Jump to content


Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
MysteriousBtrain

Bronx Bus Network Redesign Draft Plan is Coming

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

I would've split the Bx24 into two parts: Pelham Bay-Hutch Metro Center (24 hours) and Pelham Bay-Locust Point (Bx14-no overnight)

The Bx30 is officially the 1980's Bx7 reborn.

 

I would then combine your shortened Bx24 with the Bx29 so that City Island has direct access to Westchester Square bus connections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

"The proposed express route would avoid local Manhattan congested streets by traveling via the Whitestone Bridge and Long Island Expressway."

There's really no way for that BxM17 to go via the FDR?

Edited by Bay Ridge Express

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

VG8's gonna love having the BxM1, BxM2 and BxM18 all serve Inwood now. /s

All will pass through (to some degree in the case of the BxM1), but the BxM2 will only be passing through. The BxM18, on the other hand, will serve it (probably because of the connection to Hudson Yards).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

"The proposed express route would avoid local Manhattan congested streets by traveling via the Whitestone Bridge and Long Island Expressway."

There's really no way for that BxM18 to go via the FDR?

Height restrictions are a thing, especially with coach buses...

Also, did you mean BxM17?

Edited by Lex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

"The proposed express route would avoid local Manhattan congested streets by traveling via the Whitestone Bridge and Long Island Expressway."

There's really no way for that BxM17 to go via the FDR?

 

Buses aren't officially allowed on the FDR north of 20th Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

"The proposed express route would avoid local Manhattan congested streets by traveling via the Whitestone Bridge and Long Island Expressway."

There's really no way for that BxM18 to go via the FDR?

 

 

Just now, Lex said:

Height restrictions are a thing, especially with coach buses...

South of 23rd Street and north of 96th Street are okay for buses, but it’s a no-go thru midtown.

In theory buses *can* go via the West Side Highway tho (south of the GWB.) I’ve been on Bolt buses that have gone up and down the West Side Highway many times and I haven’t been guillotined by a low bridge yet. Whether they’re actually allowed to is a whole other discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

By law, the states own and operate the Interstate Highway System. If the State turns over the Deegan to NYC, then it would no longer be an Interstate highway. The State would give up federal maintenance money (which NYC would not receive) and might even have to reimburse the original construction costs. 

Federal Highway Administration - Interstate FAQs

 

It seems as if the City is ready to deal with such issues given the discussions I’ve had with various elected officials regarding the Deegan and the Gowanus. For the Gowanus, we want the hours of operation of the HOV expanded to provide relief for express bus commuters, and the Brooklyn Borough President, Councilman Brannan, and several Staten Island elected officials all support that.

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

 

I also want to add that people in the residential areas the Bx46 serves have also been requesting for a route in their area prior to the route's inception. The problem is that the bus doesn't do much but act as a shuttle to the subway, and doesn't go anywhere else residents want. Given that it's often faster to just walk to the (6), this route doesn't carry except for when shift changes occur. Perhaps it'll be used more when the Bx6 SBS is moved out of Hunts Point, but it still needs more than current riders.

Extending it to Yankee Stadium would help out the Bx6 Local and give residents along the Bx46 section better access to the rest of the south Bronx, as well as access to regional connections (Metro-North at Melrose). If current headways are retain, you'd need one extra bus (per cycle), but additional fares collected would help offset that. 

I don’t see that happening. The new network focuses less on back-up coverage. You can see what they are doing now based on what they did with the Bronx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I don’t see that happening. The new network focuses less on back-up coverage. You can see what they are doing now based on what they did with the Bronx.

That's kind of concerning, since if you want to run a network with no backups and minimal overlap you need really solid frequency and reliability on each individual line if you want to keep ridership over the long haul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

That's kind of concerning, since if you want to run a network with no backups and minimal overlap you need really solid frequency and reliability on each individual line if you want to keep ridership over the long haul.

Well they’re making customers choose... Frequency vs coverage. Most customers will naturally choose frequency because who doesn’t like a bus that comes frequently? Most don’t understand the trade-offs, and the (MTA) is banking on this. In order to provide more frequent service, the (MTA) is having fewer corridors with various routes serving it, so they are banking on service being reliable and thinking that yanking a few stops and making service more direct will make everything ok. Not the case...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Well they’re making customers choose... Frequency vs coverage. Most customers will naturally choose frequency because who doesn’t like a bus that comes frequently? Most don’t understand the trade-offs, and the (MTA) is banking on this. In order to provide more frequent service, the (MTA) is having fewer corridors with various routes serving it, so they are banking on service being reliable and thinking that yanking a few stops and making service more direct will make everything ok. Not the case...

We need to have enough separate work done by DOT on things like bus lanes that we can keep our key corridors reliable for bus service while still maintaining decent frequency on most of these corridors, but we really also shouldn't be doing things like cutting the 30 back into the 1980s Bx7 and using the Bx23 as the only thing serving all of Co-op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It seems as if the City is ready to deal with such issues...

 

But is the State ready or willing to deal with it? Probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

But is the State ready or willing to deal with it? Probably not.

I assume they are. This has been going on now for months, just a question of when it happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

We need to have enough separate work done by DOT on things like bus lanes that we can keep our key corridors reliable for bus service while still maintaining decent frequency on most of these corridors, but we really also shouldn't be doing things like cutting the 30 back into the 1980s Bx7 and using the Bx23 as the only thing serving all of Co-op.

I had the chick that re-designed the Bronx routes in my first meeting. I expected something like this, and I told her point blank that most of the express bus routes were already direct and didn’t make many stops, and that you couldn’t do too much because of the topography and street layout in some cases. With a few exceptions, I can certainly understand the changes more than the Staten Island mess. This was more a tweak. If I had to rate this I’d give it a B. Most stops were kept, and I do like the idea of the added stop at 96th and 5th and 3rd and 96th. I’ve always felt that the BxM6, BxM7, 8, 9 and 10 should have that.With some more tweaks it could be even better.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, engineerboy6561 said:

We need to have enough separate work done by DOT on things like bus lanes that we can keep our key corridors reliable for bus service while still maintaining decent frequency on most of these corridors, but we really also shouldn't be doing things like cutting the 30 back into the 1980s Bx7 and using the Bx23 as the only thing serving all of Co-op.

Bx23 being the default Co-op City route is pure cost savings for the MTA. Since the Bx23 is MTA Bus, it gets more of a subsidy from NYC (used to be “blank check”, idk if that’s still the case) than whatever the Bx26/28/29/30 from NYCT all get.

If I was a Gun Hill B/O I’d be pissed as well because now all that work is going to Eastchester, a place where they can’t easily transfer to since the agencies STILL aren’t fully merged.

Edited by paulrivera
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, paulrivera said:

In theory buses *can* go via the West Side Highway tho (south of the GWB.) I’ve been on Bolt buses that have gone up and down the West Side Highway many times and I haven’t been guillotined by a low bridge yet. Whether they’re actually allowed to is a whole other discussion.

 

On the Henry Hudson, no, buses are officially not allowed. That's why the BxM2 and BxM18 are shown using Riverside Drive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the mta should have left two routes on the loop in Co-op city. If this actually goes through I can see the Bx-23 seeing a spike in ridership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Brillant93 said:

I think the mta should have left two routes on the loop in Co-op city. If this actually goes through I can see the Bx-23 seeing a spike in ridership. 

 

Is that a bad thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

Is that a bad thing?

No, not really. 

1 hour ago, engineerboy6561 said:

We need to have enough separate work done by DOT on things like bus lanes that we can keep our key corridors reliable for bus service while still maintaining decent frequency on most of these corridors, but we really also shouldn't be doing things like cutting the 30 back into the 1980s Bx7 and using the Bx23 as the only thing serving all of Co-op.

Police need to enforce bus lanes, too many people don’t respect the hours the lanes are in effect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Brillant93 said:

I think the mta should have left two routes on the loop in Co-op city. If this actually goes through I can see the Bx-23 seeing a spike in ridership. 

The Bx38 at the very least should of been kept to serve (North) Co-op City. Asch Loop still has the Bx26 and Bx28. Section 5 would be ok with just the Bx23.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paulrivera said:

If I was a Gun Hill B/O I’d be pissed as well because now all that work is going to Eastchester, a place where they can’t easily transfer to since the agencies STILL aren’t fully merged.

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

The Bx38 at the very least should of been kept to serve (North) Co-op City. Asch Loop still has the Bx26 and Bx28. Section 5 would be ok with just the Bx23.

I agree I was saying this in the other topic chat. North Co-Op still need direct access to the (5) at Gun Hill you get decent ridership from Dreiser and Carver Loops 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

The Bx38 at the very least should of been kept to serve (North) Co-op City. Asch Loop still has the Bx26 and Bx28. Section 5 would be ok with just the Bx23.

But wouldn't residents of Sections 5 lose subway connections to the (2) and (5) ( assuming that three legged transfers aren't allowed on the Bx23).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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)?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, R262 said:

But wouldn't residents of Sections 5 lose subway connections to the (2) and (5) ( assuming that three legged transfers aren't allowed on the Bx23).

 

One more reason why I would prefer to scrap transfers in favor of a time-based pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The big problem as I see it is in Co-op City, where the layout really prevents anything more direct, especially with respect to Section 5, as well as the Bx29's truncation. 

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. In the past, it was an issue to not serve it. But with Bee-Line using MetroCard (and almost certainly to switch to OMNY, along with NICE), this isn't too important anymore.

The best changes are to the cross-town routes in the mid-Bronx (Bx6 SBS, Bx11, Bx35, Bx36, and Bx40)...especially the Bx36, which could see a reduction in as many as 5 buses at peak times without reducing frequency of service. But to work, the Bx11 needs to become articulated. A missed one was with the Bx46 though. IMO, the Bx6/46 combination could have worked, with the Bx6 truncated to Yankee Stadium during the Bx6 SBS's hours.

A few changes would be needed, including modifying 174 Street between Southern and Hoe (and that intersection), and tearing down the dead-end along Balcom Avenue.

Edited by aemoreira81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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