Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Cait Sith

Brooklyn Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Now that the existing conditions report is released. I figured it would make sense to just make a new topic (and pin it) so we don't clutter any other redesign threads.

Other redesign threads will be pinned as well, with some threads being merged with one another to clear up clutter.

https://new.mta.info/system_modernization/brooklynbusredesign

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering when these threads were gonna be pinned. I was gonna create this thread about 3 hrs ago but look at what happened to the Queens Existing Conditions thread, so I said f**k it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Limitations of the Existing Network

  1. Much of the network is a grid, though in some neighborhoods, circuitous routes slow down travel to key destinations and transfer points.
  2. Bus routes sometimes operate on nearby parallel streets, splitting the available resources.
  3. Bus priority is generally limited to SBS corridors and does not benefit most Brooklyn bus riders.
  4. Bus stops spaced close together slow down bus travel, as the bus needs to frequently decelerate to a stop and then wait to re-enter the flow of traffic.
  5. Narrow streets and difficult turns, particularly left turns, hamper bus speeds and reliability.
  6. Even with bus routes covering much of the borough, there are opportunities to improve connectivity and provide easier access to places in Brooklyn and beyond where customers want to go.

1. Why does it have to be "slow down travel to key destinations and transfer points" though? This sounds to me like they want to make the network more grid-like than it already is, while making things inconvenient in the process... Let's see how many routes they'll have ending at Canarsie (L) vs. having service continue along Flatlands av, to have riders hoofing it out from Flatlands av to the (L) (again)....

2. This is code for *bus routes run too closely - a great reason to consolidate service along one corridor*... Of course, this won't come with commensurate service levels to facilitate it; somehow that part of it always slips through the cracks....

3. This isn't the MTA's fault, but "bus priority" is used rather loosely here..... I also question their use of the term "benefit"....

4. To what scale though; How many bus riders across/within Brooklyn are really being hampered, or devastated by this?

5. This goes hand in hand with point #2 AFAIC... Bed-Stuy riders traveling latitudinally in-particular better worry about what this plan has to offer when it comes to "addressing" this particular facet of it....

6. Yes, there are opportunities to improve connectivity & provide easier access to places in Brooklyn & beyond.... The question is, a] what & b]  how much of what's going to be sacrificed in order to fulfill those opportunities?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read the Brooklyn Existing Conditions Report and see how they are setting the stage for their draft proposals which will destroy Brooklyn bus service just like they intend to destroy Queens service. 

The goals are the same: increase bus speeds, more SBS, eliminating half the bus stops, more unnecessary bus lanes, reducing coverage and providing fewer bus hours to save money. There will be a few good ideas, some of them mine, but mostly bad ideas. They will claim buses will be more reliable and more frequent but that won’t happen. Ridership will continue to decline. 

You might think I am jumping the gun or giving them bad ideas, but I think I know them well enough to make accurate predictions of what they will propose. We will see how close I will be to what they actually propose. I predict they will propose: 

Elimination of the B4, B7, B11, B15, B20, B24, B25, B32, B39, B45, B52, B62, B63, B64, B74, and B100 with the following route changes and assuming the Queens proposal goes forward.

B2 extend to Bay Ridge Ave and Shore Rd via 65 St on western (as I proposed) but stopping every half mile and operating every 20 to 30 minutes and extend to Mill Basin on eastern end. 

B6 will no longer serve New Lots subway and be rerouted to Gateway. 

B8 will be spit in two. Will terminate at Flatbush Ave. New route will take over eastern half and be rerouted from Brookdale to Gateway Mall. 

B9 Reroute to Lutheran (NYU Langone) and extend eastern end along Ave N to E71 St. ( I proposed eastern rerouting only) 

B12 rerouted along Empire Blvd to Ocean Avenue.

B16 straighten along Ft Hamilton Pky (as I proposed) but operating every 20 minutes and shortened to Park Circle. 

New route along 13/14 Avenue to VA hospital, also every 20 minutes but stopping every half mile with northern end to ridiculous destination like Red Hook and stops every mile north of 39 St. 

B36 eastern end rerouted to go south on Nostrand and east via current B4 route. 

B41 will make SBS and eliminate Bergen Beach Branch. 

B43 rerouted off Empire to Kings County Hospital as I proposed.

B46 will terminate at Dekalb. 

B48 southern end truncated. Will terminate around Dekalb Ave. 

B49 terminated at Foster Ave from the south end and returned to pre 1978 routing after community rejects proposal to ban all cars from Sheepshead Bay Road. 

B57 service on Smith and Court eliminated. 

B61 extended east to replace a shortened B16. 

B67 extended to Williamsburg Plaza. 

B83 straight on Pennsylvania. 

B84 extended north. 

Other routes unchanged except for decreasing service span and increasing frequency. Those are B1, B3, B12, B13, B14, B17, B26, B31, B35, B37, B38, B42, B44, B47, B54, B60, B65, B67, B68, B69, B70, and B82.

They will not be successful in eliminating all the routes listed, but they will try. 

Again, this is not what I want to see, but I believe what they will try to do. 

Edited by BrooklynBus
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slight modification to what they will do to the B15. They won't eliminate it. Instead they will increase bus stop spacing in Bed Stuy to every half mile, and then every mile after that until it reaches Brookdale Hospital. Then it will operate along Linden Blvd and Conduit non stop to the airport. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I just read the Brooklyn Existing Conditions Report and see how they are setting the stage for their draft proposals which will destroy Brooklyn bus service just like they intend to destroy Queens service. 

The goals are the same: increase bus speeds, more SBS, eliminating half the bus stops, more unnecessary bus lanes, reducing coverage and providing fewer bus hours to save money. There will be a few good ideas, some of them mine, but mostly bad ideas. They will claim buses will be more reliable and more frequent but that won’t happen. Ridership will continue to decline. 

You might think I am jumping the gun or giving them bad ideas, but I think I know them well enough to make accurate predictions of what they will propose. We will see how close I will be to what they actually propose. I predict they will propose: 

Elimination of the B4, B7, B11, B15, B20, B24, B25, B32, B39, B45, B52, B62, B63, B64, B74, and B100 with the following route changes and assuming the Queens proposal goes forward.

B2 extend to Bay Ridge Ave and Shore Rd via 65 St on western (as I proposed) but stopping every half mile and operating every 20 to 30 minutes and extend to Mill Basin on eastern end. 

B6 will no longer serve New Lots subway and be rerouted to Gateway. 

B8 will be spit in two. Will terminate at Flatbush Ave. New route will take over eastern half and be rerouted from Brookdale to Gateway Mall. 

B9 Reroute to Lutheran (NYU Langone) and extend eastern end along Ave N to E71 St. ( I proposed eastern rerouting only) 

B12 rerouted along Empire Blvd to Ocean Avenue.

B16 straighten along Ft Hamilton Pky (as I proposed) but operating every 20 minutes and shortened to Park Circle. 

New route along 13/14 Avenue to VA hospital, also every 20 minutes but stopping every half mile with northern end to ridiculous destination like Red Hook and stops every mile north of 39 St. 

B36 eastern end rerouted to go south on Nostrand and east via current B4 route. 

B41 will make SBS and eliminate Bergen Beach Branch. 

B43 rerouted off Empire to Kings County Hospital as I proposed.

B46 will terminate at Dekalb. 

B48 southern end truncated. Will terminate around Dekalb Ave. 

B49 terminated at Foster Ave from the south end and returned to pre 1978 routing after community rejects proposal to ban all cars from Sheepshead Bay Road. 

B57 service on Smith and Court eliminated. 

B61 extended east to replace a shortened B16. 

B67 extended to Williamsburg Plaza. 

B83 straight on Pennsylvania. 

B84 extended north. 

Other routes unchanged except for decreasing service span and increasing frequency. Those are B1, B3, B12, B13, B14, B17, B26, B31, B35, B37, B38, B42, B44, B47, B54, B60, B65, B67, B68, B69, B70, and B82.

They will not be successful in eliminating all the routes listed, but they will try. 

Again, this is not what I want to see, but I believe what they will try to do. 

Majority of these ideas are what you came up on here, especially the B41 and the B9. How can you seriously say that’s not what you want to see but you had these ideas in your head? I recall one time I was talking to you about the former and you said the Bergen Beach branch was light during rush hour so it made sense for the B9 to serve Avenue N full time? 
 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Majority of these ideas are what you came up on here, especially the B41 and the B9. How can you seriously say that’s not what you want to see but you had these ideas in your head? I recall one time I was talking to you about the former and you said the Bergen Beach branch was light during rush hour so it made sense for the B9 to serve Avenue N full time? 
 

 

No. Only a few of what I stated are my ideas and by using part of them, they won't be making things better. When I proposed the eastern extension of the B9, it was with the stipulation that a renumbered B41 shuttle remain during rush hours and during overnight hours. By not keeping the B41 during rush hours, they will be causing protests because the riders who use it during rush hours won't be happy. Other times it is lightly used. 

Same thing with routing the B43 to Kings County Hospital. While it should be taken off Empire, the B12 still needs to serve Kings County Hospital. If it is moved to Empire, many riders will have an extra transfer. That is the exact shit they did in Queens. Help some and hurt as many as you help, when you can help many and hurt a relatively few which is how I proposed it. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

No. Only a few of what I stated are my ideas and by using part of them, they won't be making things better. When I proposed the eastern extension of the B9, it was with the stipulation that a renumbered B41 shuttle remain during rush hours and during overnight hours. By not keeping the B41 during rush hours, they will be causing protests because the riders who use it during rush hours won't be happy. Other times it is lightly used. 

Same thing with routing the B43 to Kings County Hospital. While it should be taken off Empire, the B12 still needs to serve Kings County Hospital. If it is moved to Empire, many riders will have an extra transfer. That is the exact shit they did in Queens. Help some and hurt as many as you help, when you can help many and hurt a relatively few which is how I proposed it. 

Another concern is that you mentioned that if they implemented some of the routes you propose, they would most likely operate every 20-30 minutes. TF? They think THATS frequent enough? Also, stops every half mile on local routes? For real?

At the very minimum, these routes should be operating at 8-minute frequencies, and IMO, stop every 3-4 blocks or 750 feet, or whatever the community desires, even if a bus route travels along 65th Street (your proposed B2 route).

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Elimination of the B4, B63, B64,

B2 extend to Bay Ridge Ave and Shore Rd via 65 St on western (as I proposed) but stopping every half mile and operating every 20 to 30 minutes and extend to Mill Basin on eastern end.

B9 Reroute to Lutheran (NYU Langone) and extend eastern end along Ave N to E71 St. ( I proposed eastern rerouting only)

If they actually do that, they are board certified insane and Bay Ridge will want their heads on a pike (and rightfully so)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

No. Only a few of what I stated are my ideas and by using part of them, they won't be making things better. When I proposed the eastern extension of the B9, it was with the stipulation that a renumbered B41 shuttle remain during rush hours and during overnight hours. By not keeping the B41 during rush hours, they will be causing protests because the riders who use it during rush hours won't be happy. Other times it is lightly used. 

Same thing with routing the B43 to Kings County Hospital. While it should be taken off Empire, the B12 still needs to serve Kings County Hospital. If it is moved to Empire, many riders will have an extra transfer. That is the exact shit they did in Queens. Help some and hurt as many as you help, when you can help many and hurt a relatively few which is how I proposed it. 

The fact of the matter is that if they go through what you’re saying it some of these routes wouldn’t be very off from what you proposed. So I mean you’re basically saying that you’re idea is way better even though it would be the same. I took a look at your bus proposal. 

then knowing this sub everyone will circle jerk around your idea. This really proves my point no one on here cares what’s being done only who is delivering it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

They will not be successful in eliminating all the routes listed, but they will try. 

Again, this is not what I want to see, but I believe what they will try to do. 

 

What if they somehow defy your requirements and propose something that you like? Will you complain that they're depriving you of things to complain about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

Elimination of the B4, B7, B11, B15, B20, B24, B25, B32, B39, B45, B52, B62, B63, B64, B74, and B100 with the following route changes and assuming the Queens proposal goes forward.

Why post such meaningless speculation when we know this won't occur? On what possible planet is the B63 getting eliminated? On what alternate planet is the B25 going away? In what as-yet undiscovered universe is the B15 being eliminated? And in what cosmic void is the B62 getting cut?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

Why post such meaningless speculation when we know this won't occur? On what possible planet is the B63 getting eliminated? On what alternate planet is the B25 going away? In what as-yet undiscovered universe is the B15 being eliminated? And in what cosmic void is the B62 getting cut?

It's not meaningless speculation. I am not saying they will get away with eliminating the B63, but they will try to either take that away or the B37. Since they were unsuccessful with permanently taking the B37 away, I don't think they will try it again. As for why they woukd want to take something away, did you read what they say about frequency and coverage? They say they can't provide both. Well you have buses on 3rd and 5th Avenue and a subway on Fourth. They show a theoretical map with six bus routes and claim the system would be better if there were only two routes instead of six but operating more frequently because people want better frequencies and don't mind walking more. So it logically follows they woukd propose doubling the frequency if the B37 from 20 minutes to ten minutes in exchange for eliminating the B63 or increasing service on the B63 and eliminating the B37 as well as reducing the number of bus stops on the route that remains.

They have been trying to get rid of the B25 for years claiming it duplicates the subway. Opposition has prevented that and I believe will continue to prevent that from happening, but they will try. 

I revised my statement about the B15 being eliminated although in the Queens Draft it specifically states the Queens route operating on Hegeman would replace the B15. In the Brooklyn Existing Consitions they make it appear that the B15 was created to serve JFK when that is a recent extension to a former trolley route operating since the 1890s. They state that it shouldn't make local stops to the airport which is why an believe it will remain but be moved to Linden and operate non-stop to the Airport. They want it to operate faster and previously talked about it being converted to SBS. So I believe it won't make stops closer than every half mile or every mile. They will claim there are other routes within a quarter mile riders could take for local service, just as they proposed in Queens by proposing stops every 6,000 feet along 101 Ave. 

They are replacing the B62 with the Q1 which is why it is on the list for elimination.

There are reasons for all my statements. It is speculation, but certainly not meaningless. 

 

4 hours ago, Brillant93 said:

The fact of the matter is that if they go through what you’re saying it some of these routes wouldn’t be very off from what you proposed. So I mean you’re basically saying that you’re idea is way better even though it would be the same. I took a look at your bus proposal. 

then knowing this sub everyone will circle jerk around your idea. This really proves my point no one on here cares what’s being done only who is delivering it. 

No I am not saying at all that my ideas are the same as what they are proposing. I said they will take certain elements of my proposal that fit into the general scheme of what they want to do anyway like making a grid system, not because I proposed it. And they will do it in a half-assed why to balance out the numbers of people benefiting by my good ideas with the numbers of people who will be hurt by their ideas so in the end, just a short many people are hurt as are helped, and because they will be removing half the bus stops as in Queens, far more will be hurt than helped. And what I stated certainly does not prove your point. 

3 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

What if they somehow defy your requirements and propose something that you like? Will you complain that they're depriving you of things to complain about?

I will like straightening out the B16 and a new route on 13/14 Avenue and I will like a route all along Empire Blvd, but I will dislike most everything else, so there will be no shortage of things to complain about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I just read the Brooklyn Existing Conditions Report and see how they are setting the stage for their draft proposals which will destroy Brooklyn bus service just like they intend to destroy Queens service. 

The goals are the same: increase bus speeds, more SBS, eliminating half the bus stops, more unnecessary bus lanes, reducing coverage and providing fewer bus hours to save money. There will be a few good ideas, some of them mine, but mostly bad ideas. They will claim buses will be more reliable and more frequent but that won’t happen. Ridership will continue to decline. 

You might think I am jumping the gun or giving them bad ideas, but I think I know them well enough to make accurate predictions of what they will propose. We will see how close I will be to what they actually propose. I predict they will propose: 

** list of predictions **

Again, this is not what I want to see, but I believe what they will try to do. 

I don't really feel like going route-for-route with what may happen, but I actually think you're giving them too much justice (in terms of how many routes would remain intact/as they are today).... Basically, I think the thing'll feature concepts where I'll be like "I get what you're trying to do here, but um, no - this aint it"... Well that, and some "those portions of current routes have no business being combined" type of reactions.... Trying to be too creative for the sake of changing bus routes, because the network hasn't been changed in an umpteen amount of years....

Speculation aside, I want to see how they'll go about addressing service gaps, service to new areas, & indirect routings of current routes <_<

3 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

Why post such meaningless speculation when we know this won't occur? On what possible planet is the B63 getting eliminated? On what alternate planet is the B25 going away? In what as-yet undiscovered universe is the B15 being eliminated? And in what cosmic void is the B62 getting cut?

Being fair to him, he did amend his B15 prediction....

Anyway, I agree with you in regards to the B25 & B63... However, if what's being proposed in the Queens draft plan ends up being finalized & is a precursor to anything, things aren't looking so hot for the B62....

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

I don't really feel like going route-for-route with what may happen, but I actually think you're giving them too much justice (in terms of how many routes would remain intact/as they are today).... Basically, I think the thing'll feature concepts where I'll be like "I get what you're trying to do here, but um, no - this aint it"... Well that, and some "those portions of current routes have no business being combined" type of reactions.... Trying to be too creative for the sake of changing bus routes, because the network hasn't been changed in an umpteen amount of years....

Speculation aside, I want to see how they'll go about addressing service gaps, service to new areas, & indirect routings of current routes <_<

Being fair to him, he did amend his B15 prediction....

Anyway, I agree with you in regards to the B25 & B63... However, if what's being proposed in the Queens draft plan ends up being finalized & is a precursor to anything, things aren't looking so hot for the B62....

I don't think they will be changing bus routes just for the sake of doing that. Their guidelines are clear. No bus routes on congested streets especially one way streets. That describes the B11 to a T. But they won't get away with getting rid of it. There will be riots. They will also get rid of Caton Ave which is very congested. Their Q 1 replaces the B62. The only real problem is how often it will stop. 

As far as service gaps, they mention the difficulty of getting to Red Hook which is why they will extend or create a route from Red Hook to some place far away that no one needs to go to and it will stop every mile. The other problem they rightly mention is the difficulty of getting around Prospect Park which is why I believe they will extend the B61 around the park in exchange for shortening the B16. They might even split it in half so it fits their grid system scenario. Reinstituting the B71 means too many extra miles unless they run it with stops a half mile apart and they won't run it to Manhattan for reasons I previously stated. It would be too successful. They will also add a route from central Brooklyn to Gateway because they mention it's a problem. If they don't intend to fix that, it wouldn't be mentioned as a problem. 

Extending the B84 northward at 30 minute headways is cheap and the service gap can't be ignored. 

Also look at their misleading map that shows no service gaps with virtually everyone within a quarter Mike if a bus route. The problem with the map is that it doesn't dustinguish between north south and east west routes. If you are within a quarter of a north south route, it means nothing if you need to go east west  or vice versa, because your trip will require at least three buses. The map should show a quarter mile walk to or from a north south and east west bus route. Then you would see real service gaps. And why show an isolated area like Red Hook and not show Gerritsen Beach which is also isolated? Because they don't intend to fix that one. 

I explained how they will fix indirect routings by straightening the B16 which everyone wants, changing the B12 to miss the hospital and requiring an extra transfer for B12 riders and rerouting the B43 as I suggested. The B49 old routing and shortening it.  There aren't that many indirect routes in Brooklyn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

No I am not saying at all that my ideas are the same as what they are proposing. I said they will take certain elements of my proposal that fit into the general scheme of what they want to do anyway like making a grid system, not because I proposed it. And they will do it in a half-assed why to balance out the numbers of people benefiting by my good ideas with the numbers of people who will be hurt by their ideas so in the end, just a short many people are hurt as are helped, and because they will be removing half the bus stops as in Queens, far more will be hurt than helped. And what I stated certainly does not prove your point. 

 

Brooklyn already has a grid like bus system so I don't get what the grand scheme of things. 

Your predictions

14 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

B2 extend to Bay Ridge Ave and Shore Rd via 65 St on western (as I proposed) but stopping every half mile and operating every 20 to 30 minutes and extend to Mill Basin on eastern end. 

B6 will no longer serve New Lots subway and be rerouted to Gateway. 

B8 will be spit in two. Will terminate at Flatbush Ave. New route will take over eastern half and be rerouted from Brookdale to Gateway Mall. 

B9 Reroute to Lutheran (NYU Langone) and extend eastern end along Ave N to E71 St. ( I proposed eastern rerouting only) 

B12 rerouted along Empire Blvd to Ocean Avenue.

B16 straighten along Ft Hamilton Pky (as I proposed) but operating every 20 minutes and shortened to Park Circle. 

New route along 13/14 Avenue to VA hospital, also every 20 minutes but stopping every half mile with northern end to ridiculous destination like Red Hook and stops every mile north of 39 St. 

B36 eastern end rerouted to go south on Nostrand and east via current B4 route. 

B41 will make SBS and eliminate Bergen Beach Branch. 

B43 rerouted off Empire to Kings County Hospital as I proposed.

B46 will terminate at Dekalb. 

B48 southern end truncated. Will terminate around Dekalb Ave. 

B49 terminated at Foster Ave from the south end and returned to pre 1978 routing after community rejects proposal to ban all cars from Sheepshead Bay Road. 

B57 service on Smith and Court eliminated. 

B61 extended east to replace a shortened B16. 

B67 extended to Williamsburg Plaza. 

B83 straight on Pennsylvania. 

B84 extended north

Your proposal 

"B2 - Bay Ridge Ave/Shore Rd to Kings Plaza via 65 St and Aves P/R to Kings Plz.

• Stops at even numbered avenues only along 65 St.' "

Rather half mile than every two blocks which will slow down the bus like crazy.

"B6 and B6 LTD - Cropsey/25 Ave to Seaview/ E 108 St via Bay Pkwy, Ave J, Glenwood Rd, E 80 St and Ave L.

• Flatlands Ave and New Lots subway service provided by B82, B80, or B84."

You proposed to cut the B6 from the new lots station as well. 

"B9 - Shore Rd/101 St to Veterans Ave/ E71 St via Shore Rd, 60 St, Aves N, M, L and N.

• Replaces B41 Bergen Beach branch during non-rush hours except overnight."

I've argued this with you in the past and told you this wouldn't work for the Bergen Beach area because people don't need the B9 to get anywhere, especially to the B and Q trains. It would be a waste. 

"B12 – Discontinued."

Hmmm?

"B16 - 4 Ave/86 St to Saratoga/Broadway via Ft. Hamilton Pkwy, Caton, Clarkson and Saratoga.

• Provides through Ft. Hamilton Parkway service, also filling service gap on Clarkson Ave. • Replaces western end of B12 and northern end of B7. Rest of B7 is eliminated. New B23 provides 13/14 Ave service."

So you will discontinue the B12 and replace it with the B16? But the prediction that you have for the MTA which the B12 will still be utilized on empire blvd is worse? Your proposal will be unreliable because 1) its too courteous and 2) its doesn't really meet the needs of the people who actually use the B12 bus.  

"B36 – Eastbound service rerouted to Sheepshead Bay Station via Sheepshead Bay Rd and E 17 St."

So either way its your proposal or a prediction on the MTA behalf the B36 won't serve people to Coney Island hospital. 

"B41 and B41 LTD- Bergen Beach branch replaced with a B9 extension and a B10 shuttle to Flatbush/Nostrand during rush hours and overnight hours."

Either way the B41 Bergen Beach branch will be in question. 

"B49 - Utica Ave/Empire Blvd to Kingsborough College via Empire Blvd and Ocean Ave.

• Service north of Empire Blvd and Rogers/Bedford service provided by a rerouted B44 local and B44 SBS.

• B49 Limited is eliminated and replaced by a B44 SBS to Kingsborough Community College."

Why would you make the B49 more courteous as it is? Plus why would you even eliminate its limited service just to reroute the B44? It doesn't make sense to have the B44 run to KBCC. 

 "B83 - Extended from Broadway Junction to Putnam/Forest via existing B20 route which is discontinued."

Which isn't too far off from your MTA prediction. You want the B83 going straight on penn ave just like the MTA

"B84 – Extended north to Cleveland Avenue Station to provide new north south East NY service to fill a service gap, and better serves Gateway Center Mall."

Again this is just the same exact thing you want. 

15 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

They will not be successful in eliminating all the routes listed, but they will try. 

Again, this is not what I want to see, but I believe what they will try to do.

What you had on your proposal isn't very off from what you predicted. Its literally almost the exact same thing. 

You can't sit here and act like the MTA is doing a disservice when you would be committing the exact same disservice if you were put in the same position. 

Everyone in the borough can't be satisfied with everything. If everyone's argument which I am gathering are the headway and wait times let it be that. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I don't think they will be changing bus routes just for the sake of doing that. Their guidelines are clear. No bus routes on congested streets especially one way streets. That describes the B11 to a T. But they won't get away with getting rid of it. There will be riots. They will also get rid of Caton Ave which is very congested. Their Q 1 replaces the B62. The only real problem is how often it will stop. 

As far as service gaps, they mention the difficulty of getting to Red Hook which is why they will extend or create a route from Red Hook to some place far away that no one needs to go to and it will stop every mile. The other problem they rightly mention is the difficulty of getting around Prospect Park which is why I believe they will extend the B61 around the park in exchange for shortening the B16. They might even split it in half so it fits their grid system scenario. Reinstituting the B71 means too many extra miles unless they run it with stops a half mile apart and they won't run it to Manhattan for reasons I previously stated. It would be too successful. They will also add a route from central Brooklyn to Gateway because they mention it's a problem. If they don't intend to fix that, it wouldn't be mentioned as a problem. 

Extending the B84 northward at 30 minute headways is cheap and the service gap can't be ignored. 

Also look at their misleading map that shows no service gaps with virtually everyone within a quarter Mike if a bus route. The problem with the map is that it doesn't dustinguish between north south and east west routes. If you are within a quarter of a north south route, it means nothing if you need to go east west  or vice versa, because your trip will require at least three buses. The map should show a quarter mile walk to or from a north south and east west bus route. Then you would see real service gaps. And why show an isolated area like Red Hook and not show Gerritsen Beach which is also isolated? Because they don't intend to fix that one. 

I explained how they will fix indirect routings by straightening the B16 which everyone wants, changing the B12 to miss the hospital and requiring an extra transfer for B12 riders and rerouting the B43 as I suggested. The B49 old routing and shortening it.  There aren't that many indirect routes in Brooklyn. 

See here.... When I say "I want to see how they'll go about addressing service gaps, service to new areas, & indirect routings of current routes", I'm talking about what specific routings/routes they're going to come up with, not your dictation/explanation for how they're going to go about it.... While I agree with some of what you're predicting overall, I don't see them keeping that many routes exactly as they are in your untouchables list either.... It is what it is....

When I see a statement, verbatim, that reads "While the Brooklyn Bus Network covers nearly the entire borough, it has not changed much in the past decades to support this growth.", I have no reason to believe that they won't go hell or high water in altering bus routes.... Yeah they have guidelines, no one's disputing that... The two are not mutually exclusive..... The fact that they have guidelines won't have these planners not making a change or two, just so that there won't be too many proposed routes that resemble current routes... Some of those alterations in the Queens draft plan appear to be indicative of that (especially in SE Queens) & there isn't much of a reason for me to doubt that won't happen with their brilliant plan to revolutionize/modernize Brooklyn's network <_<

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Brooklyn already has a grid like bus system so I don't get what the grand scheme of things. 

Your predictions

Your proposal 

"B2 - Bay Ridge Ave/Shore Rd to Kings Plaza via 65 St and Aves P/R to Kings Plz.

• Stops at even numbered avenues only along 65 St.' "

Rather half mile than every two blocks which will slow down the bus like crazy.

"B6 and B6 LTD - Cropsey/25 Ave to Seaview/ E 108 St via Bay Pkwy, Ave J, Glenwood Rd, E 80 St and Ave L.

• Flatlands Ave and New Lots subway service provided by B82, B80, or B84."

You proposed to cut the B6 from the new lots station as well. 

"B9 - Shore Rd/101 St to Veterans Ave/ E71 St via Shore Rd, 60 St, Aves N, M, L and N.

• Replaces B41 Bergen Beach branch during non-rush hours except overnight."

I've argued this with you in the past and told you this wouldn't work for the Bergen Beach area because people don't need the B9 to get anywhere, especially to the B and Q trains. It would be a waste. 

"B12 – Discontinued."

Hmmm?

"B16 - 4 Ave/86 St to Saratoga/Broadway via Ft. Hamilton Pkwy, Caton, Clarkson and Saratoga.

• Provides through Ft. Hamilton Parkway service, also filling service gap on Clarkson Ave. • Replaces western end of B12 and northern end of B7. Rest of B7 is eliminated. New B23 provides 13/14 Ave service."

So you will discontinue the B12 and replace it with the B16? But the prediction that you have for the MTA which the B12 will still be utilized on empire blvd is worse? Your proposal will be unreliable because 1) its too courteous and 2) its doesn't really meet the needs of the people who actually use the B12 bus.  

"B36 – Eastbound service rerouted to Sheepshead Bay Station via Sheepshead Bay Rd and E 17 St."

So either way its your proposal or a prediction on the MTA behalf the B36 won't serve people to Coney Island hospital. 

"B41 and B41 LTD- Bergen Beach branch replaced with a B9 extension and a B10 shuttle to Flatbush/Nostrand during rush hours and overnight hours."

Either way the B41 Bergen Beach branch will be in question. 

"B49 - Utica Ave/Empire Blvd to Kingsborough College via Empire Blvd and Ocean Ave.

• Service north of Empire Blvd and Rogers/Bedford service provided by a rerouted B44 local and B44 SBS.

• B49 Limited is eliminated and replaced by a B44 SBS to Kingsborough Community College."

Why would you make the B49 more courteous as it is? Plus why would you even eliminate its limited service just to reroute the B44? It doesn't make sense to have the B44 run to KBCC. 

 "B83 - Extended from Broadway Junction to Putnam/Forest via existing B20 route which is discontinued."

Which isn't too far off from your MTA prediction. You want the B83 going straight on penn ave just like the MTA

"B84 – Extended north to Cleveland Avenue Station to provide new north south East NY service to fill a service gap, and better serves Gateway Center Mall."

Again this is just the same exact thing you want. 

What you had on your proposal isn't very off from what you predicted. Its literally almost the exact same thing. 

You can't sit here and act like the MTA is doing a disservice when you would be committing the exact same disservice if you were put in the same position. 

Everyone in the borough can't be satisfied with everything. If everyone's argument which I am gathering are the headway and wait times let it be that. 

You obviously did not carefully read what I wrote. Yes, Brooklyn has basically a grid like system and that’s is good. Yet some irregularities need to be straightened like on Ft Hamilton Parkway. Yet others like the B49 serving Sheepshead Bay Station need to remain. But in the MTA’s applying of formulas to solve problems, they want to straighten all irregularities which is a disservice to bus riders. 

65 St. Stopping every other avenue as I proposed is exactly what the MTA is proposing for all its routes, so how am I losing down a bus route that dies t e en exist? What I am protesting is that their route probably will stop at every fourth avenue missing vital transfers and cause extra walking. The only reason I proposed every other avenue on this street only rather than every avenue is because the B9 is on 60 Street stopping every avenue, but they will change that to every other Avenue if they follow what they did in Queens. 

B12. Yes the B12 on Empire is worse because everyone now going to the hospital using it will require a transfer. Under my proposal some B12 riders would require a transfer but just as many now requiring two buses will be able to make the trip with one bus. 

B36. Never said anything about the B36 not serving Coney Island Hospital. I was only proposing to return direct service to the station in one direction without a one block walk. Until several years ago, it had two directional access that everyone was happy with for forty years. The traffic congestion at the station was a myth created by DOT and I ave a video proving there was none during the height I felt the evening rush hour taken one week before they changed the route. Because of roadway reconstruction, it isn’t possible to restore westbound service to the station without ripping out the unneeded cement they put in. 

 Bergen Beach. the B41 Branch is needed during rush hours.

B44 to Kingsborough. I already discussed this many times here and readers are already tired of me repeating myself with my reasons. They are clearly stated in my proposal. Having an L shaped B49 is not circuitous. It is a very direct route from East Flatbush which many residents would appreciate. I lived there for 25 years and wished many times that such a route existed. And I am not eliminating the Limited service which only runs in the AM peak anyway just to reroute the B44. I just said it would no longer be needed if the B44 proposal were accepted. 

B83. Yes I proposed to straighten the B83 as I believe the MTA will propose along with a new route on Van Siclen to replace the existing B83 there and to fill a service gap north of that, but I don’t believe the MTA proposal will include that part because it is extra service. 

B84. Yes it is the same in this case. 

Of course no one will  say satisfied with everything, it the MTA’s proposal will cause much more disatisfaction than mine would. 

Share this post


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

See here.... When I say "I want to see how they'll go about addressing service gaps, service to new areas, & indirect routings of current routes", I'm talking about what specific routings/routes they're going to come up with, not your dictation/explanation for how they're going to go about it.... While I agree with some of what you're predicting overall, I don't see them keeping that many routes exactly as they are in your untouchables list either.... It is what it is....

When I see a statement, verbatim, that reads "While the Brooklyn Bus Network covers nearly the entire borough, it has not changed much in the past decades to support this growth.", I have no reason to believe that they won't go hell or high water in altering bus routes.... Yeah they have guidelines, no one's disputing that... The two are not mutually exclusive..... The fact that they have guidelines won't have these planners not making a change or two, just so that there won't be too many proposed routes that resemble current routes... Some of those alterations in the Queens draft plan appear to be indicative of that (especially in SE Queens) & there isn't much of a reason for me to doubt that won't happen with their brilliant plan to revolutionize/modernize Brooklyn's network <_<

Yes they will have some startling new routes running every 20 minutes and stopping every mile or half mile, but I don’t believe those will supplement the existing system or actually connect neighborhoods that need to be connected. As I said, I can see Park Slope’s complaint that it is difficult for them to get around the park which is actually I addressed in my 1973 Masters Thesis, and the MTA has yet to address it. They will make a few changes to address that problem which is good. But let’s say they make some wild route from Red Hook to Bensonhurst? Do we really need that if it reduces the dusting bus stops from every 750 feet to every 2,000 feet? 

If we take their statement about growth literally, then the proposed system should not be cost neutral but should provide additional service miles and access as well as improve connections reducing the percentage of riders requiring a transfer from 37 percent to 25 or 30 percent. But that won’t happen with a perfect grid system where most would need to transfer unless they are traveling in a straight line and don’t need to go across a borough where the route doesn’t do that.

I am curious what routes you think are in jeopardy of the ones I think they won’t change.

Share this post


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

Yes they will have some startling new routes running every 20 minutes and stopping every mile or half mile, but I don’t believe those will supplement the existing system or actually connect neighborhoods that need to be connected. As I said, I can see Park Slope’s complaint that it is difficult for them to get around the park which is actually I addressed in my 1973 Masters Thesis, and the MTA has yet to address it. They will make a few changes to address that problem which is good. But let’s say they make some wild route from Red Hook to Bensonhurst? Do we really need that if it reduces the dusting bus stops from every 750 feet to every 2,000 feet? 

If we take their statement about growth literally, then the proposed system should not be cost neutral but should provide additional service miles and access as well as improve connections reducing the percentage of riders requiring a transfer from 37 percent to 25 or 30 percent. But that won’t happen with a perfect grid system where most would need to transfer unless they are traveling in a straight line and don’t need to go across a borough where the route doesn’t do that.

I am curious what routes you think are in jeopardy of the ones I think they won’t change.

I can see them attempting to supplant some existing routes with routes like that (of which you make an example of)..... It should be obvious to anyone that knows Brooklyn enough, that routes of the sort won't loom supplemental to current routes.... When they speak of addressing growth, that's more or less their way of trying to connect neighborhoods/areas they believe that are in higher demand than what's actually the case; which is why I say the MTA is out of touch with its riderbase... Just because there's job growth in Downtown Brooklyn (for example), doesn't mean that there's necessarily a need for a route running directly from say, Gerritsen Beach, or say, Broadway Junction, to Downtown for that particular purpose....

Your curiosity piques a curiosity of my own... I'm not quite understanding why you're making this more about your predictions, instead of the impending redesign itself.... I have no vested interest in being *correct* over just how the MTA's going to f*** up the network... But to quell your inquisitiveness, well if by "in jeopardy" you mean a complete elimination with no replacement, then none of them..... If by "in jeopardy" you mean there's going to be any sort of change to them, then all 22 of those routes you listed....

Again, I don't see too many Brooklyn routes being kept exactly as they are & I'm not going to get into what I think is going to happen corridor by corridor, or what's going to happen to bus service along any significant amount of corridors... Way I see it, they're going to look to change just about everything under the cloak of progression....

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

You obviously did not carefully read what I wrote. Yes, Brooklyn has basically a grid like system and that’s is good. Yet some irregularities need to be straightened like on Ft Hamilton Parkway. Yet others like the B49 serving Sheepshead Bay Station need to remain. But in the MTA’s applying of formulas to solve problems, they want to straighten all irregularities which is a disservice to bus riders. 

65 St. Stopping every other avenue as I proposed is exactly what the MTA is proposing for all its routes, so how am I losing down a bus route that dies t e en exist? What I am protesting is that their route probably will stop at every fourth avenue missing vital transfers and cause extra walking. The only reason I proposed every other avenue on this street only rather than every avenue is because the B9 is on 60 Street stopping every avenue, but they will change that to every other Avenue if they follow what they did in Queens. 

B12. Yes the B12 on Empire is worse because everyone now going to the hospital using it will require a transfer. Under my proposal some B12 riders would require a transfer but just as many now requiring two buses will be able to make the trip with one bus. 

B36. Never said anything about the B36 not serving Coney Island Hospital. I was only proposing to return direct service to the station in one direction without a one block walk. Until several years ago, it had two directional access that everyone was happy with for forty years. The traffic congestion at the station was a myth created by DOT and I ave a video proving there was none during the height I felt the evening rush hour taken one week before they changed the route. Because of roadway reconstruction, it isn’t possible to restore westbound service to the station without ripping out the unneeded cement they put in. 

 Bergen Beach. the B41 Branch is needed during rush hours.

B44 to Kingsborough. I already discussed this many times here and readers are already tired of me repeating myself with my reasons. They are clearly stated in my proposal. Having an L shaped B49 is not circuitous. It is a very direct route from East Flatbush which many residents would appreciate. I lived there for 25 years and wished many times that such a route existed. And I am not eliminating the Limited service which only runs in the AM peak anyway just to reroute the B44. I just said it would no longer be needed if the B44 proposal were accepted. 

B83. Yes I proposed to straighten the B83 as I believe the MTA will propose along with a new route on Van Siclen to replace the existing B83 there and to fill a service gap north of that, but I don’t believe the MTA proposal will include that part because it is extra service. 

B84. Yes it is the same in this case. 

Of course no one will  say satisfied with everything, it the MTA’s proposal will cause much more disatisfaction than mine would. 

"65 St. Stopping every other avenue as I proposed is exactly what the MTA is proposing for all its routes, so how am I losing down a bus route that dies t e en exist? What I am protesting is that their route probably will stop at every fourth avenue missing vital transfers and cause extra walking. The only reason I proposed every other avenue on this street only rather than every avenue is because the B9 is on 60 Street stopping every avenue, but they will change that to every other Avenue if they follow what they did in Queens."

If the whole point of a bus is to be faster than walking then why on earth should there be a bus stop every two blocks? I'm sure they're not going to miss transfer points. Queens isn't a good way to compare to BK because queens was unique out of all the boroughs, they had to redraw every bus route. BK will most likely be handled the same way the Bronx was. 

"B12. Yes the B12 on Empire is worse because everyone now going to the hospital using it will require a transfer. Under my proposal some B12 riders would require a transfer but just as many now requiring two buses will be able to make the trip with one bus."

But yet you want to get rid of it instead of keeping it. If its main purpose is to serve the hospital then it needs to stay, discontinuing it like you want isn't going to help. I don't get why you expect the MTA to have it go down empire while your own proposal is to have a very long bus route to replace it that doesn't even reflect the travel patterns of the customers who take the B12 or B16. 

"B36. Never said anything about the B36 not serving Coney Island Hospital. I was only proposing to return direct service to the station in one direction without a one block walk. Until several years ago, it had two directional access that everyone was happy with for forty years. The traffic congestion at the station was a myth created by DOT and I ave a video proving there was none during the height I felt the evening rush hour taken one week before they changed the route. Because of roadway reconstruction, it isn’t possible to restore westbound service to the station without ripping out the unneeded cement they put in."

Reading your proposal made it seem like you and your prediction to the MTA was it was going to replace the B4 which would avoid the hospital all together. 

"Bergen Beach. the B41 Branch is needed during rush hours."

There needs to be a branch for it at all times that provides connection to the 2 and 5 train, also that will serve the demographics of that area. Having the B9 serve that area is going to be a waste because no one needs the B9 on that end to go anywhere in midwood because there's other reliable options in the area. 

"B44 to Kingsborough. I already discussed this many times here and readers are already tired of me repeating myself with my reasons. They are clearly stated in my proposal. Having an L shaped B49 is not circuitous. It is a very direct route from East Flatbush which many residents would appreciate. I lived there for 25 years and wished many times that such a route existed. And I am not eliminating the Limited service which only runs in the AM peak anyway just to reroute the B44. I just said it would no longer be needed if the B44 proposal were accepted."

There's really no need for that. All what needs to happen is for that route to have better ways to connect people to KBCC. Rerouting the B44 isn't going to solve, its going to actually hurt people. 

"B83. Yes I proposed to straighten the B83 as I believe the MTA will propose along with a new route on Van Siclen to replace the existing B83 there and to fill a service gap north of that, but I don’t believe the MTA proposal will include that part because it is extra service."

But you wanted to replace the B20 with the B83 and put another 80ish bus to replace its service while it was straightened along penn avenue. 

"B84. Yes it is the same in this case."

My whole point is that you can't say the MTA has a worse idea if your ideas fall inline with there. The only major draw back you claim the MTA will do is cut service such as headways. Which is understandable, but if your routes are going to be the same or a little different by an avenue or two then its not fair to claim your ideas are less disastrous than the MTA. 

This is what I mean people on here don't care whats being done but who is delivering it. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I can see them attempting to supplant some existing routes with routes like that (of which you make an example of)..... It should be obvious to anyone that knows Brooklyn enough, that routes of the sort won't loom supplemental to current routes.... When they speak of addressing growth, that's more or less their way of trying to connect neighborhoods/areas they believe that are in higher demand than what's actually the case; which is why I say the MTA is out of touch with its riderbase... Just because there's job growth in Downtown Brooklyn (for example), doesn't mean that there's necessarily a need for a route running directly from say, Gerritsen Beach, or say, Broadway Junction, to Downtown for that particular purpose....

Your curiosity piques a curiosity of my own... I'm not quite understanding why you're making this more about your predictions, instead of the impending redesign itself.... I have no vested interest in being *correct* over just how the MTA's going to f*** up the network... But to quell your inquisitiveness, well if by "in jeopardy" you mean a complete elimination with no replacement, then none of them..... If by "in jeopardy" you mean there's going to be any sort of change to them, then all 22 of those routes you listed....

Again, I don't see too many Brooklyn routes being kept exactly as they are & I'm not going to get into what I think is going to happen corridor by corridor, or what's going to happen to bus service along any significant amount of corridors... Way I see it, they're going to look to change just about everything under the cloak of progression....

I am making this about my predictions just to see how close I am to what’s really going to happen. You say they are going to change just about every route. Is that what they did in Queens? I didn’t study every proposed change there. They say they are starting Brooklyn and Queens from a blank slate which is first of all is the incorrect way to proceed because you are not planning a new city but one with existing travel patterns. But from certain statements they made, they are not really taking that approach so how can you believe anything they say? If they really are starting from a blank slate, they wouldn’t make a statement like the B38 is always going to exist. 

Share this post


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

1. If the whole point of a bus is to be faster than walking then why on earth should there be a bus stop every two blocks? I'm sure they're not going to miss transfer points. Queens isn't a good way to compare to BK because queens was unique out of all the boroughs, they had to redraw every bus route. BK will most likely be handled the same way the Bronx was.

2. But yet you want to get rid of it (B12) instead of keeping it. If its main purpose is to serve the hospital then it needs to stay, discontinuing it like you want isn't going to help. I don't get why you expect the MTA to have it go down empire while your own proposal is to have a very long bus route to replace it that doesn't even reflect the travel patterns of the customers who take the B12 or B16. 

3. Reading your proposal made it seem like you and your prediction to the MTA was it was going to replace the B4 which would avoid the hospital all together. 

4. There needs to be a branch for it (B41) at all times that provides connection to the 2 and 5 train, also that will serve the demographics of that area. Having the B9 serve that area is going to be a waste because no one needs the B9 on that end to go anywhere in midwood because there's other reliable options in the area. 

5. There's really no need for that ( B44 to Kingsborough) . All what needs to happen is for that route to have better ways to connect people to KBCC. Rerouting the B44 isn't going to solve, its going to actually hurt people. 

"B83. Yes I proposed to straighten the B83 as I believe the MTA will propose along with a new route on Van Siclen to replace the existing B83 there and to fill a service gap north of that, but I don’t believe the MTA proposal will include that part because it is extra service."

6. But you wanted to replace the B20 with the B83 and put another 80ish bus to replace its service while it was straightened along penn avenue. 

"B84. Yes it is the same in this case."

7. My whole point is that you can't say the MTA has a worse idea if your ideas fall inline with there. The only major draw back you claim the MTA will do is cut service such as headways. Which is understandable, but if your routes are going to be the same or a little different by an avenue or two then its not fair to claim your ideas are less disastrous than the MTA. 

This is what I mean people on here don't care whats being done but who is delivering it. 

1. When you say every two blocks, I assume you mean city blocks or every 550 feet. But in the 65 St discussion we were talking avenue blocks. Every two avenue blocks is    every 1500 feet. Except for 65 Street and a few other cases, I believe that is to wide a spacing. Every 550 feet for very lightly utilized stops or every 750 feet is correct because that means most riders are a quarter mile from a bus route. So they won’t mis transfer points, but skipping 12, 16 and 20 Avenues and all odd numbered avenues means that some who live along 65 St will have to walk over a quarter mile and those on nearby streets will have even longer walks which violates the quarter-mile standard which they claim they are still adhering to. 

2. The purpose of the B12 is not only to serve the hospital but it is a major destination along the route. I want to change it for the same reason the MTA wants to change it because it is very slow and makes an excessive amount of turns. Every time it turns, it misses a traffic signal. I used to use that route very often in my younger days. The route I propose going down Empire is not very long but almost the same distance as the existing B49. And if all you want to do is reflect all the existing travel patterns, why change any route at all? The purpose of connecting the B16 with the B12 is to enable more two bus trips around the park which is even one of the stated problems. The reason I hooked the B16 up with the B7 was to maintain the northern half of the B7 which I believe isn’t needed more than the southern half which I propose to eliminate because of its proximity to neighboring routes. If they even retain the B7, they will have it stop once every mile making it even more useless. 

3. Both my B4s, the proposal and the option do not change the route near Coney Island Hospital.

4. The B41 Branch is lightly utilized during non rush hours. It also makes scheduling more difficult. An extension of the B9 provides important transfers to the B46 and B47 enabling many trips currently requiring three buses to be made with two buses. That is the primary reason for the proposal. 

5. And how do you propose the B44 have better ways to connect riders to KBCC. A fast direct one bus trip is the best connection. There are many students in Bed Stuy, Crown Heights, and Flatbush and East Flatbush who would use it. Much better than the slow B49. It would help many more than it would hurt. If the MTA would allow a bus, train, and a bus for one fare, then it would not be necessary and I would withdraw the proposal. 

6. That is what I would do which differs from the MTA plan so you can’t say the proposals are the same.

7. I am saying that there are similarities between what I propose and what they will do, but under my proposals very few will be hurt, while under theirs the numbers hurt will be as great as the numbers helped and with the decreased frequencies and wider bus stop spacing proposed, their proposal will be a huge negative. So you can’t my proposals would be close to what I think they will propose. That would be a totally inaccurate statement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I am making this about my predictions just to see how close I am to what’s really going to happen. You say they are going to change just about every route. Is that what they did in Queens? I didn’t study every proposed change there. They say they are starting Brooklyn and Queens from a blank slate which is first of all is the incorrect way to proceed because you are not planning a new city but one with existing travel patterns. But from certain statements they made, they are not really taking that approach so how can you believe anything they say? If they really are starting from a blank slate, they wouldn’t make a statement like the B38 is always going to exist. 

Yeah, that's what they did with Queens.... Only local routes that remained as is (routing-wise) that I can recall off-top is the Q2 (their QT38) & the Q70 (their QT70).... If there are anymore, it isn't but like 2 or 3 more....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brillant93 said:

"65 St. Stopping every other avenue as I proposed is exactly what the MTA is proposing for all its routes, so how am I losing down a bus route that dies t e en exist? What I am protesting is that their route probably will stop at every fourth avenue missing vital transfers and cause extra walking. The only reason I proposed every other avenue on this street only rather than every avenue is because the B9 is on 60 Street stopping every avenue, but they will change that to every other Avenue if they follow what they did in Queens."

If the whole point of a bus is to be faster than walking then why on earth should there be a bus stop every two blocks? I'm sure they're not going to miss transfer points. Queens isn't a good way to compare to BK because queens was unique out of all the boroughs, they had to redraw every bus route. BK will most likely be handled the same way the Bronx was. 

"B12. Yes the B12 on Empire is worse because everyone now going to the hospital using it will require a transfer. Under my proposal some B12 riders would require a transfer but just as many now requiring two buses will be able to make the trip with one bus."

But yet you want to get rid of it instead of keeping it. If its main purpose is to serve the hospital then it needs to stay, discontinuing it like you want isn't going to help. I don't get why you expect the MTA to have it go down empire while your own proposal is to have a very long bus route to replace it that doesn't even reflect the travel patterns of the customers who take the B12 or B16. 

"B36. Never said anything about the B36 not serving Coney Island Hospital. I was only proposing to return direct service to the station in one direction without a one block walk. Until several years ago, it had two directional access that everyone was happy with for forty years. The traffic congestion at the station was a myth created by DOT and I ave a video proving there was none during the height I felt the evening rush hour taken one week before they changed the route. Because of roadway reconstruction, it isn’t possible to restore westbound service to the station without ripping out the unneeded cement they put in."

Reading your proposal made it seem like you and your prediction to the MTA was it was going to replace the B4 which would avoid the hospital all together. 

"Bergen Beach. the B41 Branch is needed during rush hours."

There needs to be a branch for it at all times that provides connection to the 2 and 5 train, also that will serve the demographics of that area. Having the B9 serve that area is going to be a waste because no one needs the B9 on that end to go anywhere in midwood because there's other reliable options in the area. 

"B44 to Kingsborough. I already discussed this many times here and readers are already tired of me repeating myself with my reasons. They are clearly stated in my proposal. Having an L shaped B49 is not circuitous. It is a very direct route from East Flatbush which many residents would appreciate. I lived there for 25 years and wished many times that such a route existed. And I am not eliminating the Limited service which only runs in the AM peak anyway just to reroute the B44. I just said it would no longer be needed if the B44 proposal were accepted."

There's really no need for that. All what needs to happen is for that route to have better ways to connect people to KBCC. Rerouting the B44 isn't going to solve, its going to actually hurt people. 

"B83. Yes I proposed to straighten the B83 as I believe the MTA will propose along with a new route on Van Siclen to replace the existing B83 there and to fill a service gap north of that, but I don’t believe the MTA proposal will include that part because it is extra service."

But you wanted to replace the B20 with the B83 and put another 80ish bus to replace its service while it was straightened along penn avenue. 

"B84. Yes it is the same in this case."

My whole point is that you can't say the MTA has a worse idea if your ideas fall inline with there. The only major draw back you claim the MTA will do is cut service such as headways. Which is understandable, but if your routes are going to be the same or a little different by an avenue or two then its not fair to claim your ideas are less disastrous than the MTA. 

This is what I mean people on here don't care whats being done but who is delivering it. 

its funny that I I just had a discussion about this a couple of days with a member of the opposite political party. about how this change occurred.

We remember the b/36 change and how it was implemented at that time as it was put in place without any real discussion with us (the riders).

Everyone in the community knows who was involved and how this individual who has announced that he is running for congress wants their votes, (I cannot vote in their primary as I am a member of the opposite party). However, I will do everything that I can to remind the   voters and residents that ride the B/36 that this is the individual who changed the B/36 and refused to take responsibilityfcor his actions.

What I am afraid of with this clown is that just to get even with the B/36 riders on Nostrand Avenue that he will use his influence and have the B/36 route go down Nostrand Avenue and replace the B/4 to Knapp Street..

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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