Bronx Bus Network Redesign Draft Plan is Coming

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

- Co-op City is definitely going to be revised. While the goal here makes sense, the proposed implementation reeks of a baby walking before it crawled. Section 5 loses direct connections to anything other than the on top of the Bx30 being the sole route outside of the Bx23 for those in Sections 1 and 2. 

- Riverdale was the most vocal neighborhood in the public feedback (outside of Co-op) yet local bus service there was left untouched. The Bx10 staying untouched is weird given the streamlining that went on elsewhere on the map. I have a feeling that the express buses were the focal point of the commuters who were giving input from Riverdale. At least the Bx20 lives another day for those who find it useful.

- I don't like the off peak BxM6/10 combo. Express buses off peak aren't exactly speed demons and this combo does add a good amount of off-highway mileage to the BxM10 which will make less appealing for folks riding from Baychester and Morris Park. 

- Most of the changes elsewhere make sense to me even if it's clear the goal was to streamline all around. I like what was done with the Bx40/42 in Throgs Neck and the re-route of the Bx40 along East 180th and Burnside is a pretty good idea to allow the Bx36 to take over Tremont and make that route more direct. The Bx36 is overdue for some sort of major change.

- A lot of these changes work so well it's hard to tell they were made at first glance. I had to take two looks to see the Bx4A was shortened to Southern Blvd and that the Bx11 was extended to serve Parkchester.

- The thing I want to see is how frequent these routes in Central and South Bronx end up being. The Bx36 is super frequent (on paper) due to the high ridership it has but some of that will get lost to the Bx40 and 11 in the redesign. The Bx36 will also gain some riders from those routes as well so it will be interesting to see how the BPH are allocated since that will be a huge factor in deciding who the winners and losers are with this revamp. 

- Although the infamous Bx12 SBS is not getting a routing change (none were necessary) it would have been nice to see them propose an increase in frequency. There's going to be improvements in frequency for a bunch of revised routes but not the busiest one at the moment which remains a constant rolling set of sardine cans. Goes to show they care more about making the new changes work then keeping the commuters of the established network happy. 

- I would end the Bx30 at Fordham Plaza heading south. Makes a lot more sense then Bronx Park East for extra connections plus you can truly cancel the demand for Bee-Line 60/61/62 within the Bronx since Fordham Plaza is the main origin/destination point for intra-Bronx riders on Bee Line. 

- Bx5 will see a major reduction in frequency post-revamp. That is a guarantee. 

[MysteriousBtrain]

1 hour ago, R262 said:

But wouldn't residents of Sections 5 lose subway connections to the  and  ( assuming that three legged transfers aren't allowed on the Bx23).

Section 5 is fine with the . Not many people live that far in Co-op to be using the like that. If service is needed, extend the Bx28 back to section 5 and call it a day.

[Bay Ridge Express]

The Co-op City fiasco makes me wonder what is going to happen with Downtown Brooklyn. (A single shuttle bus traversing the different parts of Downtown while forcing the other routes to be truncated... where have I heard that idea before)

[JeremiahC99]

2 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

The Co-op City fiasco makes me wonder what is going to happen with Downtown Brooklyn. (A single shuttle bus traversing the different parts of Downtown while forcing the other routes to be truncated... where have I heard that idea before)

This was an idea proposed by the DOT in 2011 for their study on how to improve the still-terrible traffic situation in Downtown Brooklyn. This would coincide with building a new bus terminal at Ashland Place and Fulton Street (near the Lafayette Avenue Subway station). Unlike this Co-op city Fiasco, NOBODY WOULD LOSE ACCESS INTO THE AREA. Rather, as not to many people take the bus into Downtown (at least on the routes from the south), the relatively small amount of people who make this trip would make the convenient transfer to a free bus shuttle operating on the Fulton/Livingston corridor in Brooklyn to continue the short journey.

Going back to the Bronx, there does seem to be a day and night difference between the plan for Co-op Bronx and the 2011 DOT plan for Downtown Brooklyn. Co-op is more residential, which should warrant more bus service to areas outside the area (not just the ). The plan for Co-op City needs to be refined. Co-op City is not Downtown Brooklyn, and clearly does not need one route doing a circular shuttle while other routes would just terminate at outer area loops. I’m not hearing of a plan to make the Bx23 free either so this will inconvenience ALOT of people.

[paulrivera]

22 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Section 5 is fine with the . Not many people live that far in Co-op to be using the like that. If service is needed, extend the Bx28 back to section 5 and call it a day.

Q50 to Section 1 and 2, the Bx30 to Bay Plaza serving 3 and 4, and the Bx28 to Section 5. The Bx38 might need to be un-cancelled to maintain Bay Plaza service vía Gun Hill Road, but extended to Bedford Park or Fordham to replace the Bx34 south of Norwood.

Bam. Everyone gets something.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

1 hour ago, aemoreira81 said:

As for the Bx30, this resurrects the old Bx7 Boston Road...one might as well turn it over to Bee-Line and branch the Bx16 at the eastern end.

 

 The old Bx7 used Bronx Park East south of Allerton.

 Bee-Line will have to close its doors (i.e. stop carrying passengers locally) along Boston Road. 

 

[aemoreira81]

On the express side, I would actually propose that the BxM5 (currently the BxM11, be extended to Woodlawn via what would otherwise be deadhead distance. Running via Bronxwood instead of White Plains Road would make that cost-neutral over deadhead distance. Now, if the NYCDOT will permit express buses via the Henry Hudson Parkway, that is a game-changer for the BxM2 and BxM18---but why can't buses go all the way down?

As for the BxM6/10 service, it basically restores the pattern under New York Bus Service, where the BxM6 only ran weekdays and Saturdays and the BxM10 was rerouted at other times.

As for the BxM17, I wonder if it would make sense to have that route run via the BQE as well to the Manhattan Bridge and then enter Lower Manhattan that way. (Return service would be via the Williamsburg Bridge.)

2 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

 The old Bx7 used Bronx Park East south of Allerton.

 Bee-Line will have to close its doors (i.e. stop carrying passengers locally) along Boston Road. 

 

Branching the Bx16 would not cause that result if there is no NYC Transit service along Boston Road. Rather, there would be one branch serving Pelham (isolated from the rest of NYC), and one branch going to Co-op City Section 1.

Edited June 2, 2019 by aemoreira81

[Lil 57]

5 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

Gun Hill will still get more work from frequencies of "8 minutes or better all-day" on some of its routes. 

I guess EC would need more buses for this.

[GreatOne2k]

9 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

 The old Bx7 used Bronx Park East south of Allerton.

 Bee-Line will have to close its doors (i.e. stop carrying passengers locally) along Boston Road. 

 

The Bx30 would also have to run on Fordham Road (and would have to swap with the Bx16 past Conner Street) for the 60/61/62 to be completely closed door

[Gotham Bus Co.]

5 hours ago, RailRunRob said:

I agree I was saying this in the other topic chat. North Co-Op still need direct access to the  at Gun Hill you get decent ridership from Dreiser and Carver Loops 

 

I would have restructured the Bx23 to run from Pelham Bay  to Dyre  using the BxM7 route from Pelham Bay to Dreiser Loop, then continue on Co-op City Blvd, right Baychester into Tillotson, left Conner, into Provost, left 233rd, left Dyre.

[Lex]

6 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Section 5 would be ok with just the Bx23.

The most isolated part of Co-op City would be just fine with nothing more than the Bx23? Seriously?

[Around the Horn]

2 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

On the subject of the Bx23, since it’s going to be converted into a circular route solely traveling around the neighborhood with other routes terminating at Asch Loop or Dreiser Loop, wouldn’t it be more idea to just make the Bx23 route free (I.e, no fares charged at all)?

This I agree with...

The proposed Bx23 should be free for the same reasons people want the Q70 to be free.

[bwwnyc123]

Loop bus routes should be free.

[MysteriousBtrain]

33 minutes ago, GreatOne2k said:

The Bx30 would also have to run on Fordham Road (and would have to swap with the Bx16 past Conner Street) for the 60/61/62 to be completely closed door

Bee-line is only open door along Boston Road, not Fordham Road just to remind you. They can very well make riders use the Bx12/30 instead of the 60-62.

[MysteriousBtrain]

28 minutes ago, Lex said:

The most isolated part of Co-op City would be just fine with nothing more than the Bx23? Seriously?

Im not saying that section would agree with this, I'm saying in terms of ridership section 5 would adapt to using the Bx23 <->  or just use the Bx23 only. Only the Bx26 or Bx28 should be serving section 5 along with the Bx23. Co-op city may need more direct routes but to have everything serve Earhart Lane? Ridership isn't as justified as the Drieser and Bellamy Loops.

Edited June 2, 2019 by MysteriousBtrain

[checkmatechamp13]

3 hours ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

- Riverdale was the most vocal neighborhood in the public feedback (outside of Co-op) yet local bus service there was left untouched. The Bx10 staying untouched is weird given the streamlining that went on elsewhere on the map. I have a feeling that the express buses were the focal point of the commuters who were giving input from Riverdale. At least the Bx20 lives another day for those who find it useful.

I think that might've been because they were afraid of backlash, so they didn't want to make any changes (even if those changes could've potentially been positive). I agree, I thought for sure they would've did something to untangle the Bx10.

3 hours ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

- I don't like the off peak BxM6/10 combo. Express buses off peak aren't exactly speed demons and this combo does add a good amount of off-highway mileage to the BxM10 which will make less appealing for folks riding from Baychester and Morris Park. 

Since the BxM10 generally runs more frequently than the BxM6 off-peak, they might do something like they do with the BxM1 (the "via Inwood" trips and the ones that bypass it). Or they can have Parkchester benefit from having every off-peak BxM10 trip run through there, and hope that the increased frequency in that area attracts riders (enough to offset whatever number of Baychester/Morris Park riders are put-off by having the extra stops)

3 hours ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

- Most of the changes elsewhere make sense to me even if it's clear the goal was to streamline all around. I like what was done with the Bx40/42 in Throgs Neck and the re-route of the Bx40 along East 180th and Burnside is a pretty good idea to allow the Bx36 to take over Tremont and make that route more direct. The Bx36 is overdue for some sort of major change.

- A lot of these changes work so well it's hard to tell they were made at first glance. I had to take two looks to see the Bx4A was shortened to Southern Blvd and that the Bx11 was extended to serve Parkchester.

- The thing I want to see is how frequent these routes in Central and South Bronx end up being. The Bx36 is super frequent (on paper) due to the high ridership it has but some of that will get lost to the Bx40 and 11 in the redesign. The Bx36 will also gain some riders from those routes as well so it will be interesting to see how the BPH are allocated since that will be a huge factor in deciding who the winners and losers are with this revamp. 

I don't think the Bx36 will see any significant change in frequency. It loses the riders from the Bronx River Houses, but it gains riders from the northern part of Parkchester (while also providing that area with a new direct route to Upper Manhattan). Within the East Tremont area, it still maintains the connections to the same north-south bus routes as it does now, and I think riders will continue to choose the street they walk to based on the particular destination they're trying to reach (e.g. for Upper Manhattan, Tremont Avenue , or Hugh Grant Circle, they'll still head over to the Bx36, and for Burnside Avenue , River Park Towers, or Westchester Square, they'll head over to the Bx40) 

If I had to guess, if there's any of the 3 routes that would lose ridership/frequency, it would be the Bx40. The Bx11 is definitely going to see a boost in ridership/frequency (they say it'll go from every 10 minutes or better to every 8 minutes or better). That connection over the Bronx River will give it a nice boost in ridership from all the extra connections (plus the Bx36's old riders along 174th Street). The Bx36 itself as I mentioned above would likely be a break-even at worst, but I expect it to gain some riders because the new route is straighter and should be more reliable.

The Bx40 in the plan says it's getting a boost from every 20 minutes or better (10 minutes or better where it overlaps the Bx42) to every 8 minutes or better, But the Bx42 being a more reliable alternative east of Westchester Square, combined with the fact that the new route really isn't much straighter than the old route (granted it was already fairly straight) means that, unless they plan on doing things to address congestion and bunching along the route, reliability (and therefore ridership) won't be much better than it is with the current Bx40/42 combo. The same way you often see Bx40/42 buses bunched up, it can be just the same except with two Bx40s. But hopefully they do something to address the reliability (bus lanes, TSP, etc). Honestly, I was expecting them to cut it back to Westchester Square, and have two separate routes cover the eastern and western parts of Throgs Neck respectively.

3 hours ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

- I would end the Bx30 at Fordham Plaza heading south. Makes a lot more sense then Bronx Park East for extra connections plus you can truly cancel the demand for Bee-Line 60/61/62 within the Bronx since Fordham Plaza is the main origin/destination point for intra-Bronx riders on Bee Line. 

Actually, if anything I would say they want Bee Line to still help out in covering Boston Road (for the simple reason that it's fewer buses NYCT has to run). Think about it, most of the other Bee Line routes just travel over the city line to the closest subway station (or slightly further in. I know the 4/20/21 end at BPB, the 42 ends at 233rd Street, and the 52 ends at the Boston-Secor Houses). The 60/61/62 travel for a few miles before they reach their actual terminal, so NYCT probably figures they might as well take some passengers while they're at it. So they'll still get the people traveling past Bronx Park East who don't want to transfer to the Bx12/22.

[danielhg121]

The whole Bx23 thing is just asking for the route to bunch. I see the Bx23 buses that pull into Edson/Bartow, they never exceed standing capacity and most of the time, less than that even but the MTA basically wants to increase the frequency on a fairly short route and have all the riders get dispersed to where they’re going after that. I still think the bunching will cause uneven gaps in service and that’ll deter ridership which allows them to cut service later on.

I really hope they decide to make it fare free otherwise, ur screwing over Co-Op City residents.

[Union Tpke]

Here is Alon Levy's take on the plan. I am interested in hearing your responses.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

5 hours ago, danielhg121 said:

I really hope they decide to make it fare free otherwise, ur screwing over Co-Op City residents.

 

Or at least a 3-leg transfer. Or maybe (here I go again) scrap transfers in favor of a time-based pass.

[Lennyj17]

12 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

I guess EC would need more buses for this.

Looking at the maps, it looks like Q50 will loop PBP instead of terminating, this has me thinking the Q50 will go back to CP with Flushing being its sole terminal. This will free up buses at EC for Bx23.... Or they may just move Bx23 to GH, and pile more express runs into EC. 

The whole MTAB vs NYCT thing is going to have to fall by the waste side sooner or later especially with Qns Bus Network overhaul coming up next, to make any sense. If MTAB vs NYCT stays intact as far as where routes are based, OH BOY! Qns is going to be a real doozy.    

Let me say as someone who uses Q50 from Flushing to Co-Op, there is a base that rides the overlapping bases (Flushing to PBP - PBP Co-Op) and they will be shitting bricks. Q50, IMO doesn't need to go beyond Carver Loop really... Most its base (from South of PBP anyway) is off the bus by Carver. I would have it run Co-Op City Blvd to Bay Plaza using the Bx29, 38 layover.. People using Q50 in section 5 mostly use it to get to Bay Plaza because it came before a 23, 26, 28, or 29, No other reason.

I agree others that a direct link between Northern Co-Op to the  needs to be maintained.. It's an easier Xfer for the West Side than taking the to a Crosstown bus in the city. I would rather have had all Bx23's run PBP  - 5-4-3-2-1- Gun Hill and vice-versa. If not that then detour the Bx30 to serve Baychester  directly. 

Edited June 2, 2019 by Lennyj17

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

Or maybe (here I go again) scrap transfers in favor of a time-based pass.

So with your time based pass, people can just swipe in on the bus once and make as many transfers as they want in a two hour period, all while paying only $2.75 within that two hit period (I.e, no additional fares deducted)?

[Gotham Bus Co.]

1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said:

So with your time based pass, people can just swipe in on the bus once and make as many transfers as they want in a two hour period, all while paying only $2.75 within that two hit period (I.e, no additional fares deducted)?

 

It could be 2 hours (e.g. CT Transit). It could be 3 hours (e.g. Denver RTD). It could even be 4 hours overnight and 2.5 hours at other times. 

[paulrivera]

Come to think of it, isn’t it ironic that Bay Plaza is THE mall of the Bronx, but honestly is gonna get such mediocre service. It’ll still get the Bx5 on the weekends, but during the week... I don’t even know...

[Missabassie]

On 5/31/2019 at 10:39 PM, Coney Island Av said:

Thoughts:

-It's ironic that they eliminate the BxM11 (or turn it into the BxM5 rather) yet they don't even bother fiddling with the Bx39 which also runs directly under the ...

-The Bx15/M125 split is honestly a bad idea just like the M5/M55 fiasco. Same thing with the M100 being cut to Amsterdam/125th. 125 St is such a major corridor, and the only way this could work is if the M60 SBS is heavily increased in service.

-The Bx6 SBS change is something I honestly agree with. Having visited Hunts Point before, it's literally an industrial wasteland with little residential houses. The only places in Hunts Point where there's a considerable amount of housing is west of the Bruckner. Anything east of that is literally tumbleweeds. I don't think anyone would care if the Bx6 SBS were to be rerouted because given the area is very low-density, the Bx6 Local and Bx46 would do fine there. 

-The BxM17 is actually interesting and not bad. It provides support to the BxM7, and gives Co-op City express access to Lower Manhattan. 

-Cutting the Q50 to PBP is honestly a bad idea. That route is very crucial in connecting not just Co-op City with Queens, but also the East Bronx in general. If the Q50 were to be cut back, it would lose a significant amount of ridership... Not to mention that the Bx23 might have to be heavily increased in order for it to be the sole Co-op City Loop service. Also, the Bx26 and Bx28 don't need to have their Co-op City terminals changed. They work fine as-is and it wouldn't really make a difference slightly cutting them back.

Hate to say it, but thats probably by design.... think M23 +SBS+ & M14 +SBS+ where many stops were pulled....

 

On 6/1/2019 at 1:04 AM, Around the Horn said:

I feel like the Co-op City changes are asinine...

That's not going to go over well at all.

Nope not well at all. I frequent coop city, while i can walk thru the paths pretty swiftly, thats' just me. most people ain't up for all that walking, and for many older folks, out of the question. Secondly, forcing everyone to transfer is not a very good policy IMO. Using the bus is about convenience, so basically the message here is they want to run as little service as possible. ''You either transfer or you're on your own'', hence why everybody and their mother's brother drives everywhere.

 

On 6/1/2019 at 6:20 AM, LTA1992 said:

Nah. It's basic transport planning that's been widely used across the world. New York is just the next in line.

Also, I think the MTA spied on an argument I had with a friend regarding bus service in Co-Op.

I seem to be the only person who thinks the proposed routes make sense. And I read the document. Three legged transfers may come with the redesign as it's something residents wanted.

Really, wow.... I stand corrected.

[Missabassie]

18 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

The Co-op City fiasco makes me wonder what is going to happen with Downtown Brooklyn. (A single shuttle bus traversing the different parts of Downtown while forcing the other routes to be truncated... where have I heard that idea before)

Ooohh god.....

19 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

On the subject of the Bx23, since it’s going to be converted into a circular route solely traveling around the neighborhood with other routes terminating at Asch Loop or Dreiser Loop, wouldn’t it be more idea to just make the Bx23 route free (I.e, no fares charged at all)?

So basically they'll just make it +Selectbus+ & call it a day. (I'm not necessarily advocating for that by the way)