46pm westbound from Main & Nelson takes 20 minutes to get down to the MNRR station 🤨 That and timepoint E is Cortandt Town Center, and the westbound 5:10pm trip from JVM has Note #1, which only applies to those trips running east of JVM**)

4 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Just to be clear, in that little "food for thought" series, those weren't routes I was proposing.... When you brought up (one of their options for) prioritization in the redesign being that of (improved) east-west service, those were possible voids that I think they may consider filling.... With that said:

- I like the idea of connecting Dobbs Ferry (or just western Westchester county in general) to Mamaroneck & the New Haven line, as I do see a decent amt. people taking advantage of that; for CT bound RR service that is.... The thing about a route of sorts is, I can see them doing away with the rest of that service along Weaver St as a result, instead of running a Weaver st. route up to White Plains.... The BL-66 is basically an old folks shuttle that carries very very light (even for Bee-Line standards) north & west of Larchmont... I'm actually being optimistic by even bringing a Dobbs Ferry - Mamaroneck route up, because I can also see them completely doing away with the thing (66), to use those resources to improve (as in, frequency wise) east - west travel in southern Westchester county..... The routing you drew up (east-west route) I'd say is the best way to go about it; having it use the Hutch. to Mamaroneck av, instead of via Fenimore rd., etc....

Oh definitely, I understand they were guesses at what Bee Line might have in mind, rather than your actual proposals.

Do you think Bee Line would be willing to touch the BL-63, or do you think they would be afraid of NIMBY backlash? It seems like they intended for it to be the eastern counterpart of the BL-64/65, but then they got to a certain point and said "Screw it, let's just go all the way to White Plains". (Either that, or they intended to have a separate shuttle for SE White Plains, and then decided to combine it with the BL-63). 

4 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

- If they were to improve east-west connections by creating a Yonkers - New Roc' route (via Cross County, via the Yonkers portion of the BL-25), I don't see how that's necessarily a precursor for a McLean-Nereid-Sandford route.... I don't necessarily believe they have to maintain a direct connection to Downtown Yonkers/Getty Sq. from the either... A filling of that gap on McLean I think is going to happen regardless (of such a would-be newfound Yonkers-New Roc' route).... Too many SW Yonkers patrons ride up to Getty Sq. to basically get anywhere else/elsewhere within Westchester.....

I would LMAO if Bee-Line formulates a loop route out of the BL-25 & BL-26 b/w Cross County & the .... However they'll end up going about it though, yeah, they'll still minimally maintain some sort of connection b/w Cross County and the .... What I ultimately want to say here though is that the crux of the matter is the current network that has buses funneling in/out of downtown Mt. Vernon/Petrillo Plaza the way they currently do (of course, the street grid/layout exacerbates matters)....

I don't want to have what I think will happen with anything involving an actual redesign of Bee-Line's network conflated with my actual proposals.... That's how confusion arises around these parts.... As far as my actual proposal of having the BL-6 running b/w the & White Plains, I wouldn't have the BL-2 running down to Bedford Park (although that doesn't sound like a bad idea on the surface)..... With my proposals, I'd leave the BL-2 & the BL-25 alone....

- If they end up having the BL-19 serving Tarrytown & Ossining, the BL-13's getting cut back to Tarrytown full time.... They have BL-13's running at appx. an hourly clip b/c they got BL-14's (better) catering to the needs of Ossining patrons...... If they don't leave BL-19's put, I'd be shocked if they were to have buses running every 30 b/w Tarrytown & Ossining with the BL-13/19.....

Good point, I should've distinguished between those a bit better in my phrasing. (I guess part of it is wishful (or hopeful) thinking that they're on the same page as you when it comes to other concepts/corridors/routes of interest). 

[checkmatechamp13]

And just to be clear (since re-reading it, it seems a bit ambiguous)

@checkmatechamp13 BL-15 Proposal:

White Plains - Peekskill MNRR via Staples Plaza, JVM, Cortlandt Town Center, Hudson Valley Hospital & Hudson Avenue

@B35 via Church BL-15 Proposal:

White Plains - Cortlandt Town Center via Staples Plaza & JVM

Real/Current BL-15

White Plains - Downtown Peekskill via Staples Plaza, Cortlandt Town Center & Main Street

Staples Plaza is the shopping center along US-202 (just west of the Taconic) with the Staples & BJs in it. And for those who are unfamiliar with the area, Downtown Peekskill refers to the Main & James area, about a mile uphill from the actual MNRR station.

And there's some changes that him and myself are proposing for the southern end of the BL-15 (you can refer to the map posted earlier), but that is for a separate discussion. 

[B35 via Church]

At it's core, the BL-15 suggestion is a way to restore service from points south of [northern Westchester county] to JVM.... The BL-16 serving JVM; Jefferson Valley Mall, to me, is akin to & reminiscent of when the B83 was the only route serving Gateway Mall.... Now I'm not at all implicating that JVM is as popular as Gateway Mall, but I'm speaking to the fact that it's insanely difficult to get to that mall (JVM) via public transportation...... The BL-16 is a route that solely runs laterally in the upper part of northern Westchester county.... I hate to admit it, but (although the old BL-12 to JVM is missed) the BL-12 from end to end was more wasteful than the BL-15 from end to end - and the BL-15 itself IMO is hanging on a thread, being that there's simply more demand for the BL-14 north-of-White-Plains & it (15) is used interchangeably/supplementarily with it (14).....

What Checkmate is aiming to accomplish, in essence, is even more of a balancement in usage between the BL-14 & the BL-15 overall (as in, b/w White Plains & northern Westchester county) than I am.... By extending it into Peekskill, it's his belief that you could perhaps take people off BL-14's to/from Peekskill & have them gravitate towards the (altered/suggested) BL-15 via JVM of mine instead.... I'm not saying he's flat out wrong, but my concern with running the (altered/suggested BL-15 via JVM), outside of the futility I mentioned in my last post, is simply that of runtime.... That is why I'd just have anyone needing Peekskill xferring to/from off either the BL-14 & BL-16 from/at Cortlandt Town Ctr....

That said:

18 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I think another thing is the increased interaction of the BL-15 with the BL-16 (since it's going all the way out to JVM) and how that can be taken advantage of. For example, the BL-16 runs every 60 minutes, but rush hour MNRR trains arrive every 30 minutes. So you can try to arrange the schedules so that passengers are getting a bus to JVM every 30 minutes at the height of rush hour. (I know the BL-15 has a weird span of service, but for example, the 4:52pm and 5:52pm northbound arrivals can be met with a BL-16, and the 5:21pm northbound arrival can be met with a BL-15). And then off-peak, the southbound trains typically leave around :35 while the northbound trains arrive around :52, so if you want to avoid having a super-long layover for the BL-16, you can have the BL-16 meet all of the trains heading inbound, and then outbound, some trains will be met with a BL-15 (Unfortunately not all of them, since the BL-15 is less frequent than the BL-16).

And then of course, you have the fact that the BL-15 would be serving different portions of Peekskill itself, compared to the BL-16 (Crompond Road/Hudson Street vs. Division Street/Downtown Peekskill), so it might get some unique riders from the BL-16's ridership base, rather than the BL-14's. (Also, not that it would make much of a difference, but I would have the BL-15 cover the Strawberry Road diversion of the BL-16...honestly I think some Sunday service might be in order...I don't think 3 trips each way will break the bank)

(**On a side note, I see a few typos in the BL-16 schedule. Apparently the 5:46pm westbound from Main & Nelson takes 20 minutes to get down to the MNRR station 🤨 That and timepoint E is Cortandt Town Center, and the westbound 5:10pm trip from JVM has Note #1, which only applies to those trips running east of JVM**)

I'll say this...

If I were to consider an extension of the altered BL-15 (via JVM) in question on into Peekskill, quite frankly, I would have it taking even more of the Taconic (as in, from Pleasantville).... You may/likely have to sacrifice serving Briarcliff Manor if a route of sorts were to continue serving Peekskill patrons (better/differently) by having it serve the more hillier portions of the city....

I think what this is boiling down to (and there's nothing wrong with either) is that I'm more looking at the route holistically & you're more focused/honed in on the northern Westchester aspect of the route.... If White Plains & that whole NY Medical College complex were more proximate to Peekskill than it currently is, I would have had the idea running into Peekskill.... That, or if there were absolutely no bus service whatsoever north of White Plains (akin to the NJT's #559 b/w Toms River & (coincidentally named) PLEASANTVILLE ).... But the difference in distance b/w Peekskill & White Plains (especially considering the BL-15 isn't as linear as the BL-14... which I believe is yet another factor as to why people gravitate to it more) looms too great IMO.... I mean, look at all we're doing, just to try to make the BL-15 more attractive.... It's too much *nothing* in that middle pocket of northern Westchester county between.... Pleasantville and Yorktown Hgts...

18 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

- Oh definitely, I understand they were guesses at what Bee Line might have in mind, rather than your actual proposals.

Do you think Bee Line would be willing to touch the BL-63, or do you think they would be afraid of NIMBY backlash? It seems like they intended for it to be the eastern counterpart of the BL-64/65, but then they got to a certain point and said "Screw it, let's just go all the way to White Plains". (Either that, or they intended to have a separate shuttle for SE White Plains, and then decided to combine it with the BL-63).

- Good point, I should've distinguished between those a bit better in my phrasing. (I guess part of it is wishful (or hopeful) thinking that they're on the same page as you when it comes to other concepts/corridors/routes of interest). 

- There was a dude named dadbo46 back on RD that was said to have some sort of affiliation with Bee-Line (whether that last part was true or not, IDRK).... I'm paraphrasing, but I remember him basically conveying that Bee-Line swiftly caved into the demands of Scarsdale when it came down to more service to/from White Plains.... So to opine on the question, I'd say if whatever they have in mind doesn't benefit Scarsdale specifically, then they wouldn't even touch the thing....

- Thanks for the compliment, but I tend to think the opposite when it comes to my proposals & the mindset and/or willingness of these transit agencies to possibly/hopefully implement them, or something close enough to them.... Then again, I may be doing some conflating of my own - that is, painting Bee-Line with the same brush of being inconsiderately cut-happy like the transit agency we have to deal with here in NYC with the MTA.... At the same time though, I have more faith in Bee-Line when it comes down to addressing demand/better catering to the riding public.....

Not sure if you get anymore "draconian" than the MTA in that category

Edited February 1, 2021 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

@B35 via Church What would you think of creating a route (let's call it BL-22 for arguments' sake) that takes the White Plains - Pleasantville portion of the BL-6, and combines it with the Pleasantville - Ossining portion of the BL-19? Then the BL-19 can be rerouted to run to Tarrytown via NY-117.

So in other words:

BL-19: Katonah - Mount Kisco - Pleasantville - Tarrytown

BL-22: White Plains - Pleasantville - Ossining

Under this proposal, the BL-15 would bypass Pleasantville, but still serve Briarcliff Manor (North State Road), and then get on the Taconic to head straight to Yorktown Heights. Also, the BL-22 would serve Marble Avenue within Pleasantville (rather than Broadway). Basically, I'd be going all-or-bust for the northern Westchester ridership base. 

Of course, this introduces a third Ossining - White Plains route (well, a fourth one if you count the BL-11), but I don't think that's too preposterous, considering they're pretty much all hourly. 

[GojiMet86]

New Flyer has won the contract with Bee-Line. Base order is for 66 XDE40, with options for 52 XDE40 and 10 XDE35.

 

https://www.newflyer.com/content/2021/02/westchester-county-awards-new-flyer-a-contract-for-up-to-128-hybrid-electric-xcelsior-transit-buses/

Quote

 

Westchester County awards New Flyer a contract for up to 128 hybrid-electric Xcelsior Transit Buses
February 1, 2021 | New Flyer

St. Cloud, Minnesota, USA – February 1, 2021: (TSX: NFI) New Flyer of America Inc. (“New Flyer”), a subsidiary of NFI Group Inc. (“NFI”), one of the world’s leading independent global bus manufacturers, today announced that the Westchester County Department of Public Works and Transportation (operating as the ”Bee-Line”) has awarded New Flyer a new order for 66 Xcelsior® forty-foot hybrid electric buses. The order is part of a two year contract, with future possible option orders for up to 52 additional forty-foot and 10 thirty five-foot Xcelsior hybrid electric buses.

The Bee-Line is Westchester County's bus system, serving over 27 million passengers annually in the White Plains region of New York state and has been a longtime leader in sustainable mobility and continues to rely on New Flyer’s low-emission expertise. The purchase is supported by a combination of state and Federal Transit Administration funds, and replaces end of life vehicles, continuing the county’s move toward more sustainable transit.

“Hybrid-electric buses immediately reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and are a safe and reliable way to move people through the community while contributing to cleaner air,” said Chris Stoddart, President, New Flyer and MCI. “New Flyer's hybrid-electric technology is currently in motion across 5,500 buses, providing reductions in transmission and brake maintenance, requiring fewer parts and fluids, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions through decreases of up to 50% in NOx and 90-100% in particulate matter levels. We are proud to have delivered more than 170 hybrid buses into Westchester County since 2009”.

Hybrid buses provide a better passenger experience through smoother acceleration, a quieter ride, and improved air quality. Today, there are more than 15,000 Xcelsior buses on the road in the U.S. and Canada. For more information, visit newflyer.com/buses/xcelsior-family.

New Flyer has been leading innovation in mobility for 90 years, and today supports growing North American cities with sustainable buses, technology, and infrastructure. It also operates the Vehicle Innovation Center, the first and only innovation lab of its kind dedicated to advancing bus and motor coach technology and providing essential workforce development through electric bus training, now available online. New Flyer is testing automated vehicle technology and remains committed to the development of technology standards that deliver safe, clean, sustainable, connected mobility options to communities.

 

 

[B35 via Church]

On 2/1/2021 at 7:45 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church What would you think of creating a route (let's call it BL-22 for arguments' sake) that takes the White Plains - Pleasantville portion of the BL-6, and combines it with the Pleasantville - Ossining portion of the BL-19? Then the BL-19 can be rerouted to run to Tarrytown via NY-117.

So in other words:

BL-19: Katonah - Mount Kisco - Pleasantville - Tarrytown

BL-22: White Plains - Pleasantville - Ossining

Under this proposal, the BL-15 would bypass Pleasantville, but still serve Briarcliff Manor (North State Road), and then get on the Taconic to head straight to Yorktown Heights. Also, the BL-22 would serve Marble Avenue within Pleasantville (rather than Broadway). Basically, I'd be going all-or-bust for the northern Westchester ridership base. 

Of course, this introduces a third Ossining - White Plains route (well, a fourth one if you count the BL-11), but I don't think that's too preposterous, considering they're pretty much all hourly. 

At the rate you're going (all or bust), you may as well have (your modification to the) BL-15 modification I posed, running nonstop from Yorktown Hgts. to that whole complex surrounding NY Medical College & call it a day....

===============================

Considering what you're saying though (with the BL-15 modification bypassing Pleasantville & remaining serving Briarcliff Manor east of rt. 9a )

If the BL-19 were to continue on rt. 117 over to Tarrytown, I would have the BL-13 cut back to Tarrytown full time.... The BL-19 would then become the lone route serving Phelps Hospital instead.... Thing also is, the "BL-22" would need to run down to Arcadian (ending inside there somewhere) instead of simply ending at MNRR Ossining like the BL-19 does..... I wouldn't have BL-13's & BL-19's running north of MNRR Tarrytown - even if it is for a relatively short enough stint b/w MNRR Tarrytown & rt. 117..... What I'm essentially implicating here is that there's less of a need to link Ossining & White Plains via Tarrytown (real BL-13) compared to linking Ossining & White Plains via industrial/commercial Elmsford & Valhalla/NY Medical Coll. complex (real BL-14)....

As far said "BL-22", while interesting, I would worry about the patronage of this route if the BL-13 was maintained running to Ossining.... Another way of putting this is (outside of the BL-11) the BL-22 would be a distant last option out of Ossining - being that it would neither serve that whole complex in Valhalla (real BL-14) nor Tarrytown proper (real BL-13).... Yeah, the fact that it would be a third full time route (fourth route overall) out of Ossining IMO is neither here nor there to me; I'm more focusing on how the route would serve people.... At minimum though, being that the "BL-22" would serve White Plains, it'd automatically make it more "worth it" than the (real BL-19).... Mt. Kisco & Ossining are easily the real BL-19's biggest ridership generators, but neither obviously compares to the demand for White Plains, county-wide.....

For a visual, I decided to map out a BL-19 of sorts (diversion to Tarrytown), as well as a "BL-22" with my own spin on it (considering everything mentioned above).... Also included your spin to the modified BL-15 in question (as in, having it run to MNRR Peekskill, etc.) → MAP HERE

Edited February 7, 2021 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

On 2/6/2021 at 10:23 PM, B35 via Church said:

At the rate you're going (all or bust), you may as well have (your modification to the) BL-15 modification I posed, running nonstop from Yorktown Hgts. to that whole complex surrounding NY Medical College & call it a day....

===============================

Considering what you're saying though (with the BL-15 modification bypassing Pleasantville & remaining serving Briarcliff Manor east of rt. 9a )

If the BL-19 were to continue on rt. 117 over to Tarrytown, I would have the BL-13 cut back to Tarrytown full time.... The BL-19 would then become the lone route serving Phelps Hospital instead.... Thing also is, the "BL-22" would need to run down to Arcadian (ending inside there somewhere) instead of simply ending at MNRR Ossining like the BL-19 does..... I wouldn't have BL-13's & BL-19's running north of MNRR Tarrytown - even if it is for a relatively short enough stint b/w MNRR Tarrytown & rt. 117..... What I'm essentially implicating here is that there's less of a need to link Ossining & White Plains via Tarrytown (real BL-13) compared to linking Ossining & White Plains via industrial/commercial Elmsford & Valhalla/NY Medical Coll. complex (real BL-14)....

As far said "BL-22", while interesting, I would worry about the patronage of this route if the BL-13 was maintained running to Ossining.... Another way of putting this is (outside of the BL-11) the BL-22 would be a distant last option out of Ossining - being that it would neither serve that whole complex in Valhalla (real BL-14) nor Tarrytown proper (real BL-13).... Yeah, the fact that it would be a third full time route (fourth route overall) out of Ossining IMO is neither here nor there to me; I'm more focusing on how the route would serve people.... At minimum though, being that the "BL-22" would serve White Plains, it'd automatically make it more "worth it" than the (real BL-19).... Mt. Kisco & Ossining are easily the real BL-19's biggest ridership generators, but neither obviously compares to the demand for White Plains, county-wide.....

For a visual, I decided to map out a BL-19 of sorts (diversion to Tarrytown), as well as a "BL-22" with my own spin on it (considering everything mentioned above).... Also included your spin to the modified BL-15 in question (as in, having it run to MNRR Peekskill, etc.) → MAP HERE

Do you think the BL-1C/1X could reasonably be extended further north to Hawthorne or Pleasantville, rather than diverting the BL-22?

Also, out of curiosity, do you think the BL-19 in and of itself would get higher ridership under my proposal (Katonah-Mount Kisco-Tarrytown) or under its current structure (Katonah-Mount Kisco-Ossining)? Also, is the vast majority of the BL-19's ridership within Ossining coming from the portions west of Highland Avenue (US-9), or do a noticeable amount come from portions between US-9 and NY-9A?

I'm assuming that most of the riders seeking Phelps Hospital are coming from points south?

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Do you think the BL-1C/1X could reasonably be extended further north to Hawthorne or Pleasantville, rather than diverting the BL-22?

Also, out of curiosity, do you think the BL-19 in and of itself would get higher ridership under my proposal (Katonah-Mount Kisco-Tarrytown) or under its current structure (Katonah-Mount Kisco-Ossining)? Also, is the vast majority of the BL-19's ridership within Ossining coming from the portions west of Highland Avenue (US-9), or do a noticeable amount come from portions between US-9 and NY-9A?

I'm assuming that most of the riders seeking Phelps Hospital are coming from points south?

I'd say it isn't worth taking the BL-15 away from Pleasantville to have the BL-1c/1x running up to Hawthorne (where I can't really see anything terminating in) and/or Pleasantvile - not even if you were to cut the BL-1c/1x back to Getty Square... Unlike swapping serving Ossining for Tarrytown with the BL-19, that just screams poor tradeoff to me.... The "BL-22" looping to serve Hawthorne wouldn't be too much different than having the modified BL-15 looping to serve the BJ's in Yorktown Hgts. IMO... All things considered, I'd rather have said "BL-22" covering Hawthorne that way over the diverted BL-19 to Tarrytown doing so.... I honestly don't think riders would mind such a diversion; especially considering the way the (real) BL-15 serves Hawthorne before serving Pleasantville..... "BL-22" is going to need more of a ridership grab than the diverted Tarrytown BL-19.... Anybody riding b/w White Plains & Ossining that are that impatient would end up taking BL-14's anyway.....

A diverted BL-19 to Tarrytown would garner more ridership than the current BL-19; I don't have to think twice about that..... I mean, people definitely take BL-19's in Ossining, but at the same time, it's noticeably tertiary to both the BL-13 & the BL-14.... Now that I think about it, there's quite a sizable amt. of BL-14 riders that ride b/w Ossining & [Peekskill or Cortlandt Town Ctr.].... Anyway, the vast majority of bus usage in Ossining period emanates from the heart of the village (as in, west of Highland av.).... It's nothing drastic either way, but push comes to shove, you're more likely to see more passenger activity in general on the BL-19 over the BL-14 once they leave the downtown area (within Ossining, I mean).... Most the White Plains bound BL-14's I've taken have been straight shots to Hospital Oval (NY Medical Coll.) after that Spring/Waller stop (Ossining)....

I find that Hudson Valley Hospital garners more bus usage in general over that of Phelps.... While I do think there should be some sort of bus service to Phelps, I don't notice any real difference from off which direction on the BL-13 riders really/predominantly emanate from....

[RailBus63]

On 2/2/2021 at 11:34 PM, GojiMet86 said:

New Flyer has won the contract with Bee-Line. Base order is for 66 XDE40, with options for 52 XDE40 and 10 XDE35.

 

https://www.newflyer.com/content/2021/02/westchester-county-awards-new-flyer-a-contract-for-up-to-128-hybrid-electric-xcelsior-transit-buses/

 

Any idea which other bus manufacturers bid on the contract?  I couldn't find anything on the county website.