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.
Via Garibaldi 8

Bronx Redesign Draft Released

Recommended Posts

On ‎6‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 4:48 AM, Cabanamaner said:

I find it curious that the Bx19, long considered to be one of the slowest moving turds in any borough, will be left virtually untouched after the redesign.

I don’t know if splitting it in half would help, but that stretch on 149th Street from Southern Blvd to Grand Concourse is notoriously brutal. 

Here's something additional to ponder on, that should raise inquisitions:

"The Draft Plan creates more direct east-west routes, particularly in the Central Bronx where current routes are circuitous and ridership is high. The Bx36 is especially noteworthy in this regard, as it is among the highest-ridership routes in the borough yet is one of the slowest. Segments on East 174th Street and East 180th Street add several turns and route it onto a particularly slow section of Boston Road in West Farms Square. Our proposal to reroute the Bx36 to stay on East Tremont Avenue would streamline the route and provide a simpler, more direct east-west connection."

.....

"We are not proposing any routing changes for the Bx19, considering the route is straight, direct, has high ridership, and connects to several important destinations and transfer points."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So let's ignore how slow the Bx19 is because it's nice & straight, but let's nicely straighten the Bx36 because it's one of the slowest routes in the borough.....

 

3 hours ago, 78 via Stew Leonards said:

Anyone think they should extend the Bx26 back to Fordham Center like it did in the 90s?

Not only would I not reinstate/extend Bx26's to Fordham Center, I'd truncate the Bx28 away from there.....

On ‎6‎/‎17‎/‎2019 at 3:04 PM, 4 via Mosholu said:

I don't believe I gave any input to what the changes are in this forum space, although I did this online and gave some of my ideas as to what I think should happen. There are some reroutes in this plan that work, and some that don't work. There are also some that I question their necessity or saw a missed opportunity. Note that this is part one, the next part is going to be on what doesn't work, what I question their necessity, and potential opportunities that were missed.

What works in the Bronx local plan:

  • The 8 to Country Club - Dean/Layton Avenues, and the 24 extension to Locust Point - Tierney Place/Longstreet Avenue: I think this would be great for Country Club and Locust Point because at the very least, Locust Point would still have a bus available to them. The 8 could benefit from a significant shortage of service in the sense that there would not be any reliability issues on the Country Club end, as there is in the current Locust Point end. Perhaps that would cut out the ever growing short turns that exist on the 8 that sends it to Westchester Square. I'm certain that this 24 extension would not cause trouble, similar to the 8 when it served Stadium Avenue (and marked as via Pelham Bay Park in the process).
  • The 6 Select+ to Turnbull/Pugsley Avenues via Story: I had sensed this one coming since I never understood why the 5 has to terminate there at all. Hopefully they would just cut out the 5 short turn and send all weekday runs over to Simpson Street (i.e. West Farms Road/Southern Boulevard).
  • The 11 to Hugh Grant Circle - East 177th Street/Parkchester: The 11 had been long overdue for a new ridership base. This would help to appease 36 riders that would depend on service along 174 Street. Another improvement that I would propose is to make the 11 run overnight with one to three buses running from 1 to 6AM, similar to what's currently done with the 36 overnight.
  • The 18 as the Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority's first true Circulator via Morris Heights and Highbridge: While this route is dispatched from Tenth Avenue (i.e. Kingsbridge) considering that home is under the Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority, this could be a test to see whether a circulator service would become profitable in the long run.
  • The 36 and 40 swapping sections of 177th Street (i.e. Tremont Avenue): I had wanted the 40 to be the 177th Street-Tremont route, but this seems to be better for the 36, as it would just focus on running almost entirely via Tremont and the 40 could take over the 180 Street portion for a better connection to East 180th Street on the #2/5.
  • The 4A to Simpson Street via Metropolitan Oval: This would help eliminate a duplicate of a route that has operated in hand with the 4 since the 14 was cut. Additionally, another improvement I would propose is to call the route the 4M (with the M signifying its operation via Metropolitan Oval).
  • The 35 covering a portion of the 11's route via Jennings Street: Perhaps this could help maintain service in the section that is going to be cut from the 11.

- Yes, the Bx24 extension won't cause trouble, given the car-centric section of Bronx CB10 it'd largely serve.....

- What constitutes a route being overdue for a new riderbase (as opposed the riderbase it already has) ?

- Aside from the fact that there's no reason given as to why it would supposedly work, how do you deem the Bx18 as a circulator as that of working, if you're unsure if it's a test to see if it'd be profitable in the long run?

- As was already stated, the Bx4a isn't a duplicate; it's a complement of the Bx4, carved from the Bx4.....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Here's something additional to ponder on, that should raise inquisitions:

"The Draft Plan creates more direct east-west routes, particularly in the Central Bronx where current routes are circuitous and ridership is high. The Bx36 is especially noteworthy in this regard, as it is among the highest-ridership routes in the borough yet is one of the slowest. Segments on East 174th Street and East 180th Street add several turns and route it onto a particularly slow section of Boston Road in West Farms Square. Our proposal to reroute the Bx36 to stay on East Tremont Avenue would streamline the route and provide a simpler, more direct east-west connection."

.....

"We are not proposing any routing changes for the Bx19, considering the route is straight, direct, has high ridership, and connects to several important destinations and transfer points."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So let's ignore how slow the Bx19 is because it's nice & straight, but let's nicely straighten the Bx36 because it's one of the slowest routes in the borough.....

 

Not only would I not reinstate/extend Bx26's to Fordham Center, I'd truncate the Bx28 away from there.....

- Yes, the Bx24 extension won't cause trouble, given the car-centric section of Bronx CB10 it'd largely serve.....

- What constitutes a route being overdue for a new riderbase (as opposed the riderbase it already has) ?

- Aside from the fact that there's no reason given as to why it would supposedly work, how do you deem the Bx18 as a circulator as that of working, if you're unsure if it's a test to see if it'd be profitable in the long run?

- As was already stated, the Bx4a isn't a duplicate; it's a complement of the Bx4, carved from the Bx4.....

 

Some of these routes are going to be gettin some sort of bus lanes and/or Traffic Signal Priority. This is going on behind the scenes. I’ve been workin with the DOT on bus shelters, bus stops and bus lanes and TSP requests. Need to do a follow up actually...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Not only would I not reinstate/extend Bx26's to Fordham Center, I'd truncate the Bx28 away from there.....

That along with the Bx34 reroute would force too many riders on the Bx1/Bx2, and that route can't take much more than what it has already.

Share this post


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

That along with the Bx34 reroute would force too many riders on the Bx1/Bx2, and that route can't take much more than what it has already.

Yeah, but at the same time, something has to give... Too many Bx28's running to Fordham Center compromises the quality of service for Co-op riders, while cutting back Bx28's to Lehman would divert some of those riders past that point to the Bx1/2.....

Not for anything aforementioned, but the Bx34 I would leave right where it is, regardless.....

Share this post


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

My pipe dream would be the a split of the Bx12. SBS would run between Sedgwick and Bay Plaza, the local 12 would run between Fordham/Valentine and Pelham Bay and the M207 would run between 207/Broadway and Pelham Pkwy/White Plains Rd (I would’ve split the 12 and 207 at Fordham Plaza but it’s turning 5 routes (6 with the Bx34) already and the area is a major choke point.) The hawk Bx12 local and M207 would be interlined and thru-running like the Bx39/Bx41 late night combo.

I’d rather reduce the stops west of Jerome Av on the SBS - basically 10th Av, Cedar, University, Jerome, Concourse, Fordham Plaza, then business as usual. Connects to all the trains, Bx3, and reduces runtime (while still giving Fordham Hill Oval access since most either take the local to the last stop on Sedgwick or walk from Jerome).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

- What constitutes a route being overdue for a new riderbase (as opposed the riderbase it already has) ?

In regards to the riderbase question, I was talking about how the 11 would replace the 36 right along 174 into Hugh Grant Circle. In this proposal, the 11 would likely be marked as Hugh Grant Circle - East 177th Street/Parkchester via 170/174 Streets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

- Aside from the fact that there's no reason given as to why it would supposedly work, how do you deem the Bx18 as a circulator as that of working, if you're unsure if it's a test to see if it'd be profitable in the long run? 

The Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority hasn't operated a circulator of that level before; the only line that was close to this was with the QBx1 which mainly ran a circulator service between Pelham Bay Park and each part of Co Op City under Queens Surface, present day College Point. The only time it ran to Main Street was during off peak, but even with that - there was a variation of which section it would serve during that time. They had the intermittent service to/from Flushing via Bellamy. It later became quite confusing with time despite the original circulator directly serving each section of Co Op City, which is how it was split into the 23 as the loop service and the 50 as the main service to Main Street - both from New York Bus Service, present day Eastchester. I question the fact that they wish to make the 23 do more work with more intervals and cut the 50 out of Co Op City entirely, because I know it'd only hurt Co Op City more.

It's true I didn't give a reason as to how that would supposedly work as well as the fact that I'm unsure as to how it would be profitable. You got me on those points @B35 via Church. My reasoning behind saying that it was going to be a test was in regards to the 46 not being proposed for major changes. Its more or less a line that has a wasted potential, meaning it could do more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 4 via Mosholu said:

In regards to the riderbase question, I was talking about how the 11 would replace the 36 right along 174 into Hugh Grant Circle. In this proposal, the 11 would likely be marked as Hugh Grant Circle - East 177th Street/Parkchester via 170/174 Streets.

Oh, I understood you were talking about the Bx11.... That inquiry there was more general; I'm not understanding what makes (any) bus route long overdue for a new riderbase....

It's one thing to say a route could use more ridership - However, to say a route is long overdue for a new riderbase, implicates that there's some issue with some route's current riderbase.....

8 hours ago, 4 via Mosholu said:

The Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority hasn't operated a circulator of that level before; the only line that was close to this was with the QBx1 which mainly ran a circulator service between Pelham Bay Park and each part of Co Op City under Queens Surface, present day College Point. The only time it ran to Main Street was during off peak, but even with that - there was a variation of which section it would serve during that time. They had the intermittent service to/from Flushing via Bellamy. It later became quite confusing with time despite the original circulator directly serving each section of Co Op City, which is how it was split into the 23 as the loop service and the 50 as the main service to Main Street - both from New York Bus Service, present day Eastchester. I question the fact that they wish to make the 23 do more work with more intervals and cut the 50 out of Co Op City entirely, because I know it'd only hurt Co Op City more.

It's true I didn't give a reason as to how that would supposedly work as well as the fact that I'm unsure as to how it would be profitable. You got me on those points @B35 via Church. My reasoning behind saying that it was going to be a test was in regards to the 46 not being proposed for major changes. Its more or less a line that has a wasted potential, meaning it could do more.

The current structure of the Bx18 is really all that's needed.... There's no point in running along Sedgwick, south of where Sedgwick meets Undercliff... That, and while this circulator wiil get High Bridge patrons to the (D) & the (4) quicker, the fact that the Bx11 would no longer serve Ogden/Plimpton means those Bx13's are gonna get slammed heading to/from Washington Heights..... The Bx18 up there would do nothing for those folks....

They better run more Bx13 service as a result of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Oh, I understood you were talking about the Bx11.... That inquiry there was more general; I'm not understanding what makes (any) bus route long overdue for a new riderbase....

It's one thing to say a route could use more ridership - However, to say a route is long overdue for a new riderbase, implicates that there's some issue with some route's current riderbase.....

The current structure of the Bx18 is really all that's needed.... There's no point in running along Sedgwick, south of where Sedgwick meets Undercliff... That, and while this circulator wiil get High Bridge patrons to the (D) & the (4) quicker, the fact that the Bx11 would no longer serve Ogden/Plimpton means those Bx13's are gonna get slammed heading to/from Washington Heights..... The Bx18 up there would do nothing for those folks....

They better run more Bx13 service as a result of this.

There will be an extra bus or two per hour for the Bx13 but the change is not too significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/19/2019 at 5:54 AM, Gotham Bus Co. said:

Before 1984, the Bx19 was two routes: Bx30 (149th Crosstown) and Bx31 (Southern Blvd). 

Meanwhile, Bx12 used to be two routes through the early 1970s: Bx12 (east of Sedgwick) and Bx19 (west of Fordham Plaza).

Not to sound off topic (technically it isn't) but is anyone interested in seeing the timetables for the older routes mentioned above?

On 6/19/2019 at 4:38 AM, 78 via Stew Leonards said:

why was it ever cut back to BPB?

 

On 6/19/2019 at 4:49 AM, Lex said:

I couldn't tell you, but if the Bx28 is any indication, it's not needed down there. Hell, it already crosses the Bx34 and Bx41, and it interacts with the Bx12 and weekday Bx22 at/near its extremities.

I can answer that. A study was conducted sometime in 1999-2000 and the TA saw that more riders going to Fordham Center at the time used the Bx28 and not the Bx26. Yet this doesn't explain why the Fordham Center branch was the main route, whereas the Bedford Park branch wasn't. Keep in mind that prior to December 1991, buses alternated to either terminals. Until September 2000, the Bedford Park branch saw service weekday rush hours, early weekend mornings, and all remaining late evening service. Surprisingly, the Bx26 was not part of the 1995 service cuts, how strange.

Now that we're talking about the Bx28, based on older maps that I have in my collection, all Sunday service ended at Moshulu Parkway. Again, I'm not sure what allegedly caused the ridership changes between both routes at that time.

Edited by IRT Bronx Express
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, IRT Bronx Express said:

Not to sound off topic (technically it isn't) but is anyone interested in seeing the timetables for the older routes mentioned above?

 

I can answer that. A study was conducted sometime in 1999-2000 and the TA saw that more riders going to Fordham Center at the time used the Bx28 and not the Bx26. Yet this doesn't explain why the Fordham Center branch was the main route, whereas the Bedford Park branch wasn't. Keep in mind that prior to December 1991, buses alternated to either terminals. Until September 2000, that branch saw service weekday rush hours, early weekend evenings, and all remaining late evening service.

Now that we're talking about the Bx28, based on older maps that I have in my collection, all Sunday service ended at Moshulu Parkway. Again, I'm not sure what allegedly caused the ridership changes between both routes at that time.

I would love to see some of the timetables for the older routes!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I would love to see some of the timetables for the older routes!

http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/BronxSkipStopExpress/library/BusPictures

Just a sample of what I have, there's actually more. ;) Hard to believe that our last major Bronx bus restructuring took place in 1984.

Edited by IRT Bronx Express
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IRT Bronx Express said:

Not to sound off topic (technically it isn't) but is anyone interested in seeing the timetables for the older routes mentioned above?

 

I can answer that. A study was conducted sometime in 1999-2000 and the TA saw that more riders going to Fordham Center at the time used the Bx28 and not the Bx26. Yet this doesn't explain why the Fordham Center branch was the main route, whereas the Bedford Park branch wasn't. Keep in mind that prior to December 1991, buses alternated to either terminals. Until September 2000, the Bedford Park branch saw service weekday rush hours, early weekend mornings, and all remaining late evening service. Surprisingly, the Bx26 was not part of the 1995 service cuts, how strange.

Now that we're talking about the Bx28, based on older maps that I have in my collection, all Sunday service ended at Moshulu Parkway. Again, I'm not sure what allegedly caused the ridership changes between both routes at that time.

The nostalgia is kicking in, remembering the Bx26's turn left on Jerome from BPB heading south, and running nothing but RTS's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I never did comment on these express bus changes.... Real quick:

BxM2: Broadway between 59th & 110th? Riverside drive isn't the quote-unquote unofficial bypass it used to be, either (not even remotely).... Ridership losses will be apparent (which is why I never concurred with some on here that suggested, or inquired as an implication as to why the BxM2 doesn't take Riverside dr.)..... The route will be straighter, but more inefficient.... UES usage is being underestimated.... More people will flock to the BxM1.....

BxM4/BxM5: So basically, revoke express service from the Concourse to half-ass break up the BxM11..... Reverting the BxM4b super express & extending it to serve the lightest used portion of the BxM11, I see as ending up suffering the same fate that the BxM4b super expresses did..... Shifting buses away from via WPR to via Bronxwood I agree with, but I would have buses serve the (area in the) opposite direction along 233rd, along/towards the park....

Norwood should still have express bus service though; the BxM4 wasn't just a lightly used bus along the Concourse with the vast majority of riders wanting Woodlawn.... This is one area where & what both of these route proposals fail to address....

BxM8: As long as it's only for the 2 City Island trips in each direction....

BxM17: There's a reason you would never see anyone on any of these transit forums actually suggest a routing for a Co-Op - Lower Manhattan route (even though they felt a route transporting potential riders b/w those two points should exist).... This is why..... Further proof that a picture speaks a thousand words.

BxM18:  Usage along the current service area only has it transporting 200 something riders.... Running it nonstop to Chambers isn't going to help & this fantasy that Riverside dr. will be the savior of all for it (and the BxM2) is a straight up fallacy.....

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

I never did comment on these express bus changes.... Real quick:

BxM18:  Usage along the current service area only has it transporting 200 something riders.... Running it nonstop to Chambers isn't going to help & this fantasy that Riverside dr. will be the savior of all for it (and the BxM2) is a straight up fallacy.....

The map is wrong on the PDF. The bus is making a few West Midtown stops plus Hudson Yards, so it wouldn't be a Downtown only bus. The question is if those added stops, plus the additional Inwood stops would bring in enough riders in the long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The map is wrong on the PDF. The bus is making a few West Midtown stops plus Hudson Yards, so it wouldn't be a Downtown only bus. The question is if those added stops, plus the additional Inwood stops would bring in enough riders in the long term.

At the meeting they said the BxM2 and BxM18 would bypass Inwood. (I know in the report it mentions that the BxM18 would serve Inwood...so many inconsistencies...)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The map is wrong on the PDF. The bus is making a few West Midtown stops plus Hudson Yards, so it wouldn't be a Downtown only bus. The question is if those added stops, plus the additional Inwood stops would bring in enough riders in the long term.

3 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

At the meeting they said the BxM2 and BxM18 would bypass Inwood. (I know in the report it mentions that the BxM18 would serve Inwood...so many inconsistencies...)

Stupid shit.

Wth are riders supposed to believe anymore....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2019 at 7:41 AM, B35 via Church said:

It's one thing to say a route could use more ridership - However, to say a route is long overdue for a new riderbase, implicates that there's some issue with some route's current riderbase.....

Perhaps that was what I meant to say, that the 11 could use more ridership from East 177.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I did say there was going to be a part two with this one, so here it is. Anything that I put in Blue Gray are my own suggestions.

What doesn't work in the Bronx Redesign Plan (and what I question their necessity of)

  • Every route to Co Op City - Earhart Lane/Erskine Place serving Pelham Bay Park and not serving it (i.e. the 26/28/30/50)Whoever decided to come up with more cuts in Co Op City service needs to get their head examined. I have a fellow friend that I rode with on the 26 some time back, and she was heading home to her place on the Hutch nearby PS 160. If the 26 was cut, she'd have to get on the 23 that would serve that area and then transfer to the 26 towards Lehman. Perhaps she wouldn't go to Lehman, but she is a Co Op City resident. Besides, I went to school in 153, and I think that by cutting off the lines that would touch the 23, it would overwhelm that bus. Co Op City as a whole would be in one way or another an area where the most severe cuts has ever taken place anywhere.
  • The two split 15 buses: Having the 55 come back as a LIMITED stopping at all the Third Avenue stops would work best over calling the other 15 the 125.
  • The 16's Mundy Lane portion: That one is more or less unnecessary for the 16 to go via Pitman, Mundy Lane and 238th (i.e. Nereid). I think it is quite dangerous for it to run through a narrow lane. Having it run straight up Baychester into 238th is better.
  • The 19 to Riverbank State Park and Bronx Park: I'm really thinking this should have been split at the Hub over the 15, given how many times it has been slowed down in front of traffic lights so many times.
  • Giving the 23 more intervals to run in place of reduced Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit service: This was not really thought out in the most constructive way possible, given how there is a potential for bunching to occur.
  • The 28 section via Mosholu and Paul Avenues being cut: I'm not sure what is going on with the planners, but that section serves the Tracy Towers, Bronx Science and Dewitt Clinton. Having this cut would overwhelm the 1 and 2 that would be the only routes serving there, meaning that it would just serve Lehman - following the 26.
  • The 29 cut from Bay Plaza: This would become a disaster because it is heavily used north of Pelham Bay Park.
  • 30 service to Norwood being cut: It may be true that the Bainbridge section is rather notorious for duplication, as there is the 16 and 38 also terminating there. Because it mainly signifies Boston Road service, it's necessary for it to continue connecting it over there. Having the route run completely via Boston Road to Pelham Parkway may help make the 60/61/62 have pickup only to White Plains and New Rochelle as well as drop off only from there via Boston. But having it become straightened out would provide more problems than it's worth.
  • 32 having twenty stops cut out from the route: At the very least, the 144th on Morris towards Bronx Veterans as well as the 171st on Morris stop (both towards Mott Haven and Bronx Veterans, given how the main entrance to Taft each weekday morning is always through 171st) should still exist as I'm not certain a wholesale stop cut of that amount is necessary. That's one thing I question.
  • 36 having eighteen stops cut from the uncut areas: I just question why that has to happen. Like the 32, the 36 is planned to be a Select+ route, given its status as a Bus Priority Study Corridor. Keeping the Morris on Tremont stop would be important given how there are kids going to head start as well as MS 117 on 176th Street.
  • 38 cut of ALL service: There had been a plan for some time to have the 28 become a Select+ route, given how there had been a myriad of articulated coach buses over there. In the meantime, the 28 should be a LIMITED before any talk about cutting the 38 occurs.
  • 46 to Hunts Point and Prospect: The 46 should have been absorbed with another Coliseum (i.e. West Farms) Line running near there. Perhaps the 27 would have been better for this.
  • 4 express service cut from the Grand Concourse and peak extension to Wakefield: The Grand Concourse section is more or less dependent on it, due to only two ADA stops at 161st and Kingsbridge (with a third due for Bedford Park). Rerouting it to the Deegan at 233rd would somehow help, but it would create more trouble because the lifeline that was there at the time I was growing up would be no more, in addition to cutting the 4 from Katonah.
  • 5 express service via Bronxwood to 233rd Street: I'm quite certain they want to stop running the 11 via White Plains Road. Calling it the 5 would bring it under Liberty Lines Express, but I'm not sure how this would help.
  • 17 express service via Queens: I question this necessity because it was just not studied enough as a route that should leave the drawing board.
  • 18 express service via Hudson Yards: This would be a bummer since it wouldn't really stop at Hudson Yards itself, while cutting out the stop for the World Financial Center.
Edited by 4 via Mosholu
Just realized the 29 doesn't stop at Erskine Place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, 4 via Mosholu said:

I did say there was going to be a part two with this one, so here it is. Anything that I put in Blue Gray are my own suggestions.

What doesn't work in the Bronx Redesign Plan (and what I question their necessity of)

  • 4 express service cut from the Grand Concourse and peak extension to Wakefield: The Grand Concourse section is more or less dependent on it, due to only two ADA stops at 161st and Kingsbridge (with a third due for Bedford Park). Rerouting it to the Deegan at 233rd would somehow help, but it would create more trouble because the lifeline that was there at the time I was growing up would be no more, in addition to cutting the 4 from Katonah.
  • 5 express service via Bronxwood to 233rd Street: I'm quite certain they want to stop running the 11 via White Plains Road. Calling it the 5 would bring it under Liberty Lines Express, but I'm not sure how this would help.
  • 17 express service via Queens: I question this necessity because it was just not studied enough as a route that should leave the drawing board.
  • 18 express service via Hudson Yards: This would be a bummer since it wouldn't really stop at Hudson Yards itself, while cutting out the stop for the World Financial Center.

Responses:

I spoke with DOT and an (MTA) planner up in Pelham Bay the other night who I have dealt with before about the entire express bus network.

  • BxM4 - There has been some discussion about maybe having the BxM4 come off of the Deegan to serve 158th/161st since that is a big stop and then get on the Deegan (Northbound) and stay on the Concourse (Southbound) from there.  That however still leaves an entire swath of the Concourse devoid of express bus service.
  • BxM5 - 233rd isn't written in stone.  They may change that, and I suggested that they have it serve the northern portion of the BxM11 to keep the current service during off-peak hours, though the planner seems to think that those people can just take the subway. I argued that they have the longest commute being the furthest away from the subway.
  • BxM17 - During the morning rush, the plan is to extend the current HOV lane in Queens , however the big question is evening service. I was assured that back-up plans would be in place should the proposed routing not work.
  • BxM17 - I am still looking to get more info about why this decision was made on this one and what data was used if any.  The answer given was that it provides new service to Hudson Yards for those of us in Riverdale (it will indeed serve Hudson Yards, then make its way down to Downtown). It would also provide a new service for Inwood.  West of Broadway, Inwood has similar demographics to a degree, and I suppose they are thinking that gentrification in Inwood will only increase west of Broadway.  However, I don't see enough ridership for this and too many stops.

 

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • The two split 15 buses: Having the 55 come back as a LIMITED stopping at all the Third Avenue stops would work best over calling the other 15 the 125.

What.

1 hour ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • The 28 section via Mosholu and Paul Avenues being cut: I'm not sure what is going on with the planners, but that section serves the Tracy Towers, Bronx Science and Dewitt Clinton. Having this cut would overwhelm the 1 and 2 that would be the only routes serving there, meaning that it would just serve Lehman - following the 26.

Apparently, the Bx10 doesn't exist.

1 hour ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • 30 service to Norwood being cut: It may be true that the Bainbridge section is rather notorious for duplication, as there is the 16 and 38 also terminating there. Because it mainly signifies Boston Road service, it's necessary for it to continue connecting it over there. Having the route run completely via Boston Road to Pelham Parkway may help make the 60/61/62 have pickup only to White Plains and New Rochelle as well as drop off only from there via Boston. But having it become straightened out would provide more problems than it's worth.

The lack of a direct connection to Montefiore's Moses division isn't the main issue, but that the entire route barely connects to anything (the subway isn't enough), which is why the former Bx7 was split between two routes on one end of (that stretch of) Boston Road and merely dropped on the other.

1 hour ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • 38 cut of ALL service: There had been a plan for some time to have the 28 become a Select+ route, given how there had been a myriad of articulated coach buses over there. In the meantime, the 28 should be a LIMITED before any talk about cutting the 38 occurs.

And what route was the Bx38 carved out of, again?

1 hour ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • 46 to Hunts Point and Prospect: The 46 should have been absorbed with another Coliseum (i.e. West Farms) Line running near there. Perhaps the 27 would have been better for this.

Aside from canning it, doing anything with the Bx46 would look desperate. Folding it into the Bx27? That would be beyond foolish.

 

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:
  • BxM5 - 233rd isn't written in stone.  They may change that, and I suggested that they have it serve the northern portion of the BxM11 to keep the current service during off-peak hours, though the planner seems to think that those people can just take the subway. I argued that they have the longest commute being the furthest away from the subway.

That argument doesn't hold water. Aside from a couple of drop-offs (which are a short walk away), every stop from Pelham Parkway to the Wakefield terminus sits right by a subway station. It doesn't help that the bus operates far less frequently than the (2). (Now, if you were to talk about accessibility, that would be a different story.) 

Share this post


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

Apparently, the Bx10 doesn't exist.

The 10 does exist; what I meant to say was that the 1, 2, and 10 would be overwhelmed around Mosholu if this were to go through.

Edited by 4 via Mosholu

Share this post


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

And what route was the Bx38 carved out of, again?

The 38 began from the 28, serving the last two sections (4 and 5). The only main difference is serving 206, not 192.

Edited by 4 via Mosholu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lex said:

Aside from canning it, doing anything with the Bx46 would look desperate. Folding it into the Bx27? That would be beyond foolish.

What's desperate about wanting to increase ridership on a low ridership route like the Bx46? Yeah combining it with the Bx27 is not a good idea, but keeping it as it is eventually won't cut it. It's been done before with other routes in this city, before the MTA got on that cut-cut-cut mentality. It's this type of mentality which is why the bus system is the way it is, which is exactly what the MTA wants. Keep it the way it is, then ultimately cut the thing when finances get tight.

That bus doesn't do anything for most people who live along that route because of its high headways. The fact that it doesn't serve much of anything besides residential and industrial portions doesn't help either.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • 5 express service via Bronxwood to 233rd Street: I'm quite certain they want to stop running the 11 via White Plains Road. Calling it the 5 would bring it under Liberty Lines Express, but I'm not sure how this would help.

Of course, you mean MTA Bus Company. There is no more Liberty Lines Express. (And... MTA has the right to assign the route to either Yonkers or Eastchester.)

 

 

2 hours ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • The 29 cut from Bay Plaza: This would become a disaster because it is heavily used north of Pelham Bay Park.

 It seems that the Bx23 will still be there to pick up the slack.

 

 

2 hours ago, 4 via Mosholu said:
  • 17 express service via Queens: I question this necessity because it was just not studied enough as a route that should leave the drawing board.
  • 18 express service via Hudson Yards: This would be a bummer since it wouldn't really stop at Hudson Yards itself, while cutting out the stop for the World Financial Center.

BxM17: "The proposed express route would avoid local Manhattan congested streets by traveling via the Whitestone Bridge and Long Island Expressway." I would be very interested to see just how much faster this is versus going through Manhattan. I could also envision using the Triboro to the BQE to the Willie B to Allen Street. 

BxM18: Yes, it would. ("The proposed routing change will provide Riverdale and Inwood customers with new direct service to Hudson Yards....")

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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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