Select Bus Service Discussion Thread

[Brillant93]

36 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I think it would just make more sense to just run the B9 24/7 (to connect riders to the Avenue M train station). Less confusing than operating a route to Flatbush/Nostrand that runs rush hours and overnights only.

If that poster that somebody found a while back is any indication, the B91 (Flatbush-Bergen Beach) would only run rush hours only, and the B9 would be the primary route serving Bergen Beach. I hope they don't eliminate overnight service on that portion (when they swapped the Bx39/41 on WPR in The Bronx, the "accidentally" eliminated overnight service, and ended up just running a stupid Bx39 shuttle between Gun Hill Road & 241st Street instead of running it the full route so it can also benefit people on the southern end). At the very least, hopefully they run a B9 shuttle to Avenue M, but really, at that point, they might as well run the whole route and provide better overnight east-west service in that part of Brooklyn.

The B91 needs to operate like the B100. Terminate at the junction and provide service to Bergen Beach at all times not just rush hour. But all in all The MTA needs to look at the B41 operation before the go ahead with sbs. If they can find a reason why this bus route don’t operate on time then it would greatly help the customers. 

[checkmatechamp13]

38 minutes ago, Brillant93 said:

The B91 needs to operate like the B100. Terminate at the junction and provide service to Bergen Beach at all times not just rush hour. But all in all The MTA needs to look at the B41 operation before the go ahead with sbs. If they can find a reason why this bus route don’t operate on time then it would greatly help the customers. 

While I see what you're saying, but with the way the MTA looks for excuses to cut things, I highly doubt they would give you both the B9 and B91 as full-time routes. The B9 has slightly less service than the B41 Bergen Beach branch (as unreliable as they are, that branch has both local & limited-stop service, so combined, they offer more buses per hour than the B9 does on its own)

What I think will happen is they'll bring in artics so they can reduce the headways (I can picture the B41 running similar to the Bx41 with 10-12 minute headways for most of the day on both the local and SBS, with a slight bump in favor of the SBS). The thing that really screws over the B41 is the fact that it runs near the subway once it gets north of The Junction. They'd probably figure that since the B91 covers Flatbush between Avenue N & Avenue H, and the Q35 runs all the way to Kings Plaza, they can skimp on frequency north of The Junction.

The money they save from not having to run all those B91 buses between Flatbush/Nostrand & Downtown Brooklyn (and off-peak period) would likely go back to their general budget.

BTW, didn't you say that long routes like the B41 shouldn't be split or shortened, because people might have built their travel patterns around not having to transfer?  Why the support for their proposed B91?

Edited February 24, 2018 by checkmatechamp13

[Brillant93]

10 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

While I see what you're saying, but with the way the MTA looks for excuses to cut things, I highly doubt they would give you both the B9 and B91 as full-time routes. The B9 has slightly less service than the B41 Bergen Beach branch (as unreliable as they are, that branch has both local & limited-stop service, so combined, they offer more buses per hour than the B9 does on its own)

What I think will happen is they'll bring in artics so they can reduce the headways (I can picture the B41 running similar to the Bx41 with 10-12 minute headways for most of the day on both the local and SBS, with a slight bump in favor of the SBS). The thing that really screws over the B41 is the fact that it runs near the subway once it gets north of The Junction. They'd probably figure that since the B91 covers Flatbush between Avenue N & Avenue H, and the Q35 runs all the way to Kings Plaza, they can skimp on frequency north of The Junction.

The money they save from not having to run all those B91 buses between Flatbush/Nostrand & Downtown Brooklyn (and off-peak period) would likely go back to their general budget.

BTW, didn't you say that long routes like the B41 shouldn't be split or shortened, because people might have built their travel patterns around not having to transfer?  Why the support for their proposed B91?

I could support a split for the B41 going to Bergen beach. The reason being is that at the junction during the evening and or afternoon rush it’s packed. They don’t send enough buses to Bergen beach. I used to ride it from empire after I got out of the gym and when it got to the junction there was a crowd. A separate route would help those watingvfor the bus at the junction. 

They also send more buses to Kp and it isn’t even packed. No one flicks to the mall like the used to. 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Brillant93

[EastFlatbushLarry]

4 hours ago, Brillant93 said:

I don’t think the B6 should be rerouted but it should have curbside bus lanes on avenue J in my opinion. The B6 provides transfers and connections to Brooklyn College and Midwood high school so I don’t think rerouting it would help but only make more issues. With the 82 becoming sbs and having glenwood reworked for it the B6 would follow that reroute. 

The B103 should stay as it is. It helps provide an alternative to the B41. God knows that damn 41. 

If the 41 is converted to sbs we need to tackle traffic/congestion and the mta operation of it. The B41 is a terrible bus and even on the weekends when theres no traffic they never run it on time or close to schedule. For the Bergen beach branch I have a strong gut feeling they’re going to split it to a short route that just serves Bergen beach. Just like how the B100 serves Mill Basin. It would help with the inconsistencies with the B41. If there is a B41 sbs to Bergen beach a short route that goes to the junction that runs local along with the B41 sbs would help a lot of people who live in the area. 

 

Edited February 24, 2018 by EastFlatbushLarry
Responded to wrong quote

[EastFlatbushLarry]

4 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Speaking of SBS bus speeds, have you seen the B46 SBS during the evening rush hours? Well, guess what? From my experience, from Eastern Parkway to Empire Blvd, it's not going any faster. Even getting to Eastern Parkway from Fulton Street takes too long. There is too much traffic in that area due to constant dollar van parking in the bus lane and at the corner. B17 buses turning from the main road of Eastern Parkway (the "temporary" terminal) doesn't help. In fact, I think the turning of buses is making traffic conditions worse.

I have also proposed improvements to the SBS network. In fact, the Southern Brooklyn bus proposals from 12 years ago are such a piece of art, that I decided to take those proposals and modify them due to changing needs, and increased traffic congestion, particularly in Midwood and in Downtown Brooklyn, where some of the southern Brooklyn routes feed into.

To start, the B6 reroute is a good idea. However, having the bus stay on Glenwood Road all the way to Ralph Avenue may be a bad diea, due to missing the connection to the B46 SBS. Congestion along Avenue J can slow down buses as well, turning off customers who would otherwise ride from Canarsie to the Avenue J Q station.

To solve this, the B6 would be rerouted between Flatbush Avenue and Albany Avenue. After reaching Flatbush Avenue, B6 buses would take Flatbush Avenue directly to Avenue H. Buses would make a single stop at Flatbush Avenue and Nostrand Avenue (in front of the Flatbush Avenue station). Buse would then take Avenue H to Albany Avenue and resume the regular route. 

In addition, the newly rerouted B6 would have Limited service be replaced with new B6 Select Bus Service. The route would also be extended to Coney Island (if possible). The SBS would make the following stops from west to East:

Coney Island - Stillwell Avenue 

Canal Avenue (Cropsey Avenue)

27th Avenue (Cropsey Avenue)

Bay 37th Street (Cropsey Avenue)

Bath Avenue (Bay Pkwy)

86th Street (Bay Pkwy)

78th Street (Bay Pkwy)

65th Street (Bay Pkwy)

60th Street (Bay Pkwy)

McDonald Avenue (Bay Pkwy)

Coney Island Avenue (Avenue J)

East 16th Street (Avenue J)

Ocean Avenue (Avenue J)

Campus Road (Bedford Avenue)

Nostrand Avenue (Flatbush Avenue)

Albany Avenue (Avenue H)

Utica Avenue (Avenue H)

Ralph Avenue (Flatlands Avenue)

East 80th Street (Flatlands Avenue)

Avenue L (East 80th Street)

Remsen Avenue (Avenue L)

Rockaway Pkwy (Avenue L)

East 105th Street (Avenue L)

Canarsie - East 108th Street (Seaview Avenue)

Bus lanes would be installed along Avenue J between East 16th Street and East 15th Street, as well as between East 12th Street and Coney Island Avenue, Flatbush Avene between Farragut Road and Avenue I (to benefit all buses), and Flatlands Avenue approaching Ralph Avenue. Also, new rush hour-only curbside HOV 3+ lanes would be implemented on Avenue J approaching the Avenue J bus lanes. Other times, the HOV 3+ lanes would be normal parking lanes.

With the implementation of SBS, the B103 LTD would be cutback to Flatbush Avenue - Nostrand Avenue.

On the subject of Flatbush Avenue. B41 service would be converted to B41 and B41A Select Bus. B41A SBS goes to Bergen Beach, with an extension to East 69th Street - Avenue X. This would make service faster between Kings Plaza/Bergen Beach and Downtown Brooklyn. The routes would make following stops (Note: assumes new Downtown Brooklyn Terminal is built (see below)):

Downtown Brooklyn Bus Terminal

Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center (Flatbush Avenue)

7th Avenue (Flatbush Avenue)

Eastern Pkwy (Flatbush Avenue)

Empire Blvd (Flatbush Avenue)

Clarkson Avenue (Flatbush Avenue)

Church Avenue (Flatbush Avenue)

Beverley Road (Flatbush Avenue)

Foster Avenue (Flatbush Avenue)

Nostrand Avenue (Flatbush Avenue)

Kings Hwy (Flatbush Avenue)

Avenue P (Flatbush Avenue)

Fillmore Avenue (Flatbush Avenue)

Kings Plaza (Flatbush Avenue)

Utica Avenue (Avenue N) (B41A)

Ralph Avenue (Avenue N) (B41A)

East 71st Street (Veterans Avenue) (B41A)

East 69th Street - Avenue X (B41A)

B41 Bergen Beach local service outside of the rush hours and night time would be eliminated. Instead, to fll in service to Bergen Beach, the B9 would be rerouted along Avenue N to East 69th Street, operating from 5:00 AM to 1:00 AM at current headways, bringing more frequent service to that area.

For Downtown Brooklyn, traffic is a big nightmare. To solve this, a new bus terminal would have to be built in Downtown Brooklyn. This terminal, location TBD, would be used to terminate B25, B26, B37, B38, B38 LTD, B41/A, B41/A SBS, B45, B52, B67, and B103 LTD buses. To replace buses on Fulton Street and Livingston Street, a new fare-free bus route, designated B88, would operate between Pier 6 at Brooklyn Bridge Park to the terminal, via Furman Street, Pier 5, Cadman Plaza W/ Adams Street, and Fulton Street/Livingston Street. The northern end of the B67 would instead be served by an extension of the B61 to Williamsburg Bridge Plaza, a hub for multiple routes, 7 days a week (late night service would terminate at York Street station).

I have more modifications, but I do not want to talk about all of them, as there are too many of them. I have a Google My maps of the proposals, but it isn't finished yet. In the meantime, let me know that you think of these ideas.

The problem that no one addresses (between the TLC, DOT, NYPD & NYPD Traffic) are the DOLLAR VANS that have clogged up that kiss-me-ass intersection FOR DECADES on end. Any B/O out of East NY & Flatbush Depots would tell you THAT is the major problem with that area as a whole.

Edited February 24, 2018 by EastFlatbushLarry

[B35 via Church]

13 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

For Downtown Brooklyn, traffic is a big nightmare. To solve this, a new bus terminal would have to be built in Downtown Brooklyn. This terminal, location TBD, would be used to terminate B25, B26, B37, B38, B38 LTD, B41/A, B41/A SBS, B45, B52, B67, and B103 LTD buses. To replace buses on Fulton Street and Livingston Street, a new fare-free bus route, designated B88, would operate between Pier 6 at Brooklyn Bridge Park to the terminal, via Furman Street, Pier 5, Cadman Plaza W/ Adams Street, and Fulton Street/Livingston Street. The northern end of the B67 would instead be served by an extension of the B61 to Williamsburg Bridge Plaza, a hub for multiple routes, 7 days a week (late night service would terminate at York Street station).

Already thought of that.... Don't feel like searching for the thread, but it entailed a discussion where I brought up clear cutting some of that greenery at Cadman Plaza to make room for bus lanes (akin to that of the layout of Williamsburg Bridge Plaza).... But I'm not holding my breath for that to happen.

As for your ideas, just post them up in the Brooklyn bus ideas thread..... Could use some more/different perspectives around here.

11 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

BTW, didn't you say that long routes like the B41 shouldn't be split or shortened, because people might have built their travel patterns around not having to transfer?  Why the support for their proposed B91?

All for the sake of overcrowding, that's all... It's the same logic Mr. don't talk to meeeeee there has of proposing a wasteful, supplementary service along Glenwood rd b/w the Junction & Canarsie .....

 

[Brillant93]

27 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

 

All for the sake of overcrowding, that's all... It's the same logic Mr. don't talk to meeeeee there has of proposing a wasteful, supplementary service along Glenwood rd b/w the Junction & Canarsie .....

 

But yet you proposed they split the B82 back up again while you deem my ideas of shorter routes flawed and then turnaround and justify why we should keep the long overcrowded routes with just amp up short turns, and more abundance of buses which would cause more congestion in narrow parts of the routes. Each route is different and I explained my piece to why I would be in favor for a separate route that serves the junction and Bergen beach. Especially with my "wasteful" supplementary service that would go from the junction to canarise, it would go through residential streets and would get there faster than the B6. Its more direct. Unlike the B82 it would have people take two buses if split and a train. If someone who lives in the flatlands area that needed to get to the F train they would have to spend $5.50. Thats a waste and unsatisfactory customer service. 

P.S. you can talk to me but if its going to go back and forth with arguments and the discussion isn't going anywhere then there isn't much to talk about. To many people on this forum are very cocky with the my idea is better attitude instead of adding discussion on how we can make things better for our city. No but everyone knows more than the other and especially if its about routes or service that you take on a daily basis to work or school. So again if we can't talk like civil human beings on a forum then no I'm going a head with going back and fourth with arguments. It does nothing. 

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, Brillant93 said:

But yet you proposed they split the B82 back up again while you deem my ideas of shorter routes flawed and then turnaround and justify why we should keep the long overcrowded routes with just amp up short turns, and more abundance of buses which would cause more congestion in narrow parts of the routes. Each route is different and I explained my piece to why I would be in favor for a separate route that serves the junction and Bergen beach. Especially with my "wasteful" supplementary service that would go from the junction to canarise, it would go through residential streets and would get there faster than the B6. Its more direct. Unlike the B82 it would have people take two buses if split and a train. If someone who lives in the flatlands area that needed to get to the F train they would have to spend $5.50. Thats a waste and unsatisfactory customer service. 

P.S. you can talk to me but if its going to go back and forth with arguments and the discussion isn't going anywhere then there isn't much to talk about. To many people on this forum are very cocky with the my idea is better attitude instead of adding discussion on how we can make things better for our city. No but everyone knows more than the other and especially if its about routes or service that you take on a daily basis to work or school. So again if we can't talk like civil human beings on a forum then no I'm going a head with going back and fourth with arguments. It does nothing. 

Oh, now you wanna talk.....

Look, our suggestions are part of these discussions on bettering mass transit in this city... No one that regularly posts on here is going to sit up here & intentionally post suggestions that they know would f*** up transit service...... There are different perspectives & ideologies from people on here & disagreements are going to emerge..... It has less to do any cockiness, as much as it does with you wanting discussions being on your own terms....  Too busy trying to dictate how discussions should go, instead of making your points & letting them stand for themselves.... Discussion will flow naturally if you did that.....

You complain about going back & forth with arguments, as if counterarguments being aimed at you doesn't have merit.... That's a slick way of backing out of dissension.... Yes, dissent gets to a point where its futile to continue on with it, but nothing I've seen or been a part of involving you has gotten anywhere close to that point..... We on this forum are not going to sit here & d**kride each other all day (speaking of something doing nothing) & that's what makes this place a pretty great place to talk transit on..... Free exchange of ideas, not *if you don't agree with Brilliant93, then the discussion isn't worth having*... Nobody on here wants to be bothered with your projection (I would argue that you are cocky, actually - especially as it involves this B82 discussion).... Don't talk to me about civility when you come on here with the "hurr durr" shit..... Capice?

What I'm deeming flawed, is a dinky route running b/w the Junction & Canarsie .... It is highly disingenuous to compare that to a route that would run the eastern half of the B82 b/w Spring Creek & Coney Island av/Quentin av..... Funny how you're quick to say each route is different when Checkmate called you out - but it's a problem when I suggest that the B82 be broken up & that more short turns be instilled on the B6.....

As for your wasteful service, explain how layering bus service like that is more beneficial, system-wide, over splitting a long-winded route that suffers from overcrowding & delays.... It is counter-productive to sit here & advocate for long routes & complain about unreliability at the same time..... It is counter-productive to suggest routes that run practically on top of other routes - especially when you have routes in this city that are either a] under-serviced, or b] no longer in existence.... It's a wasteful way to address overcrowding..... It's an expensive way of throwing in the towel (so to speak) in not addressing the actual problem{s} that the problematic route is having....

Edited February 24, 2018 by B35 via Church

[JeremiahC99]

19 hours ago, Brillant93 said:

I don’t think the B6 should be rerouted but it should have curbside bus lanes on avenue J in my opinion. The B6 provides transfers and connections to Brooklyn College and Midwood high school so I don’t think rerouting it would help but only make more issues. With the 82 becoming sbs and having glenwood reworked for it the B6 would follow that reroute. 

The B103 should stay as it is. It helps provide an alternative to the B41. God knows that damn 41. 

If the 41 is converted to sbs we need to tackle traffic/congestion and the mta operation of it. The B41 is a terrible bus and even on the weekends when theres no traffic they never run it on time or close to schedule. For the Bergen beach branch I have a strong gut feeling they’re going to split it to a short route that just serves Bergen beach. Just like how the B100 serves Mill Basin. It would help with the inconsistencies with the B41. If there is a B41 sbs to Bergen beach a short route that goes to the junction that runs local along with the B41 sbs would help a lot of people who live in the area. 

What I was also going to propose was that the B6 along Flatlands Avenue be replaced by another route. @BrooklynBus proposed 12 years ago that this section would be replaced by a new route along Avenue H and Flatlands Avenue going to JFK Airport, also providing needed direct transit access between Southern Brooklyn and JFK Airport. The eastern end of the B6 would be served by an extension of the B60.

I also never proposed cutting the B103 north of Flatbush Avenue. With the B6 being rerouted and converted to SBS, the B103 LTD would be redundant to the B6 SBS. Therefore, B103 service south of Flatbush Avenue would be cut. Service north of that point would operate as normal.

There needs to be curbside HOV 3+ lanes along Flatbush Avenue during rush hours north of Farragut Road and offset bus lanes between Farragut Road and Avenue I that are enforced from 7 AM to 7 PM during all seven days of the week. This way, both cars and buses move at an ideal speed rather than both crawling up and down Flatbush Avenue at slow speeds.

14 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

The problem that no one addresses (between the TLC, DOT, NYPD & NYPD Traffic) are the DOLLAR VANS that have clogged up that kiss-me-ass intersection FOR DECADES on end. Any B/O out of East NY & Flatbush Depots would tell you THAT is the major problem with that area as a whole.

I've sen all of the blatant dollar vans blocking and parking in the bus lanes every evening, slowing down everyone. Totally defeats the purpose of SBS: to have faster service.

 

6 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Already thought of that.... Don't feel like searching for the thread, but it entailed a discussion where I brought up clear cutting some of that greenery at Cadman Plaza to make room for bus lanes (akin to that of the layout of Williamsburg Bridge Plaza).... But I'm not holding my breath for that to happen.

My proposed plan actually calls for removing buses from both Fulton Mall and Livingston Street, the latter of which is notoriously slow. A new bus terminal would be built, and a new B88 bus (out of the East NY Depot), would operate along both streets, then via the current B25 route to Brooklyn Bridge Park. As previously mentioned, B67 service to Williamsburg would be replaced with an extended B61. The service would operate as a SBS route, but with no fare machines since the service would be free (to entice people commuting within Downtown Brooklyn to use it). This proposal is similar to what was proposed a few years ago by the NYC DOT when the did their study on Downtown Brooklyn traffic. Obviously this plan has gone nowhere because all potential spaces for a terminal are instead to build more development, which causes more unnecessary congestion on the streets. Here is the link to the study: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/dbstc_final_report.pdf. The Downtown Brooklyn bus shuttle if featured on pages 3-10 to 3-11, and 3-23 to 3-29.

 

19 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I think it would just make more sense to just run the B9 24/7 (to connect riders to the Avenue M train station). Less confusing than operating a route to Flatbush/Nostrand that runs rush hours and overnights only.

The rush hours and overnights only was to maintain service between Bergen Beach and the Flatbush Avenue station for those who would still need it, especially during rush hours. I also added the overnight hours as to not leave an overnight gap in bus service along Avenue N. I like your suggestion to run the B9 24/7 as well, but I fear that the MTA may not see demand for the B9 to Bergen Beach, let alone 24/7 service. Either way, something must be done to the B41 Bergen Beach branch, because when I see the passenger loads on those buses, they might eliminate the service entirely once the SBS conversion comes.

[Express Bus Operator]

Sbs41 would be good but we have to get rid of the commuter dollar vans. They cause so much pain out there and don’t follow traffic laws. They drive recklessly and daily almost causing these buses to rear end by blocking the box.

Converting the sbs41 would just run like the limited service stops but with a big blue decal buses and outside paying fare.

The bergen beach branch is heavy durning rush hour times and slowly dies after 10am and resume heaviness at 4-9pm.  They should still keep the local heading there at normal hours...

[checkmatechamp13]

On 2/23/2018 at 9:16 PM, JeremiahC99 said:

To start, the B6 reroute is a good idea. However, having the bus stay on Glenwood Road all the way to Ralph Avenue may be a bad diea, due to missing the connection to the B46 SBS. Congestion along Avenue J can slow down buses as well, turning off customers who would otherwise ride from Canarsie to the Avenue J Q station.

To solve this, the B6 would be rerouted between Flatbush Avenue and Albany Avenue. After reaching Flatbush Avenue, B6 buses would take Flatbush Avenue directly to Avenue H. Buses would make a single stop at Flatbush Avenue and Nostrand Avenue (in front of the Flatbush Avenue station). Buse would then take Avenue H to Albany Avenue and resume the regular route. 

In addition, the newly rerouted B6 would have Limited service be replaced with new B6 Select Bus Service. The route would also be extended to Coney Island (if possible). The SBS would make the following stops from west to East:

**List of proposed B6 SBS stops**

Bus lanes would be installed along Avenue J between East 16th Street and East 15th Street, as well as between East 12th Street and Coney Island Avenue, Flatbush Avene between Farragut Road and Avenue I (to benefit all buses), and Flatlands Avenue approaching Ralph Avenue. Also, new rush hour-only curbside HOV 3+ lanes would be implemented on Avenue J approaching the Avenue J bus lanes. Other times, the HOV 3+ lanes would be normal parking lanes.

With the implementation of SBS, the B103 LTD would be cutback to Flatbush Avenue - Nostrand Avenue.

On the subject of Flatbush Avenue. B41 service would be converted to B41 and B41A Select Bus. B41A SBS goes to Bergen Beach, with an extension to East 69th Street - Avenue X. This would make service faster between Kings Plaza/Bergen Beach and Downtown Brooklyn. The routes would make following stops (Note: assumes new Downtown Brooklyn Terminal is built (see below)):

**List of proposed B41 SBS stops**

B41 Bergen Beach local service outside of the rush hours and night time would be eliminated. Instead, to fill in service to Bergen Beach, the B9 would be rerouted along Avenue N to East 69th Street, operating from 5:00 AM to 1:00 AM at current headways, bringing more frequent service to that area.

3

The street grid in that part of Brooklyn around the Glenwood Houses is rather confusing. From east to west, Glenwood Road turns into Avenue H, and Farragut Road turns into Glenwood Road. So if the B6 were to just stay on Glenwood Road (and join the B103/BM2 at East 80th Street), that would still lead into its regular route on Avenue H that allows it to connect with the B46 SBS.

Also, it looks like you're trying to combine the western part of the B6 with the eastern portion of the B103, but not run the full route (you have it down Avenue L instead of Avenue M, and then you have it divert to the B17 terminal at 108th Street instead of terminating at the Breukelen Houses. I suppose I can see some of the logic (since the only thing you really miss is the connection from the residential section of Canarsie to the B60. The connections on Flatlands can be made at East 80th Street), but I'm not wild about SBS-style stop spacing in a residential neighborhood at the end of the line (where it's the only transit line on most of those streets), nor am I wild about leaving the B103 as a Downtown Brooklyn-Flatbush shuttle or extending the (already fairly long and unreliable) B60 further west.

13 hours ago, Brillant93 said:

But yet you proposed they split the B82 back up again while you deem my ideas of shorter routes flawed and then turnaround and justify why we should keep the long overcrowded routes with just amp up short turns, and more abundance of buses which would cause more congestion in narrow parts of the routes. Each route is different and I explained my piece to why I would be in favor for a separate route that serves the junction and Bergen beach. Especially with my "wasteful" supplementary service that would go from the junction to canarise, it would go through residential streets and would get there faster than the B6. Its more direct. Unlike the B82 it would have people take two buses if split and a train. If someone who lives in the flatlands area that needed to get to the F train they would have to spend $5.50. Thats a waste and unsatisfactory customer service. 

4

The extra fare shouldn't be an issue. The goal of splitting the routes should be to attract riders to the system with more reliable service, not milk the existing riders out of extra fares by making them pay for their second transfer. When the B61 (LIC-Red Hook) was split into the B61/B62 (Downtown Brooklyn-Red Hook and Downtown Brooklyn-LIC), they added a 3-legged transfer, and the same should apply to any split route. (Honestly, I think they should just program 2 transfers into the MetroCard at this point)

8 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

The rush hours and overnights only was to maintain service between Bergen Beach and the Flatbush Avenue station for those who would still need it, especially during rush hours. I also added the overnight hours as to not leave an overnight gap in bus service along Avenue N. I like your suggestion to run the B9 24/7 as well, but I fear that the MTA may not see demand for the B9 to Bergen Beach, let alone 24/7 service. Either way, something must be done to the B41 Bergen Beach branch, because when I see the passenger loads on those buses, they might eliminate the service entirely once the SBS conversion comes.

1

Worse comes to worse, you could short-turn those overnight B9 buses at the  train station. I can't see them ever eliminating service along that portion of Avenue N, due to network coverage, but I honestly have my doubts that they would continue serving it with the B41 (BTW, that document I mentioned with the B91 was unofficial). The reason being that if you include it as an SBS branch, then (especially knowing how they treated the B46, and even the B44), they're definitely going to short-change the local, and even the SBS itself won't see too frequent service (They're not going to have it stop at all the local stops, so it'll probably be Utica, Ralph, and the terminal, which isn't going to be enough to fill up buses at any reasonable frequency).

Combine that infrequency with the delays associated with running past The Junction, and if anything, the situation will be worse for Bergen Beach riders if they include Bergen Beach in their SBS plan.

Edited February 25, 2018 by checkmatechamp13

[Brillant93]

28 minutes ago, Jdog14 said:

I'd argue that once SBS starts you will see a similar thing happen to the B82 as the B46. I would've said the same thing about the B46 until SBS started and all of a sudden you got like 7 SBS buses (not kidding) to one or two locals. 

The run the sbs on the 46 like crazy. I always seen two to three buses bunched. I live by near the end of the route so I always see them during rush hour. But yeah the local is always like one bus behind them. I recall they used to do the same for when it was a limited, it ran so frequently but when you have hordes of buses like that it causes congestion. So thats one of the reasons why I am disappointing the B82 sbs would start out with 40 footers. They're supposed to be artics thats one of the reasons why they rerouted it in some parts on the route. It has grown by a few percent in ridership and overcrowding is a bitch. 

[B35 via Church]

On 2/23/2018 at 9:16 PM, JeremiahC99 said:

For Downtown Brooklyn, traffic is a big nightmare. To solve this, a new bus terminal would have to be built in Downtown Brooklyn. This terminal, location TBD, would be used to terminate B25, B26, B37, B38, B38 LTD, B41/A, B41/A SBS, B45, B52, B67, and B103 LTD buses. To replace buses on Fulton Street and Livingston Street, a new fare-free bus route, designated B88, would operate between Pier 6 at Brooklyn Bridge Park to the terminal, via Furman Street, Pier 5, Cadman Plaza W/ Adams Street, and Fulton Street/Livingston Street. The northern end of the B67 would instead be served by an extension of the B61 to Williamsburg Bridge Plaza, a hub for multiple routes, 7 days a week (late night service would terminate at York Street station).

I have more modifications, but I do not want to talk about all of them, as there are too many of them. I have a Google My maps of the proposals, but it isn't finished yet. In the meantime, let me know that you think of these ideas.

18 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

My proposed plan actually calls for removing buses from both Fulton Mall and Livingston Street, the latter of which is notoriously slow. A new bus terminal would be built, and a new B88 bus (out of the East NY Depot), would operate along both streets, then via the current B25 route to Brooklyn Bridge Park. As previously mentioned, B67 service to Williamsburg would be replaced with an extended B61. The service would operate as a SBS route, but with no fare machines since the service would be free (to entice people commuting within Downtown Brooklyn to use it).

This proposal is similar to what was proposed a few years ago by the NYC DOT when the did their study on Downtown Brooklyn traffic. Obviously this plan has gone nowhere because all potential spaces for a terminal are instead to build more development, which causes more unnecessary congestion on the streets. Here is the link to the study: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/dbstc_final_report.pdf. The Downtown Brooklyn bus shuttle if featured on pages 3-10 to 3-11, and 3-23 to 3-29.

Sorry, but I'm not seeing the correlation between the traffic in Downtown Brooklyn & there needing to be a new bus terminal in Downtown Brooklyn.... They're two completely separate issues... While I can agree with a centralized terminal, that's not going to quell much of the traffic along Flatbush av, along Atlantic av, and along Livingston.... Livingston is bogged down w/ traffic, due to the fact that a transit mall exists along the Fulton Mall strip & for whatever the reason, Schermerhorn remains to be grossly under-utilized..... The source of Flatbush av traffic is the Manhattan Bridge & the source of Atlantic av traffic is 278 (the BQE).....

You say your plan calls for removing buses off Livingston & off the Fulton Mall strip, but what I'm not understanding is how would all those routes you listed even get to/from Downtown Brooklyn.... I get that you would have a new terminal created, but where - as in, What general vicinity within Downtown do you have in mind??

Lastly, running a free circulator along Fulton Mall & along Livingston that would run up to DUMBO would be much ado about nothing, when you have the masses all entering Downtown Brooklyn from various parts of Brooklyn on all the bus routes you want to create a centralized bus terminal for.... Nobody's really going to give that up, for the sake of curtailing travel time on one leg of their commute in getting to Atlantic-Barclays, to then ride a circulator into the "heart" of Downtown.... Taking BPH off the roads is noble, but this whole circulator bit I see as accomplishing nothing more than forcing even more people onto the subway (that are currently taking buses into downtown) & getting off at stops anywhere w/i Downtown north of Atlantic-Barclays..... This is a large part of the problem the MTA is having now, with the whole "screwing around with bus service & forcing people onto trains that already at capacity" method of operation.....

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Sorry, but I'm not seeing the correlation between the traffic in Downtown Brooklyn & there needing to be a new bus terminal in Downtown Brooklyn.... They're two completely separate issues... While I can agree with a centralized terminal, that's not going to quell much of the traffic along Flatbush av, along Atlantic av, and along Livingston.... Livingston is bogged down w/ traffic, due to the fact that a transit mall exists along the Fulton Mall strip & for whatever the reason, Schermerhorn remains to be grossly under-utilized..... The source of Flatbush av traffic is the Manhattan Bridge & the source of Atlantic av traffic is 278 (the BQE).....

You say your plan calls for removing buses off Livingston & off the Fulton Mall strip, but what I'm not understanding is how would all those routes you listed even get to/from Downtown Brooklyn.... I get that you would have a new terminal created, but where - as in, What general vicinity within Downtown do you have in mind??

Lastly, running a free circulator along Fulton Mall & along Livingston that would run up to DUMBO would be much ado about nothing, when you have the masses all entering Downtown Brooklyn from various parts of Brooklyn on all the bus routes you want to create a centralized bus terminal for.... Nobody's really going to give that up, for the sake of curtailing travel time on one leg of their commute in getting to Atlantic-Barclays, to then ride a circulator into the "heart" of Downtown.... Taking BPH off the roads is noble, but this whole circulator bit I see as accomplishing nothing more than forcing even more people onto the subway (that are currently taking buses into downtown) & getting off at stops anywhere w/i Downtown north of Atlantic-Barclays..... This is a large part of the problem the MTA is having now, with the whole "screwing around with bus service & forcing people onto trains that already at capacity" method of operation.....

I’ve seen the buses that go into Downtown Brooklyn that’s i want out, and they have almost carried air. I’ve seen almost no one travel into Downtowns Brooklyn along Livingston Street and Fulton Street.

 

In addition, that report about Downtown Brooklyn helps those who travel outside of Downtown Brooklyn, as those buses have experienced delays in the area. With a new bus terminal and shuttle, the other routes would see a reduction in delays. We are not sacrificing connectivity or mobility here. In that report, it said specifically “Reducing the overlapping services has the potential to improve surface transit in Downtown Brooklyn. This reduction of service does not have to mean a decrease in mobility or access to the study area or loss of access from outlying areas of Brooklyn. By implementing a shuttle service, routes could be terminated before entering the congested downtown area, and one streamlined shuttle service could provide downtown access at high frequency and reliability”. It also says “Overlapping routes reduce the effectiveness of the surface transit network to provide access and mobility around the Study Area. Overlapping routes increase bus congestion and rider uncertainty. Providing one shuttle service to operate in Downtown Brooklyn would reduce the total number of buses that have to enter the Core of Downtown Brooklyn. Reducing overlapping buses within Downtown Brooklyn would also improve schedule reliability for passengers traveling outside of the Study Area, as buses no longer need to traverse the heavily congested Downtown Core where they are frequently subject to delays. Shuttle routes would be optimized to maintaining existing connections to the other transit modes in the area, including subway and commuter rail.”

 

This is rather efficient for bus operations, because there would be one consistent bus route within Downtown Brooklyn at high frequency and reliability. For everyone else commuting into Downtown Brooklyn, the transferring would only add 5 minutes to their commute, but their buses won’t be delayed very frequently, so it’s a win-win situation for everyone.

[BrooklynBus]

There has been a lot of discussion here since my last comment. I don't have the time or the inclination to study or comment on all of them so let me just add a few comments about my experiences from the 1970s that may add to this discussion. You can decide if service was worse or better then and what those experiences mean to current day service and proposals.

Back then I used to ride the B46 on a daily basis and also watched it in operation for more hours than I want to count. Prior to 1975, the route was scheduled at 2 minute headways between Kings Highway and Eastern Parkway and at five or 10 minute headways at most other times. In actuality, bus bunching was quite common. The actual rush hour headway was about four buses every ten minutes, not all that horrible. And waiting at most other times was never greater than 15 minutes. As for travel times, the loading times before MetroCard and the exact fare were considerable and much greater than we see today. Rush hour traffic was bad only north of Carroll Street were the road narrowed from two lanes to one. Between President or maybe Carroll Street and Eastern Parkway no parking was permitted during the morning rush hour. On days when all drivers complied, there were no delays. Bus lanes were not necessary. However, even one single parked car delayed buses by five minutes. 

How does that compare with the SBS we have today? From what I have been hearing some local riders now have to wait 30 minutes for a bus. That was inconceivable in the 1970s for the B46.

Regarding the B44 and Bergen Beach and how horrible the B41 is even with Limited service, and if routes should be long or short and how that affects reliability, this is what I have to offer. Around 1975, when I was at the Department of City Planning I surveyed arrival and departure times for three separate days between 4 and 7 PM on the B41. I found numerous instances where buses arriving from Downtown were routinely delayed as much as 45 minutes. The difference, however, between then and now other than the fact there was no limited service back then, was the MTA operated about six extra buses between Kings Plaza and the Junction and between Bergen Beach and the Junction in the peak direction only. The operated "not in service" during the first-peak direction to maximize the number of trips that could be provided. So even with those frequent 45 minute delays in the line haul service, passengers getting off the trains were still assured a bus every five or ten minutes at minimum. I think in their infinite wisdom to save money, the MTA eliminated those short runs in the 90s. 

Now they will claim SBS with its exorbitant extra costs is the answer to improving service when all that is necessary to reinstitute those rush hour short runs and probably extend them to non-rush hours as well but to operate in both directions. 

As far as the B9 taking over the Bergen Beach route, I proposed that in my 1973 masters thesis along with many other changes the MTA made independently, but it took them as long as 45 years to think of. These included extending the B38 to Metropolitan Ave, splitting the B61 into two routes, extending the B57 and to cover a portion of the B75 and have another route take over the east west portion to absorb the B77. ending the old B62 and creating the B43. Combining the B40 and B78, but without ending service on St Johns Place east of Ralph Avenue, extending the B11 east of 18 Ave, creating and 86 Street route, and probably a few others I can't think of right now. And there were many more ideas they still haven't done which I mentioned before. I guess I was a visionary that no one appreciated. 

[Brillant93]

19 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

There has been a lot of discussion here since my last comment. I don't have the time or the inclination to study or comment on all of them so let me just add a few comments about my experiences from the 1970s that may add to this discussion. You can decide if service was worse or better then and what those experiences mean to current day service and proposals.

Back then I used to ride the B46 on a daily basis and also watched it in operation for more hours than I want to count. Prior to 1975, the route was scheduled at 2 minute headways between Kings Highway and Eastern Parkway and at five or 10 minute headways at most other times. In actuality, bus bunching was quite common. The actual rush hour headway was about four buses every ten minutes, not all that horrible. And waiting at most other times was never greater than 15 minutes. As for travel times, the loading times before MetroCard and the exact fare were considerable and much greater than we see today. Rush hour traffic was bad only north of Carroll Street were the road narrowed from two lanes to one. Between President or maybe Carroll Street and Eastern Parkway no parking was permitted during the morning rush hour. On days when all drivers complied, there were no delays. Bus lanes were not necessary. However, even one single parked car delayed buses by five minutes. 

How does that compare with the SBS we have today? From what I have been hearing some local riders now have to wait 30 minutes for a bus. That was inconceivable in the 1970s for the B46.

Regarding the B44 and Bergen Beach and how horrible the B41 is even with Limited service, and if routes should be long or short and how that affects reliability, this is what I have to offer. Around 1975, when I was at the Department of City Planning I surveyed arrival and departure times for three separate days between 4 and 7 PM on the B41. I found numerous instances where buses arriving from Downtown were routinely delayed as much as 45 minutes. The difference, however, between then and now other than the fact there was no limited service back then, was the MTA operated about six extra buses between Kings Plaza and the Junction and between Bergen Beach and the Junction in the peak direction only. The operated "not in service" during the first-peak direction to maximize the number of trips that could be provided. So even with those frequent 45 minute delays in the line haul service, passengers getting off the trains were still assured a bus every five or ten minutes at minimum. I think in their infinite wisdom to save money, the MTA eliminated those short runs in the 90s. 

Now they will claim SBS with its exorbitant extra costs is the answer to improving service when all that is necessary to reinstitute those rush hour short runs and probably extend them to non-rush hours as well but to operate in both directions. 

 

I don’t think it’s a matter that service was better back then or now but it’s the landscape of the city today. Nyc has grown a lot since 1975 but unfortunately our transit system hasn’t kept up with the recent growth in the past 20 years. We have congestion, double parked cars and trucks, and dollar vans that hurt our buses from being on time.

Now sbs shouldn’t hurt the local route in my opinion. If you’re going to spread out service with sbs then put the extra buses you have left on to the local route. Bus bunching it’s an issue. If you have like serveral buses coming down a street that causes congestion and not only that but it causes the next bus to be over crowded. We can’t always anticipate how traffic works every single day but sending hordes of buses isn’t smart. It’s a complaint a lot of customers have. That’s one of the reasons why I don’t like the fact the B82 sbs is starting out with 40 footers. In the video that I posted customers complained about buses being sent in droves and they miss them only to catch the next one that is crowded. Mind you it would cause hell on the kings hwy narrow section.  The mta seems to not listen to that one complaint. 

With the B41 there needs to be a route that serves just the junction and Bergen beach. It’s a very high passenger spot. More people take the Bergen beach branch than KP. That’s if they convert the B41 into sbs.  

[B35 via Church]

14 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I’ve seen the buses that go into Downtown Brooklyn that’s i want out, and they have almost carried air. I’ve seen almost no one travel into Downtowns Brooklyn along Livingston Street and Fulton Street.

 

In addition, that report about Downtown Brooklyn helps those who travel outside of Downtown Brooklyn, as those buses have experienced delays in the area. With a new bus terminal and shuttle, the other routes would see a reduction in delays. We are not sacrificing connectivity or mobility here. In that report, it said specifically “Reducing the overlapping services has the potential to improve surface transit in Downtown Brooklyn. This reduction of service does not have to mean a decrease in mobility or access to the study area or loss of access from outlying areas of Brooklyn. By implementing a shuttle service, routes could be terminated before entering the congested downtown area, and one streamlined shuttle service could provide downtown access at high frequency and reliability”. It also says “Overlapping routes reduce the effectiveness of the surface transit network to provide access and mobility around the Study Area. Overlapping routes increase bus congestion and rider uncertainty. Providing one shuttle service to operate in Downtown Brooklyn would reduce the total number of buses that have to enter the Core of Downtown Brooklyn. Reducing overlapping buses within Downtown Brooklyn would also improve schedule reliability for passengers traveling outside of the Study Area, as buses no longer need to traverse the heavily congested Downtown Core where they are frequently subject to delays. Shuttle routes would be optimized to maintaining existing connections to the other transit modes in the area, including subway and commuter rail.”

 

This is rather efficient for bus operations, because there would be one consistent bus route within Downtown Brooklyn at high frequency and reliability. For everyone else commuting into Downtown Brooklyn, the transferring would only add 5 minutes to their commute, but their buses won’t be delayed very frequently, so it’s a win-win situation for everyone.

Confirmed.

That's all I needed to see & that's exactly what I thought this grand plan entailed (which explains why no answer was ever given for where this hypothetical bus terminal was supposed to be located at within Downtown).... Dumping a bunch of bus riders from various parts of the borough off around Atlantic-Barclays so they can take whichever one of those 6 proposed circulators that would end up being chosen, into the heart of Downtown Brooklyn.... Far too theoretical to be taken seriously & totally devoid of reality....

It's the furthest thing from a win-win.... Such a plan would encourage even more people jamming their way onto the subways, or completely giving up on public transportation altogether.... You aren't going to get near as many bus riders riding in & out of Downtown to subscribe to taking one more mode of transportation (for which they'll be on for no more than 5-10 minutes), over simply staying on whatever bus route they're currently riding to get into & out of Downtown....

The traffic issues that plague Downtown Brooklyn isn't due to overlapping bus routes, it's the sheer amt. of traffic pouring in from the Manhattan Bridge from the north, from Flatbush av from points south, & from off the BQE.... The addition of Barclays Center itself certainly didn't help the cause..... Can't do anything about the cars, so let's target the bus routes instead..... Trying to "fix" the traffic situation in the manner presented in this study, simply put, is a solution in search of a problem....

Efficiency that comes with that gargantuan of a drawback is not worth it.

[BrooklynBus]

1 hour ago, Brillant93 said:

I don’t think it’s a matter that service was better back then or now but it’s the landscape of the city today. Nyc has grown a lot since 1975 but unfortunately our transit system hasn’t kept up with the recent growth in the past 20 years. We have congestion, double parked cars and trucks, and dollar vans that hurt our buses from being on time.

Now sbs shouldn’t hurt the local route in my opinion. If you’re going to spread out service with sbs then put the extra buses you have left on to the local route. Bus bunching it’s an issue. If you have like serveral buses coming down a street that causes congestion and not only that but it causes the next bus to be over crowded. We can’t always anticipate how traffic works every single day but sending hordes of buses isn’t smart. It’s a complaint a lot of customers have. That’s one of the reasons why I don’t like the fact the B82 sbs is starting out with 40 footers. In the video that I posted customers complained about buses being sent in droves and they miss them only to catch the next one that is crowded. Mind you it would cause hell on the kings hwy narrow section.  The mta seems to not listen to that one complaint. 

With the B41 there needs to be a route that serves just the junction and Bergen beach. It’s a very high passenger spot. More people take the Bergen beach branch than KP. That’s if they convert the B41 into sbs.  

When you are trying to determine if SBS is an improvement or not, it is certainly relevant that in 1975 you never had to wait more than 15 minutes for a bus and today waiting 30 minutes for a local is a common complaint on the B46.

No one can deny that the transit system hasn't kept up with changing needs of the past 40 or 60 years. And as far as congestion and double parked cars and trucks, it has been a problem as far back as I can remember. It certainly is not new. And gypsy cabs and dollar vans gave been around since 1975. Also, not new. Are you aware that midtown congestion in the 1850s before automobiles was far greater than it is today and is why the els were built? It would take an hour or more to get from like Wall Street to like 34 Street. 

Of course dispatching buses in hoards is dumb, but if SBS was the way to fix that,  bunching on SBS routes wouldn't be almost as bad as on other routes. 

As far as more people going to Bergen Beach than Kings Plaza, I think that has to do with the time of day and day of week you are looking at. I highly doubt that is the case on weekends. 

[Brillant93]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

When you are trying to determine if SBS is an improvement or not, it is certainly relevant that in 1975 you never had to wait more than 15 minutes for a bus and today waiting 30 minutes for a local is a common complaint on the B46.

No one can deny that the transit system hasn't kept up with changing needs of the past 40 or 60 years. And as far as congestion and double parked cars and trucks, it has been a problem as far back as I can remember. It certainly is not new. And gypsy cabs and dollar vans gave been around since 1975. Also, not new. Are you aware that midtown congestion in the 1850s before automobiles was far greater than it is today and is why the els were built? It would take an hour or more to get from like Wall Street to like 34 Street. 

Of course dispatching buses in hoards is dumb, but if SBS was the way to fix that,  bunching on SBS routes wouldn't be almost as bad as on other routes. 

As far as more people going to Bergen Beach than Kings Plaza, I think that has to do with the time of day and day of week you are looking at. I highly doubt that is the case on weekends. 

I don't recall the B46 local ever being that slow, not from my knowledge or the times I have taken it. Seems like they just bunched a bunch of buses on to the sbs. If the MTA was smart they would have put the extra drivers on to the local. 

Off topic from the buses I think it was pretty stupid for them to tear down the EL on second avenue. We probably wouldn't have wasted so much money on the 2 ave subway. 

Yeah a lot of people don't ride that route on the weekends. Its quite modest but still they never can run it on time, even on the weekends with no traffic. 

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

When you are trying to determine if SBS is an improvement or not, it is certainly relevant that in 1975 you never had to wait more than 15 minutes for a bus and today waiting 30 minutes for a local is a common complaint on the B46.

No one can deny that the transit system hasn't kept up with changing needs of the past 40 or 60 years. And as far as congestion and double parked cars and trucks, it has been a problem as far back as I can remember. It certainly is not new. And gypsy cabs and dollar vans gave been around since 1975. Also, not new. Are you aware that midtown congestion in the 1850s before automobiles was far greater than it is today and is why the els were built? It would take an hour or more to get from like Wall Street to like 34 Street. 

Of course dispatching buses in hoards is dumb, but if SBS was the way to fix that,  bunching on SBS routes wouldn't be almost as bad as on other routes. 

As far as more people going to Bergen Beach than Kings Plaza, I think that has to do with the time of day and day of week you are looking at. I highly doubt that is the case on weekends. 

That's why when I make my own SBS plans, I plan to often have both the SBS and local counterparts operate as frequently as possible. Example: my modifications to your B6 Bus proposal from 12 years ago. When I modified it for the present day, I knew that there was going to traffic on Avenue J and on Flatlands Avenue approaching Ralph Avenue. Because of that, and long distances from the train stations the rerouted B6 would serve, I added an SBS route on top of the regular B6 local, replacing the B6 Limited. I planned for both the local and SBS operate every 5 minutes during the day Monday to Friday, and 8 minutes all day Saturday and Sunday. The B6 local would operate overnight every 30 minutes while there would be no B6 SBS. To make the route doable for articulated bus operations, I proposed rerouting it straight along Flatbush Avenue between Glenwood Rd and Flatbush Avenue, stopping at Flatbush Avenue and Nostrand Avenue. Due to traffic there, there would be offset bus lanes from Farragut Road to Avenue I, benefitting all buses on Flatbush Avenue. That way, B6 riders, especially those taking the SBS, would have more frequent and direct service to the Flatbush Avenue service, while those who don't want to take the SBS can still have frequent service. Therefore, everyone wins.

Speaking of B41 service to Bergen Beach and Kings Plaza, here is my point of view of all this:

I live along this route, with the closest stop being Avenue N and East 55th Street. When I come home from college, I would take the B41 Bergen Beach service. Sometimes, I would check BusTime, and I would see that the buses are at 20 minutes away, and this is during the PM Rush Hours. I often hear from other passengers that they've been waiting for so long for this bus. The wait is so long, that I would take the B41 Kings Plaza branch or the Q35 to Flatbush Avenue and Avenue P (B41) or Quentin Rd (Q35) and walk home from there. When the bus does come, it usually gets really crowded to a point that the bus literally fills up, not allowing anyone else to board.  Does that ring a bell to you?

Another time, back in early January of this year, there was a time that multiple B41 Bergen Beach buses came at the same time. This was possibly due to yet another delay. I actually got on one of the less crowded LTD's (which later hit a car) and then on another B41 after that car crash. Both were crowded after leaving Nostrand Avenue.

Both times show how erratic the B41 can get.

 

Now during the weekends, here's the biggest gripe the service has. The B41 has more buses going to Kings Plaza than Bergen Beach. The Bergen Beach service comes every 30 minutes, but I've seen on BusTime that the Bergen Beach buses are 45 minutes away. Meanwhile, the Kings Plaza buses come every 10 minutes (I've overheard passengers saying that its the one that comes every 5 seconds). Heck they even have moderately crowded Q35s and B9 buses that are notoriously empty south of Avenue P joining the party, but guess what: I feel the no one want to go to Kings Plaza (at least on the B9's). I was walking on Avenue N once during the weekend and saw a B41 carrying air in there.

 

There is too much service to Kings Plaza, and not enough to Bergen Beach, where there could be demand for frequent buses there. Does that also sound familiar to you?

 

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Confirmed.

That's all I needed to see & that's exactly what I thought this grand plan entailed (which explains why no answer was ever given for where this hypothetical bus terminal was supposed to be located at within Downtown).... Dumping a bunch of bus riders from various parts of the borough off around Atlantic-Barclays so they can take whichever one of those 6 proposed circulators that would end up being chosen, into the heart of Downtown Brooklyn.... Far too theoretical to be taken seriously & totally devoid of reality....

It's the furthest thing from a win-win.... Such a plan would encourage even more people jamming their way onto the subways, or completely giving up on public transportation altogether.... You aren't going to get near as many bus riders riding in & out of Downtown to subscribe to taking one more mode of transportation (for which they'll be on for no more than 5-10 minutes), over simply staying on whatever bus route they're currently riding to get into & out of Downtown....

The traffic issues that plague Downtown Brooklyn isn't due to overlapping bus routes, it's the sheer amt. of traffic pouring in from the Manhattan Bridge from the north, from Flatbush av from points south, & from off the BQE.... The addition of Barclays Center itself certainly didn't help the cause..... Can't do anything about the cars, so let's target the bus routes instead..... Trying to "fix" the traffic situation in the manner presented in this study, simply put, is a solution in search of a problem....

Efficiency that comes with that gargantuan of a drawback is not worth it.

The report for the plan had 4 terminal plans: a 2-story building at the BAM lot, a one-story terminal plan at the BAM site, a 2 story site at the southeast corner of Ashland and Fulton, and a two story building at Flatbush Avenue and Lafayette Avenue. The Atlantic-Barclays site was not available due to the Barclays Center construction, which opened in 2012. The two BAM sites were no longer available when the report was released and the last two sites have become home to new developments today. A new site has to be found before they even break ground on this plan

 

To solve the traffic from the Manhattan Bridge and BQE, there should be some HOV 3+ lanes in Downtown Brooklyn where feasible. This could curb some congestion that is there,

[BrooklynBus]

46 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

There is too much service to Kings Plaza, and not enough to Bergen Beach, where there could be demand for frequent buses there. Does that also sound familiar to you?

I believe an extended B9 would have greater demand than the B41.

 

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

I believe an extended B9 would have greater demand than the B41.

 

Didn’t you proposed rerouting the B9 back in 1973 and in 2006?

 

Also, what frequency would you run the rerouted B9 at to attract passengers?

[BrooklynBus]

21 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Didn’t you proposed rerouting the B9 back in 1973 and in 2006?

 

Also, what frequency would you run the rerouted B9 at to attract passengers?

Yes, I have been proposing it since 1973. I also believe I presented it to the MTA back in 2004 and of course they rejected it just like the 40 other proposals I made the year  before I retired through their Employee Suggestion Program which required them to provide written responses. None of their responses were valid. 

As far as the frequency, for the B9, I would start with the current frequency. All the connections the B 9 makes are a tremendous asset, especially the Brighton Line. Currently the B41 Bergen Beach branch is virtually useless to B46 passengers. Look at how much more useful it would be to a high volume route like the B46. It would provide B46 riders to access to an entire new area of Brooklyn with no added route mileage. No one currently going south or north on the B46 would transfer to the B41 in the westbound direction. That would all change if it were the B9. 

[Express Bus Operator]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

I believe an extended B9 would have greater demand than the B41.

 

Weekends demand more 41 to KP since people are shopping or hanging out at kp. The weekdays you see Bergen BCH buses more compare to the weekend due to people within Avenue N residents are heading to work or school. 

I’m on the 41 and my first tour starts out of the Bergen bch early. When Im returning back from dwntwn I head to KP for people who are trying to connect to the B3. My last trips are bergen bch but clearly on the weekends Avenue N is dead compared to KP location.

Now the city needs to step in and fix flatbush avenue before it ever turns sbs. Too many double park vehicles, too many dollar vans, too many cars park at the bus stops, Downtown is too congested especially after crossing Atlantic Avenue, too many constructions going on. To be honest sometimes the only way I manage through my schedule is if I hustle through and demand control on the road over other motorists. Things has to changes in order for sbs41 to work efficiently.

[BrooklynBus]

41 minutes ago, DueceDrives said:

Weekends demand more 41 to KP since people are shopping or hanging out at kp. The weekdays you see Bergen BCH buses more compare to the weekend due to people within Avenue N residents are heading to work or school. 

I’m on the 41 and my first tour starts out of the Bergen bch early. When Im returning back from dwntwn I head to KP for people who are trying to connect to the B3. My last trips are bergen bch but clearly on the weekends Avenue N is dead compared to KP location.

Now the city needs to step in and fix flatbush avenue before it ever turns sbs. Too many double park vehicles, too many dollar vans, too many cars park at the bus stops, Downtown is too congested especially after crossing Atlantic Avenue, too many constructions going on. To be honest sometimes the only way I manage through my schedule is if I hustle through and demand control on the road over other motorists. Things has to changes in order for sbs41 to work efficiently.

I appreciate what you are saying and do not disagree with you. But did you quote me because you disagree with me?