Lex Posted June 2, 2019 Share #51 Posted June 2, 2019 6 hours ago, RailRunRob said: Drieser and Carver are light years away from Asch Loop. If I need to get to the or even Montefiore For that matter the 38 is a life line. Why should some one have to switch buses? Not everyone is going to the or even the Eastside. Cut the 26,29 or even the 50 but at the very least Co-Op needs direct access to the Dyre Ave line. Is the Bx30 chopped liver or something? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastFlatbushLarry Posted June 2, 2019 Share #52 Posted June 2, 2019 2 minutes ago, WorkerX said: especially on the PM rush, the Triboro will kill reliability on all the buses coming going east past Lenox. amen. regarding the pm, anytime after 1pm (especially when the schools in the area let out) the east side is completely f****d. school buses complicate the s**t outta things in an already dense area. nothing but one-ways and being that the next 2-way thru street is south at 116, two-five takes the most punishment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 2, 2019 Share #53 Posted June 2, 2019 Here are my thoughts Bx4A-No service west of Longwood. Could just give it another designation Bx5-Since the Bx6 SBS will be tentatively extended east to Castle Hill, I see those short turns being eliminated. So they didn't consider giving it weekday service to Bay Plaza Bx8-Truncated to Layton and Dean, replaced by an extended Bx24 Bx11-Extended eastward to Parkchester (first time access) to replace the Bx36 on 174 St Bx15-No service to Manhattan, LTD service discontinued. There goes the last remnants of the Bx55 LTD Bx18-Becomes Bx23 west. Replaces the Bx11 in High Bridge Bx23-Enhanced service Bx24-Extended south to Locust Pt. Wonder what they'll do with overnight service Bx26-No service east of Asch Loop Bx28-Ends at Bay Plaza. I guess no overnight service serving all of Co-Op City. I suppose those Tracey Towers residents are ok with the Bx1 and 2. No service on Moshulu and Paul. I'm surprised LTD service was not proposed. No service west of Norwood overnights retained? Bx29-No service north of Pelham Bay, but will get overnight service. I guess it's a good trade off Bx30-Ends at Dreiser Loop with the BxM7. Becomes the Boston Rd route. (No connections to the ). Domino effect. 60/61/62 become closed door on Boston Rd. We can forget putting it on 222 St Bx34-No longer serves Bainbridge and Valentine south of 204. I wonder how it turn around at Fordham Plaza Bx35-Extended up West Farms Rd to replace the Bx11 Bx36-Now serves Tremont Av. Keeps LTD service. I like it Bx38-Eliminated Bx40-Diverts off Tremont to 180 to replace the Bx36. Another route not proposed for LTD service? Would no longer serve Ft Schulyer Bx42-No service west of Westchester Sq Bx46-I'm like everyone everyone else. This route was left alone?! M100-No service on 125 St M125-New route from The Hub to Manhattanville. I wonder what depot will have this route Q50-I'm iffy about no service north of Pelham Bay discontinued 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted June 2, 2019 Share #54 Posted June 2, 2019 10 minutes ago, Lex said: Is the Bx30 chopped liver or something? Sure seems like it. With no service via Gun Hill or the medical complexes. Baychester is somewhat close but not as direct as Gun Hill routing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastFlatbushLarry Posted June 2, 2019 Share #55 Posted June 2, 2019 i could be wrong, but i believe they're keeping the Limited bx15, and they're shifting a limited stop to 158 & 3rd southbound 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysteriousBtrain Posted June 2, 2019 Share #56 Posted June 2, 2019 12 minutes ago, Q43LTD said: Here are my thoughts Bx4A-No service west of Longwood. Could just give it another designation Bx5-Since the Bx6 SBS will be tentatively extended east to Castle Hill, I see those short turns being eliminated. So they didn't consider giving it weekday service to Bay Plaza Bx8-Truncated to Layton and Dean, replaced by an extended Bx24 Bx11-Extended eastward to Parkchester (first time access) to replace the Bx36 on 174 St Bx15-No service to Manhattan, LTD service discontinued. There goes the last remnants of the Bx55 LTD Bx18-Becomes Bx23 west. Replaces the Bx11 in High Bridge Bx23-Enhanced service Bx24-Extended south to Locust Pt. Wonder what they'll do with overnight service Bx26-No service east of Asch Loop Bx28-Ends at Bay Plaza. I guess no overnight service serving all of Co-Op City. I suppose those Tracey Towers residents are ok with the Bx1 and 2. No service on Moshulu and Paul. I'm surprised LTD service was not proposed. No service west of Norwood overnights retained? Bx29-No service north of Pelham Bay, but will get overnight service. I guess it's a good trade off Bx30-Ends at Dreiser Loop with the BxM7. Becomes the Boston Rd route. (No connections to the ). Domino effect. 60/61/62 become closed door on Boston Rd. We can forget putting it on 222 St Bx34-No longer serves Bainbridge and Valentine south of 204. I wonder how it turn around at Fordham Plaza Bx35-Extended up West Farms Rd to replace the Bx11 Bx36-Now serves Tremont Av. Keeps LTD service. I like it Bx38-Eliminated Bx40-Diverts off Tremont to 180 to replace the Bx36. Another route not proposed for LTD service? Would no longer serve Ft Schulyer Bx42-No service west of Westchester Sq Bx46-I'm like everyone everyone else. This route was left alone?! M100-No service on 125 St M125-New route from The Hub to Manhattanville. I wonder what depot will have this route Q50-I'm iffy about no service north of Pelham Bay discontinued Bx4A could just be renamed Bx44, Bx5 short turns I also see being eliminated, service in Co-op City is definitely going to get another looking at (Q50/Bx38 at the very least), I don't see a need for a Bx40 LTD/SBS if the Bx36 takes over central Tremont Avenue; E 180 St LTD is more or less redundant imo, Bx34 would most likely enter the Fordham Plaza bus terminal via one of the old Bx15 stops. M125 would either have MV or OF assigned to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastFlatbushLarry Posted June 2, 2019 Share #57 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Q43LTD said: Bx28 - I'm surprised LTD service was not proposed. agreed. ditto for the Bx40, seeing as they'll be potentially extra runs to play with. they might have to revisit this (just like they repeatedly did with the Staten Island redesign) but i just remembered... i think designating new lines as LTD is caput. Edited June 2, 2019 by EastFlatbushLarry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MysteriousBtrain Posted June 2, 2019 Share #58 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said: i could be wrong, but i believe they're keeping the Limited bx15, and they're shifting a limited stop to 158 & 3rd southbound From I understand the Bx15 LTD would basically be the Bx55 to Fordham Plaza. E 166 St is also being altered; the stop is eliminated for LTD service. Edited June 2, 2019 by MysteriousBtrain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastFlatbushLarry Posted June 2, 2019 Share #59 Posted June 2, 2019 5 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said: M125 would either have MV or OF assigned to it i almost forgot about OF. Kingsbridge can't get it, i can almost guarantee that. i gotta admit, West Farms is a stretch, and if they want artics on it, MV is out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 2, 2019 Share #60 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) Figured there'd be a system-wide focus on stop removal.... Anyway, well here goes, man.... Bx4/4a: I actually don't have a problem with this.... You don't need both the Bx4 & Bx4a running towards The Hub..... Bx6/SBS: I still feel some type of way about the current route even running over to Riverside Dr & I'm somewhat surprised that part of the route was maintained (since they're so caught up in straightening things).... Anyway, the diversion of the SBS variant to the shopping area around WPR, instead of serving the "meat" of Hunts Point, I can agree with.... Like the Bx5, ridership past WPR isn't really all that great (which is why I was never fond of a full on Bx5/Bx6 merge; a common proposal that would be brought up on these parts, over the years) Bx8: The (current) route is long & drawn out.... I mean, I get cutting it back to Dean/Layton, but I still think it should serve/end at Edgewater Park.... Bx11: Someone actually proposed the Bx11 to Parkchester on here, but he had it combined w/ the (current) Bx18, instead of going to GWB... As for this proposed Bx11, I don't like the fact that that segment east of Louis Nine would be left with only the Bx19.... I'm not really too high on disconnecting High Bridge to more of the Bronx either.... Bx13: No route changes proposed here, but if you take away the Bx11 from Ogden/Plimpton, I don't think service every 8 mins. is going to cut it during rush hours.... It's going to have to be better than every 8.... I don't think ANY of those stops up there along the Bx13 along Ogden/Plimpton should be eliminated either.... Area is hilly enough, to then have people walking longer to get to stops... Ridiculous.... Bx15: Truncating it to the hub will obviously speed up the route, but I cannot side with the idea of severing the direct connection to/along 125th for Bronxites.... I see 3rd av riders, large in part, ending up gunning for the subway after hitting (as in, terminating at) The Hub..... Bx18: Don't really see this catching on in High Bridge; turning it into a circulator to cover a portion of the Bx11 to Jerome av IRT & the Concourse IND won't cut it... Promoting walking of any sort in that neighborhood, to me, is just plain foolish..... Heading towards Manhattan (GWB), everyone's going to want Bx13's & heading in the other direction, service along Sedgwick in High Bridge (there's only that police station back there) is no substitute for service along (more of) Ogden..... Bx23: So.... have this route have more of an importance to the network (like originally anticipated/intended) now.... Shouldn't have had to had come to a bunch of cutbacks to other routes to have this happen, but *shrugs*.... Bx24: I'm not defending this proposal, but I don't see the need for this to run to PBP.... Connection to the should be made at Buhre via Jarvis instead.... Those folks in the deep SE Bronx aren't looking to get to Co-op & for damn sure they're not tryna catch the Bx12.... Something like this will likely end up on the chopping block some time in the future anyway, so its moot.... I'll finish commenting on the other changes, some time later.... Edited June 2, 2019 by B35 via Church 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted June 2, 2019 Share #61 Posted June 2, 2019 I can't get over the BxM17! This route is hilarious. On god I can't imagine that route ever, ever arriving on time, assuming they budget less than three hours per trip. It's like a greatest hits collection of every permanently traffic-ridden corridor in Queens. I've taken that drive plenty of times, and the only trip I've ever made it clear from Whitestone through the LIE to Manhattan was a Sunday one 4th of July weekend, with half the city out of town and nobody on the roads. It's impossible otherwise. And then the route goes all the way to South Ferry, just to collect more traffic?? I wouldn't even bring up the fact that 23rd-34th is technically a no-bus zone of the FDR, even if that gets broken... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastFlatbushLarry Posted June 2, 2019 Share #62 Posted June 2, 2019 26 minutes ago, B35 via Church said: Bx13: No route changes proposed here, but if you take away the Bx11 from Ogden/Plimpton, I don't think service every 8 mins. is going to cut it during rush hours.... It's going to have to be better than every 8.... I don't think ANY of those stops up there along the Bx13 along Ogden/Plimpton should be eliminated either.... Area is hilly enough, to then have people walking longer to get to stops... Ridiculous.... apparently the only thing that they cut were the 163 & 3rd trips. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cait Sith Posted June 2, 2019 Share #63 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, Brillant93 said: I don’t think M25 would work with how Manhattan bus routes are numbered. Majority of their routes are numbered based off the streets they run on like M14, M23, M34, M42, and so on. M125 makes much more sense. By that logic......every other route that doesn't shadow the streets they run on doesn't work with their designation(e.g M1-4, M21, M22, M15, M60, ect......). 10 minutes ago, MHV9218 said: I can't get over the BxM17! This route is hilarious. On god I can't imagine that route ever, ever arriving on time, assuming they budget less than three hours per trip. It's like a greatest hits collection of every permanently traffic-ridden corridor in Queens. I've taken that drive plenty of times, and the only trip I've ever made it clear from Whitestone through the LIE to Manhattan was a Sunday one 4th of July weekend, with half the city out of town and nobody on the roads. It's impossible otherwise. And then the route goes all the way to South Ferry, just to collect more traffic?? I wouldn't even bring up the fact that 23rd-34th is technically a no-bus zone of the FDR, even if that gets broken... Agreed. Though I'm still very interested in how it will be implemented. That's one ride I would definitely like to experience....with a pillow in tow lmao. I also forgot to add the Bx29 is also an unjustified cut....while it sounds good that a PBP-City Island route seems more logical, ridership on the Co-Op end is relatively high....they basically cut all of that so the Bx23 can fill in for it. Having the Bx23 fill in for all of the Co-Op City cuts is not good by any means, even if it has 3 to 8 minute headways. I still do not agree with all of these Co-Op City changes. The Bx28/Bx30 changes just reeks of service cuts to the Bx30 in exchange for the potential increases for the Bx28.... Edited June 2, 2019 by Cait Sith 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastFlatbushLarry Posted June 2, 2019 Share #64 Posted June 2, 2019 7 minutes ago, MHV9218 said: I can't get over the BxM17! This route is hilarious. On god I can't imagine that route ever, ever arriving on time, assuming they budget less than three hours per trip. It's like a greatest hits collection of every permanently traffic-ridden corridor in Queens. I've taken that drive plenty of times, and the only trip I've ever made it clear from Whitestone through the LIE to Manhattan was a Sunday one 4th of July weekend, with half the city out of town and nobody on the roads. It's impossible otherwise. And then the route goes all the way to South Ferry, just to collect more traffic?? I wouldn't even bring up the fact that 23rd-34th is technically a no-bus zone of the FDR, even if that gets broken... 😂😂😂 1 step forward... 3 steps back with this organization, lord have mercy. who's riding that line, with the God honest intent of making it to work on time? you can't even sell this to people who don't drive, so i can imagine anyone in the know regarding these particular roadways seeing this route design. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 2, 2019 Share #65 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said: 😂😂😂 1 step forward... 3 steps back with this organization, lord have mercy. who's riding that line, with the God honest intent of making it to work on time? you can't even sell this to people who don't drive, so i can imagine anyone in the know regarding these particular roadways seeing this route design. You'd need to add HOV lanes all over just to make this work, especially for the PM commute. I believe that this should be done and is long overdue for the LIE. A PM HOV lane on the LIE would have the QM2 SX, QM5 SX, QM7, QM8/QM8 SX, QM20 SX, and this BxM17. Edited June 2, 2019 by BM5 via Woodhaven 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brillant93 Posted June 2, 2019 Share #66 Posted June 2, 2019 13 minutes ago, Cait Sith said: By that logic......every other route that doesn't shadow the streets they run on doesn't work with their designation(e.g M1-4, M21, M22, M15, M60, ect......). Was just saying it makes more sense for it to be M125. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreeddekalbL Posted June 2, 2019 Share #67 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) This bxm17 sounds insane Af, sheet If I were driving I would be detouring over to the bqe/ gcp cause the LIE gonna whip that routes butt Edited June 2, 2019 by BreeddekalbL 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted June 2, 2019 Share #68 Posted June 2, 2019 3 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said: This bxm17 sounds insane Af, sheet If I were driving I would be detouring over to the bqe/ gcp cause the LIE gonna whip that routes butt Clearance... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted June 2, 2019 Share #69 Posted June 2, 2019 1 hour ago, MysteriousBtrain said: Bx4A could just be renamed Bx44, Bx5 short turns I also see being eliminated, service in Co-op City is definitely going to get another looking at (Q50/Bx38 at the very least), I don't see a need for a Bx40 LTD/SBS if the Bx36 takes over central Tremont Avenue; E 180 St LTD is more or less redundant imo, Bx34 would most likely enter the Fordham Plaza bus terminal via one of the old Bx15 stops. M125 would either have MV or OF assigned to it. The Bx36 only runs near the Bx40 in the East Tremont area. It doesn't run near it past Jerome Avenue (westbound) or White Plains Road (eastbound) 1 hour ago, EastFlatbushLarry said: agreed. ditto for the Bx40, seeing as they'll be potentially extra runs to play with. they might have to revisit this (just like they repeatedly did with the Staten Island redesign) but i just remembered... i think designating new lines as LTD is caput. Limited runs are usually just former local runs. They look at which routes run frequently enough, and then they take about half the trips during a certain time period and designate them as limited-stop trips. 1 hour ago, MysteriousBtrain said: From I understand the Bx15 LTD would basically be the Bx55 to Fordham Plaza. E 166 St is also being altered; the stop is eliminated for LTD service. This is correct. 51 minutes ago, B35 via Church said: Bx13: No route changes proposed here, but if you take away the Bx11 from Ogden/Plimpton, I don't think service every 8 mins. is going to cut it during rush hours.... It's going to have to be better than every 8.... I don't think ANY of those stops up there along the Bx13 along Ogden/Plimpton should be eliminated either.... Area is hilly enough, to then have people walking longer to get to stops... Ridiculous.... Bx15: Truncating it to the hub will obviously speed up the route, but I cannot side with the idea of severing the direct connection to/along 125th for Bronxites.... I see 3rd av riders, large in part, ending up gunning for the subway after hitting (as in, terminating at) The Hub..... Bx18: Don't really see this catching on in High Bridge; turning it into a circulator to cover a portion of the Bx11 to Jerome av IRT & the Concourse IND won't cut it... Promoting walking of any sort in that neighborhood, to me, is just plain foolish..... Heading towards Manhattan (GWB), everyone's going to want Bx13's & heading in the other direction, service along Sedgwick in High Bridge (there's only that police station back there) is no substitute for service along (more of) Ogden..... Bx24: I'm not defending this proposal, but I don't see the need for this to run to PBP.... Connection to the should be made at Buhre via Jarvis instead.... Those folks in the deep SE Bronx aren't looking to get to Co-op & for damn sure they're not tryna catch the Bx12.... Something like this will likely end up on the chopping block some time in the future anyway, so its moot.... I'll finish commenting on the other changes, some time later.... Bx13: They are referring to the off-peak frequency (the route right now is much more frequent than every 8 minutes during rush hour. Especially if you count the short-turns (either at E.L.Grant on the north end or Yankee Stadium on the south end), it's every 3-4 minutes for parts of the rush hour. Bx15: I think they're counting on that, so in order to maintain a similar frequency as the current Bx15, they figured they would fill up the buses with some M100 riders as well. Bx18: I agree. If the Bx11 is going to be shifted out of the neighborhood, then service needs to be beefed up on the Bx13. (And the one thing that I also mentioned is that the Bx11 starts earlier and ends later than the Bx13, so they should extend the span of service to match that of the Bx11....or for that matter just go all-in and make the Bx13 a 24/7 route the way it was pre-1995. And the Bx11 should probably be a 24/7 route as well if it's going to replace the Bx36 on 174th Street) Bx24: When they first proposed the 2010 cuts, the Bx8 was supposed to go across Middletown Road after serving Country Club. They moved it up to PBP because it's an ADA-accessible station (and then when they reverted the Bx5/8 to Bruckner/Crosby respectively and created the Bx24 they maintained it at PBP for that reason) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engineerboy6561 Posted June 2, 2019 Share #70 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) General comments: It really seems like the MTA is trying to move to a model where all the routes are either long through-running corridor routes with high frequency or shorter coverage routes that require a transfer to use to get anywhere outside of the neighborhood. That model can work (and in some cases in places like Phoenix where thru streets are half a mile to a mile apart it may be the best model) but doing that model well would require the through corridors to be fairly closely spaced, very reliable, and quite high frequency so that the high wait time for the coverage route is basically the only nonnegligible wait time in your trip, and the transfer policy needs to let people use three to four routes on one fare because a single continuous trip, especially a longer one is now much more likely to require three to four routes. For instance, going from Pennyfield Av or Robinson Av in Throgs Neck to the UWS or West Midtown used to be doable on one fare (Bx40 or Bx42 to West Farms, to the UWS or West Midtown) and now that's a two-fare trip (Bx42->Bx40-> ). Similarly, anyone going from Flushing to the Central Bronx now has a two-fare trip (Q50->Bx23->Bx26/28/30 instead of Q50->Bx26/28/30). The Bx30 suffers from this less because its diagonal orientation gives it connections to north-south and east-west through routes, but it's also a stub that's cut off from major ridership generators and is going to suffer from it. Converting the Bx18 to a circulator is probably a good thing in the long run because that route wasn't doing very much to begin with, and the service through its circulating area hasn't actually changed that much, but leaving the Bx46 as a short-hop route is a missed opportunity, converting the Bx30 into a diagonal stub route that ends about two thirds of a mile from heavy ridership generators and transfer points on one end and about 1.2-1.3 miles from a huge hub on the other end is irresponsible, and truncating everything leading into Co-op City down to the bare minimum is just plain dumb. More generally, the whole Co-op City proposal takes the corridor-circulator model to a somewhat ridiculous extreme. I get having a neighborhood circulator to provide internal and some limited amount of external connectivity, especially considering that the way Co-op City is laid out is more conducive to circular routings than through routings, but I think forcing everyone onto the circulator is a really bad idea; granted, so is making everything circulate through the whole neighborhood before leaving but I feel like there's a better middle ground, where most of the through-running buses serve some chunk of the circular area based on what makes the most sense for the routing. This is actually a pretty big service cut for Co-op City, and while building it as a fractal loop of cul-de-sacs was a pretty poor idea as far as transit connectivity is concerned we can do better than this. As far as specific routes are concerned, my thoughts are below: Bx6: Looks interesting, and ties back into the idea of Bruckner/Story/161 St serving as an SBS corridor that we saw presented initially; I'm not sure how this is going to affect people coming from Hunts Point across to Harlem though, nor am I sure how wise this is in the long run. Bx8: Are we sure we want to do that, and is ridership on the segment south of Bruckner/Crosby light enough that it makes sense to kill the 8 there as opposed to running it all the way down? I'm slightly sensitive to this as someone who used to go from Van Cortlandt Village to see a friend in Throgs Neck from time to time; walking to the 26 and taking the 26 to the 8 was the fastest way between those two points on buses (and also the most direct), but I don't know how much use the 8 gets below Crosby/Bruckner. Bx11/36/40 mid-Bronx: This looks pretty good overall; nobody's losing Manhattan coverage or a one-seat crosstown ride. Everyone does reasonably well, and the areas on the Bx36 that are getting swapped to the Bx11 are all walking distance to the and have connections to the at 174 St, so unless riders need Harlem/Washington Heights access specifically they'll be fine; if they do need that their commute got about ten minutes longer but that's probably OK. The 36 and the 40 have the same train connections; the only issue would be that people currently taking the 36 to a Manhattan bus would now need to take the 40 to the 3 or walk an extra quarter mile; it's most likely not a big deal in the greater scheme of things. Also, now that the Bx40 is off that narrow stretch of Tremont it could really use Limited service from Randall Av to University Av. In general, the benefits from straight running are more than likely to outweigh the small new inconveniences. Bx15: Unsure. On the one hand, 125 St is a disaster and needs to just not have parking and have real bus lane enforcement all the way from 12 Av to 1 Av, otherwise everything suffers. In the interim, disconnecting the Bx15 route from Manhattan is a mixed bag. On the one hand, it means that 3 Av passengers aren't seeing bunched/missing buses because of the clusterf**k on 125 St and the bridges, but on the other hand that's a whole pile of passengers having to make another three-legged transfer and/or completely reengineering their commutes (and piling onto already packed trains) to avoid the reliability issues the M125 is gonna have. Bx18: This is an interesting change; I'm not sure how making this a circulator like the Bx23 is going to work but it's an interesting idea. Bx23: The frequency boost is nice, but using this route to connect a whole pile of truncated routes isn't a decision I agree with much at all. Bx24: This is interesting; it's effectively the southern half of the post-2010 Bx8 routing (which got a whole pile of complaints at the time); I'm not sure how this is gonna go over or if it's a good idea to pick this fight. Bx29: Not sure if this is a good idea, since Bay Plaza is basically the only place to do non-grocery shopping for City Island residents and you're saving maybe five to seven minutes each way. Sure, it's not technically now a two-fare ride to Bay Plaza now, but it's a two-fare ride to anywhere north of Pelham Parkway and west of I95, which doesn't really make sense. Bx26: This is silly; you're chopping off seven stops each way and it really shouldn't matter very much, especially since if they're smart they'll extend it right back once the Metro-North station goes in on Erskine Pl; just leave it alone. Bx28: Cleaning up the Mosholu Parkway segment is nice, but Clinton HS and Tracey Towers are definitely a ridership generators and I'm not sure how much sense it makes to cut the only direct connection those places have with Co-op City. Also, the 28 really needs LTD/SBS service and a frequency boost; if you ran 10bph total across Gun Hill Rd then you could run 5bph limited and 5 local. Bx30: This is pretty dumb; it's now running only from Dreiser to WPR/Pelham and that doesn't make sense; if you're going to bring bus service back to the southern half of Boston Rd then connect it to something real. You could probably end it at any of Fordham Plaza, West Farms/Bronx Zoo or Parkchester; I'd suggest Fordham Plaza because that would completely duplicate the open-door segment on the 60/61/62 and thus it would be closer to a direct substitution; then again, I'm not sure what the ridership from WPR/Parkchester or WF would look like as opposed to the ridership along Fordham, but it would probably be worth looking at. On the east end, cutting it to Dreiser costs you useful connections; for that reason I'd probably run it down to either Bay Plaza or Erskine (for the new MNR connection). Bx34: This makes good sense and moves bus service only two blocks; it also directly connects Woodlawn to Fordham while getting the bus off of two one-lane streets. Bx38: Getting rid of this is pretty dumb; I'd run it at 5bph during the day as a local counterpart to the Bx28 LTD/SBS/whatever, and run it to Bedford Park/Paul-205 via the old Bx28 segment (if you take the Bx28 off Mosholu). Bx40/42 Throgs Neck: I understand why this looks good on paper, but I'm not sure we gain much from that; instead maybe run the Bx42 local and have the 40 run limited east of Randall Ave. Bx46: This is a pretty big missed opportunity; if you extended it to Yankee Stadium during the day then the Bx6 local would have some backup; maybe even bump the frequency to every 20 during rush when service on the Bx6 is likely at its least reliable. M100: I can see chopping it off 125 St to increase reliability, but the solution is to eliminate parking on 125 St and have regular ticket blitzes up and down 125 St to keep people out of the bus lanes; I'm wondering how many people use the M100 vs the M101 for through service between eastern 125 St and lower Amsterdam (considering that they're basically identical from 163 St/Amsterdam down to 125th and Lexington) and whether we should crowd the M101 further. M125: Interesting idea; to be honest I'd probably want to send this north up Amsterdam or Broadway at least a little bit (or at least be prepared to if the M101s start packing worse below 168 St because people heading to 125 all have to wait for the M101 now. Q50: Just no. Stop cutting everything off just outside Co-op City. Again, this one is kind of personal because I regularly met up with friends in Flushing while living in Van Cortlandt Village and I could do an hour 25 door to door by getting the Q50 to the Bx26, and with the three legged transfer I can't do that anymore. More generally, the Q50 carries between Co-op and Bruckner and it makes no sense to force people there onto another bus. If there's concern about the full run down to Erskine being excessive then maybe cut it back to Dreiser alongside the BxM7 but preserve the direct connections to the crosstown buses. BxM4: I don't mind the BxM4 taking over the old BxM11 terminal loop, but I think cutting out the Concourse is overkill and takes away a solid half of the ridership on the line, which then leaves it as a peak-only line because Woodlawn and the tip of Wakefield aren't enough to sustain all-day service. Honestly, bring back 1-2 super express trips a day and see how those run, and if those are self-sustaining then maybe look at using the 4 for Woodlawn and Wakefield only but I really doubt that will be self-sustaining in any meaningful way. BxM2: If a lot of people use it to the museums and Mt Sinai I don't see it making sense to throw all that ridership away. BxM5: Looks fine to me; it also no longer has half the walkshed for the route occupied by parks; basically the BxM5 covers everything from Laconia to WPR, while the BxM10 covers everything from Laconia to I95. BxM17: Looks like it would be fun to fan but a disaster during rush hour; Google Maps says that the run from Grand/FDR to Dreiser would be 55-100 minutes during rush on the given route, giving us 120-minute runtimes during rush; the BxM7 to the BxM18 would be faster by about 20 minutes. BxM18: This is a bad idea; Hudson Yards isn't a growth market like they think it is; honestly if you want to boost BxM18 ridership run it on York Av north of 57 St and have it make the old X90 stops to 92 St, then take the FDR to Bruckner to either the Deegan or Dyckman. Hell, you could do that with the BxM17 and send it Downtown-FDR-Yorkville-FDR-Bruckner. Edited June 2, 2019 by engineerboy6561 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwwnyc123 Posted June 2, 2019 Share #71 Posted June 2, 2019 Manhattanville only has Orion VII hybrids, M125 need some artics buses to handle crowd along 125 St and to the Hub in Bronx. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DetSMART45 Posted June 2, 2019 Share #72 Posted June 2, 2019 Regarding the Co-Op City changes, I went back and pulled the January 2014 study, and these new plans seem to completely disregard their own study findings and subsequent recommendations/changes. Some highlights (page numbers are from the PDF-displayed document and may not match with numbers within the report): Page 25--Destinations: Consistent AM/Mid/PM weekday & Saturday to Bx locations outside Co-Op City (total day 53% & 57%), with total day average of 22% (both) within Co-Op. The 2019 proposals would therefore complicate the vast majority of riders. Pages 69/70 (Appendix)--Age Groups: While 19-64 constitute the vast majority of users, those 65+ would be impacted greatly. Weekday 65+ use is 5%/32%/16% (AM/Mid/PM), total day 20%, and consistent on Saturday at 24%/25%/19%, total day 24%. When you additionally consider the main trip purpose (all users) during weekday middays, as well as Saturday mid/PM, is shopping, those seniors are not going to be happy. Page 35--Satisfaction by Section: Almost complete disregard in 2019 for this ... Quote Satisfaction was relatively consistent across Co-op City, although respondents in Section 5 and along Bartow Avenue reported higher levels of satisfaction than those in other sections. This is likely due to the results of the service changes in 2010, which eliminated some service from these other sections. The Bartow section also includes the Bx12-SBS, which is a high-frequency, rapid bus service. Page 39--AFC Data compared to Survey Data: Almost identical findings, and this in the write-up, totally disregarded 5 years on: Quote Table 10 shows the dispersion of trips originating in Co-op City, comparing the Metrocard AFC databased analysis and results of the market survey. The difference in Manhattan-bound trips is likely due to the fact that the market survey excluded riders of the BxM7 express bus to Manhattan. Many of the requests from the community suggested that there is a high demand for travel between the sections of Co-op City. However, these data show that only approximately 8-12% of weekday trips are taken entirely within Co-op City. This is important because the potential detriment to travelers leaving Co-op City must be considered when analyzing any potential changes that would benefit travel within Co-op City. Page 59--Appendix Letter (survey summary): About general "customer comments" ..... Quote Figures 10w and 10s show general customer comments (which, because of their “voluntary” nature, should only be used as a rough guideline for possible future analyses). The most common comments are, by far, complaints about infrequent and/or unreliable service. January 2014 Co-Op City Comprehensive Study 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted June 2, 2019 Share #73 Posted June 2, 2019 Here is Alon Levy's take on the plan. I am interested in hearing your responses. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engineerboy6561 Posted June 2, 2019 Share #74 Posted June 2, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, Union Tpke said: Here is Alon Levy's take on the plan. I am interested in hearing your responses. It's interesting; I'm not sure I agree about optimal stop spacing being that far apart. I agree with him that in theory having a network comprised of long, strong gridded corridors and short-hop coverage lines with forced transfers can work pretty well, but I share his skepticism about the MTA's ability to pull it off, and I also worry that cutting the connection between the Mid-Bronx and 125 St is just going to overcrowd the even worse than they already are. I also have feelings about redundancy and reliability, and I worry that since the DOT is only haphazardly (at best) committed to keeping streets clear for buses it might make more sense to have multiple services serving different parts of affected corridors (like the Bx15/55 pair where the Bx55 was exempted from Manhattan congestion, the old Bx1/Bx2/Bx41 alignment where the Bx2 insulated the upper Concourse from issues on the lower and insulated Melrose from issues on Webster, and theoretically the Bx28/30 pairing where Gun Hill west is insulated from delays on the segment east of Boston Road), and I'd honestly prefer more arrangements like that than having singly covered corridors and spawning three-legged transfers everywhere. Edited June 2, 2019 by engineerboy6561 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 2, 2019 Author Share #75 Posted June 2, 2019 17 hours ago, Cait Sith said: Agreed. Though I'm still very interested in how it will be implemented. That's one ride I would definitely like to experience....with a pillow in tow lmao. I said the exact same thing when I saw it... lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.