Brooklyn Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[BrooklynBus]

51 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

All of the routes within a depot are intertwined. If nothing else, it affects the B/Os in terms of run pay and days off and which trips are interlined and things like that. So it makes sense to take a look at all of the routes within a given depot as part of that borough's redesign. Basically, I asked the question of which routes are considered as part of the Brooklyn redesign, and which routes are considered as part of the Queens redesign, and the answer was "the Brooklyn redesign is the 6 Transit depots [Ulmer Park, Gleason, ENY, Flatbush, Grand Avenue, and Fresh Pond] and Spring Creek". 

I can understand only considering Brooklyn’s depots in the. Brooklyn redesign, etc. But studying or making changes only within single depots which is what I thought you were saying would be ridiculous. When I made my redesign plan for Brooklyn in 1982, I had it broken down into six stages where no single route had to be made more than twice. Usually a change at the northern end and another at the southern end. My boss who understood nothing about planning made me redo my plan five times. He imposed unrealistic conditions like all changes within a Community Board  be done at the same time. That would have meant unnecessary expense as virtually every changed route would have had to undergo changes six different times. It was totally unworkable. 

Needless to say, I was removed from the project because we could not agree. The person who took over produced a 20 page final report which had a few proposals and several hundred pages of tables to give it some weight. The reports conclusion was the MTA didn’t have the budget to proceed with any of the recommendations. That was $6 million down the drain. The other borough studies at the time cost another $15 million and resulted in two Staten Island bus route changes. That’s how the MTA wastes their money. 

[Future ENY OP]

3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

There is no way they can do Brooklyn and Queens at the same time. It isn't even possible to do Brooklyn or Queens all at once. Queens would have to be done in at least three parts. Brooklyn would also have to be done in stages.

They see the problems as a way to cut service, not improve it. The way they now see it, since Covid has reduced patronage by 40 percent, these proposals will have to have 40 percent less service. That means about 40 percent fewer routes with greater spacing between routes and wider spaced routes. I bet routes like the B52 will disappear since there are parallel routes a quarter mile away. They will again try to eliminate the B25 because of the subway. Smith Street B57 will also go. They may straighten out Ft Hamilton Pkway and 13th Ave which may be the only good coming out of these proposals. 

Personally, I cannot see the 52 losing Downtown, Bed-Stuy to Ridgewood Service.  I wouldn't want to deal with a infrequent B38 and B54 in those areas. The TA needs to better modify central Brooklyn service, but don't eliminate the routes. I know these re-designs are about cost savings, but to what expense if your going to eliminate the B25. 1/2 those stations aren't ADA compliant and the B52 there are no train stations in the immediate area of the B52.  I could really see central brooklyn really getting messed up in the re-design plan.

[B35 via Church]

On 8/27/2021 at 7:34 AM, MysteriousBtrain said:

On a different topic, I have a theory which is they want both the Brooklyn and Queens redesigns to start at the same time since there are new queens routes overlapping old Brooklyn routes.

While plausible a theory, at the end of the day, I don't think it makes a bit of difference to these clowns....

15 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

Isn't the Q59 untouched too?

14 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Same situation as the other routes, looks like a minor change with Williamsburg. Q24 and Q54-59 look similar or nearly unchanged.

Yeah, difference b/w the QT59 & the Q59 routing-wise (in Brooklyn) is that the QT59 parallels the Q54 to WBP... They have the current Q59 routing north of Grand st. & west of WBP eliminated.

14 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

I could see the B23 coming back as the 13th/14th Avenues bus with the B16 staying on Fort Hamilton Parkway the full length. Would be nice if it went all the way down to the VA Hospital or even Bay Ridge.

I don't see a 16th av. route coming back either.... If they do conjure up a 13th/14th av. route, they'd probably run it b/w VA Hospital & Church av & run it on shit headways... If said route is to run to Bay Ridge - 95th  or w/e, I especially see the 18th av. route being cut back back to 86th st (I say especially, b/c I believe that's going to happen regardless).... Speaking of which, I think the B8 is going to be split - How, is the question....

I'd be shocked if they don't straighten out service along Ft. Hamilton Pkwy.

3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

There is no way they can do Brooklyn and Queens at the same time. It isn't even possible to do Brooklyn or Queens all at once. Queens would have to be done in at least three parts. Brooklyn would also have to be done in stages.

They see the problems as a way to cut service, not improve it. The way they now see it, since Covid has reduced patronage by 40 percent, these proposals will have to have 40 percent less service. That means about 40 percent fewer routes with greater spacing between routes and wider spaced routes. I bet routes like the B52 will disappear since there are parallel routes a quarter mile away. They will again try to eliminate the B25 because of the subway. Smith Street B57 will also go. They may straighten out Ft Hamilton Pkwy and 13th Ave which may be the only good coming out of these proposals. 

Moreso than Queens anyway, I'd say it's possible to do Brooklyn in one shot.... To be clear, when I say "one shot", I obviously don't mean something stupid like full completion of a redrawn network in a day or so, but with the mindset that the whole entire borough can be pondered & visualized & an effective network can be formulated (without having to break down the borough in segments or whatever to accomplish the same end goal)...

2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Basically, I asked the question of which routes are considered as part of the Brooklyn redesign, and which routes are considered as part of the Queens redesign, and the answer was "the Brooklyn redesign is the 6 Transit depots [Ulmer Park, Gleason, ENY, Flatbush, Grand Avenue, and Fresh Pond] and Spring Creek". But at the same time, they will be coordinating with the Queens redesign planners to make sure everything is cohesive (and considering that Brooklyn only lags Queens by six months, I'm willing to bet that we'll see the final plan for both before either one is implemented, and then the question will be how exactly they will phase in the implementation).

Separate of the current borough prefixes each route currently has, I don't get what you were trying to gain clarity on... Rather than trying to answer that question as asked (I actually like the way the question was answered, so credit given there), I would've asked you a follow-up question, similar to the one I'm posing to you now....

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

...But studying or making changes only within single depots which is what I thought you were saying would be ridiculous.

I thought he meant that the MTA would look at the where the depots are physically situated, and then go about drawing up a network primarily based on that (in other words, being hyperfocused on DH mileage).... Either way, it would be ridiculous....

31 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Personally, I cannot see the 52 losing Downtown, Bed-Stuy to Ridgewood Service.  I wouldn't want to deal with a infrequent B38 and B54 in those areas. The TA needs to better modify central Brooklyn service, but don't eliminate the routes. I know these re-designs are about cost savings, but to what expense if your going to eliminate the B25. 1/2 those stations aren't ADA compliant and the B52 there are no train stations in the immediate area of the B52.  I could really see central brooklyn really getting messed up in the re-design plan.

I'm inclined to concur with that sentiment of his.... Generally speaking, I don't see them retaining the amount of Downtown Brooklyn - Ridgewood routes that there currently are..

Edited August 28, 2021 by B35 via Church
split post...

[Future ENY OP]

12 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

I'm inclined to concur with that sentiment of his.... Generally speaking, I don't see them retaining the amount of Downtown Brooklyn - Ridgewood routes that there currently are..

Here's my general issue with the Downtown to Ridgewood services. If your going to eliminate Halsey service to Ridgewood and Gates service to Ridgewood where would those folks flock to. There are some pretty long blocks in bed-stuy I wouldn't want to walk for the B38 or the other end for the B54. Unless you want to shorten the B26 to Halsey and the B52 to Gates than Bushwick and Ridgewood are out of bus service that would give direct access to Downtown. The B60 on Wilson does nothing for the general area of bushwick if you ask me. Its forcing those riders to the to Broadway Jct and forget the B20 . You need those crosstown buses. To an extent the 26, 52  complement a balance in some ways in the areas of Bushwick and Ridgewood to have direct Downtown Brooklyn service. 

Edited August 28, 2021 by Future ENY OP

[checkmatechamp13]

55 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Separate of the current borough prefixes each route currently has, I don't get what you were trying to gain clarity on... Rather than trying to answer that question as asked (I actually like the way the question was answered, so credit given there), I would've asked you a follow-up question, similar to the one I'm posing to you now....

Basically, the thing that drew my attention was the fact that the QT5 is supposedly replacing the Q8 and B15...so the obvious question is, since the one sole aspect of the B15 in Queens is its connection to JFK, and that's being "replaced" by route to Jamaica, what is covering the Brooklyn-bound JFK riders? I remembered this phrase from the Queens Existing Conditions Report (page 104 of 257).

Quote

The scope of the Queens Bus Network Redesign includes all routes that touch Queens. Included are all “Q” local, limited, and SBS routes, “QM” and “X” express routes operating in Queens; 13 local Brooklyn routes with a “B” designation running near Queens or into Queens; one “BM” express bus that runs in Queens; and a Manhattan SBS route than runs in Queens. This makes a total of 144 routes that are included in this analysis.

So in other words, I was asking where the rest of the "B" routes were (B13, B15, B20, B38), which led me to ask that question.

[BrooklynBus]

The only way Brooklyn could be done all at once is by doing a half ass job and not all the changes that are needed.

The reason why I predicted the B52 for elimination and not one of the others is that they have been favoring the B38, by giving it Limited service and having the SBS routes crossing it stopping by the B38 and not the B52 to further encourage use of the B38 to weaken the B52. I also predict they will cut the B49 at Foster Avenue and run all the B44s on Nostrand Rogers. The B49 will lose a third of its riders, and then they will cut service to every 20 minutes as well as eliminating half the bus stops to encourage riders to take the train instead. This is their ideas of “improvements”. 

[BrooklynBus]

4 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Basically, the thing that drew my attention was the fact that the QT5 is supposedly replacing the Q8 and B15...so the obvious question is, since the one sole aspect of the B15 in Queens is its connection to JFK, and that's being "replaced" by route to Jamaica, what is covering the Brooklyn-bound JFK riders? I remembered this phrase from the Queens Existing Conditions Report (page 104 of 257).

So in other words, I was asking where the rest of the "B" routes were (B13, B15, B20, B38), which led me to ask that question.

I think when they mentioned the B routes touching Queens they were only referring to changes as it affected Queens, not other changes to these routes in Brooklyn. As far as the B15, my guess is that they will just cut it so you would have to transfer to get to JFK. Of course that means that anyone already transferring will require three buses. They will dismiss that saying something like less than half transfer so it’s insignificant.

That’s the perfect way to ruin a system by making more people transfer instead of trying to reduce the number of transfers required. 

[B35 via Church]

On 8/26/2021 at 11:25 PM, Q43LTD said:

There is that QT4 route in the Queens redesign. Maybe the 57 gets eliminated entirely? If the B75 is brought back to do Downtown Brooklyn and Red Hook, I would have the B77 end at the former 75 terminal in Park Slope

Let's talk about it.

If Flushing av. is left with only the QT4 (and the B62 is concurrently scrapped for the QT1), I would have a local route run b/w 5th/10th (terminal of the old B77) & Woodhull Hospital... Combination of [the B61 b/w 5th av & Downtown Brooklyn] + [the B62 b/w Downtown Brooklyn & Classon av], then an eastward diversion along Park, en route to the hospital...

Flushing av. east of Broadway would be left with the QT4, 9th st east of 5th av would be served by a route formed from a split of the B68 (more on this shortly), and Court/Smith sts. south of Atlantic av. would be left with nothing... The savings from the latter (and other savings from alterations to bus routes city-wide I would make) would go towards that B71+ proposal/route (only thing with that is, I wouldn't run it to the Brooklyn Children's Museum, but down to Prospect Park instead),... Quite frankly, I'm of the belief that Cobble Hill & Carroll Gdns. patrons would value something like a B71+ more, than a bus running down to an IKEA... While I will say the B57 is valued more than the B75 ever was when it existed in that part of Brooklyn in question, the B57 (all things considered) still isn't nearly as valued as the B67/69 (even though the MTA f**ked things up) along 7th, the B63 along 5th, and the B61 in Red Hook proper..

In plain english, folks along 7th are more prone to taking a bus than folks along Smith/Court are.... In terms of appeal, 7th also has more going for it than Smith/Court (although the latter has bridged the gap exponentially in the last decade or so - because all things considered, I remember when Smith/Court used to be pretty... dead... While this is no fault of the B75 per se, it most certainly hampered any growth the route could've attained)....

There is this train of thought that a few ppl. have that the B68 should run to Red Hook to take over most of the B61's duties in Park Slope.... Considering the portion of the routing b/w Brighton Beach & Coney Island, I wouldn't bother - even though the B68 has a tendency to die at Church... Instead, due north, I would truncate/divert the B68 to Church av with the B35 local & I'd carve a route to run b/w Cortelyou/Flatbush (old B23 terminal) & the Red Hook IKEA to take over the B61's stint east of 5th & the B68 in Windsor Terrace....

I'll draw a map of what I'm mentioning shortly.

6 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Here's my general issue with the Downtown to Ridgewood services. If your going to eliminate Halsey service to Ridgewood and Gates service to Ridgewood where would those folks flock to. There are some pretty long blocks in bed-stuy I wouldn't want to walk for the B38 or the other end for the B54. Unless you want to shorten the B26 to Halsey and the B52 to Gates than Bushwick and Ridgewood are out of bus service that would give direct access to Downtown. The B60 on Wilson does nothing for the general area of bushwick if you ask me. Its forcing those riders to the to Broadway Jct and forget the B20 . You need those crosstown buses. To an extent the 26, 52  complement a balance in some ways in the areas of Bushwick and Ridgewood to have direct Downtown Brooklyn service. 

I didn't see him mention eliminating Halsey st. service.... Regardless, the basic ploy by the MTA is to induce xfers... As in, have people taking some other route before embarking on whichever Downtown - Ridgewood route they'd have left....

The rest of your post, you're preaching to the choir AFAIC....

4 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The only way Brooklyn could be done all at once is by doing a half ass job and not all the changes that are needed.

....if your capabilities are limited.

7 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Basically, the thing that drew my attention was the fact that the QT5 is supposedly replacing the Q8 and B15...so the obvious question is, since the one sole aspect of the B15 in Queens is its connection to JFK, and that's being "replaced" by route to Jamaica, what is covering the Brooklyn-bound JFK riders? I remembered this phrase from the Queens Existing Conditions Report (page 104 of 257).

So in other words, I was asking where the rest of the "B" routes were (B13, B15, B20, B38), which led me to ask that question.

Got it.

You perhaps should've framed the question somehow to include the term interborough (routes)...

[Gotham Bus Co.]

5 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

The way they now see it, since Covid has reduced patronage by 40 percent, these proposals will have to have 40 percent less service. That means about 40 percent fewer routes with greater spacing between routes and wider spaced routes. I bet routes like the B52 will disappear since there are parallel routes a quarter mile away. They will again try to eliminate the B25 because of the subway. Smith Street B57 will also go. They may straighten out Ft Hamilton Pkway and 13th Ave which may be the only good coming out of these proposals. 

 

These are details from the final plan?

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

16 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

Isn't the Q59 untouched too?

 

16 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

I don't remember exactly but let me check...

 

Same situation as the other routes, looks like a minor change with Williamsburg. Q24 and Q54-59 look similar or nearly unchanged.

The Q59 would take the same alignment as the Q54 to/from WBP. In other words, it no longer would take the circulatory route via Metropolitan Ave, Wythe/Kent Aves, and Broadway. Additionally, the Q59 would lose its overnight service. 

[Trainmaster5]

11 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I think when they mentioned the B routes touching Queens they were only referring to changes as it affected Queens, not other changes to these routes in Brooklyn. As far as the B15, my guess is that they will just cut it so you would have to transfer to get to JFK. Of course that means that anyone already transferring will require three buses. They will dismiss that saying something like less than half transfer so it’s insignificant.

That’s the perfect way to ruin a system by making more people transfer instead of trying to reduce the number of transfers required. 

Take a look at the subway forums sometimes. The argument there is about deinterlining vs the present service delivery idea. In other words running more trains along a particular line without realizing that they are forcing riders to transfer to another train or bus which we were taught increases a riders commute. All transfers are a delay by definition where I come from even the necessary ones. My opinion. Carry on.

[BrooklynBus]

17 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

These are details from the final plan?

No. Only the Existing Conditions have been released. These are just my predictions. 

[Future ENY OP]

18 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

The only way Brooklyn could be done all at once is by doing a half ass job and not all the changes that are needed.

The reason why I predicted the B52 for elimination and not one of the others is that they have been favoring the B38, by giving it Limited service and having the SBS routes crossing it stopping by the B38 and not the B52 to further encourage use of the B38 to weaken the B52. I also predict they will cut the B49 at Foster Avenue and run all the B44s on Nostrand Rogers. The B49 will lose a third of its riders, and then they will cut service to every 20 minutes as well as eliminating half the bus stops to encourage riders to take the train instead. This is their ideas of “improvements”. 

1) Again, I cannot see the   trying to eliminate the B52.  First off the B38 doesn't even stop at Ridgewood Terminal, that line goes into Ridgewood- Seneca Ave and Metro Ave. I get what you are saying with regards to patronage for the 38. However, that shouldn't warrant elimination for the 52. Those 2 sectors don't operate the same. The worse I could probably see is the 52 being cut to Gates/Ralph/Broadway and discontinue Bushwick and Ridgewood service for the B38.

2) Are we talking about the B49 between Foster Ave to Bed-Stuy?  Also, do you think the B44 should lose NY Avenue service at the expense to having locals and SBS on Rogers? and how do you address Bedford Avenue bus service?

[BrooklynBus]

2 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

1) Again, I cannot see the   trying to eliminate the B52.  First off the B38 doesn't even stop at Ridgewood Terminal, that line goes into Ridgewood- Seneca Ave and Metro Ave. I get what you are saying with regards to patronage for the 38. However, that shouldn't warrant elimination for the 52. Those 2 sectors don't operate the same. The worse I could probably see is the 52 being cut to Gates/Ralph/Broadway and discontinue Bushwick and Ridgewood service for the B38.

2) Are we talking about the B49 between Foster Ave to Bed-Stuy?  Also, do you think the B44 should lose NY Avenue service at the expense to having locals and SBS on Rogers? and how do you address Bedford Avenue bus service?

1) I don’t think the B52 should be eliminated or cut. 

2) Yes that part of the B49. I think all B44s should run on Nostrand Rogers and alternative NY Ave service should be provided south of Empire Blvd with a rerouted B43 to Kings County Hospital. South of that there should be a route on NY Ave that shifts over to Albany Avenue as I proposed in my redesign plan. 

[B35 via Church]

21 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

On 8/26/2021 at 11:25 PM, Q43LTD said:

There is that QT4 route in the Queens redesign. Maybe the 57 gets eliminated entirely? If the B75 is brought back to do Downtown Brooklyn and Red Hook, I would have the B77 end at the former  75 terminal in Park Slope

Let's talk about it.

If Flushing av. is left with only the QT4 (and the B62 is concurrently scrapped for the QT1), I would have a local route run b/w 5th/10th (terminal of the old B77) & Woodhull Hospital... Combination of [the B61 b/w 5th av & Downtown Brooklyn] + [the B62 b/w Downtown Brooklyn & Classon av], then an eastward diversion along Park, en route to the hospital...

Flushing av. east of Broadway would be left with the QT4, 9th st east of 5th av would be served by a route formed from a split of the B68 (more on this shortly), and Court/Smith sts. south of Atlantic av. would be left with nothing... The savings from the latter (and other savings from alterations to bus routes city-wide I would make) would go towards that B71+ proposal/route (only thing with that is, I wouldn't run it to the Brooklyn Children's Museum, but down to Prospect Park instead),... Quite frankly, I'm of the belief that Cobble Hill & Carroll Gdns. patrons would value something like a B71+ more, than a bus running down to an IKEA... While I will say the B57 is valued more than the B75 ever was when it existed in that part of Brooklyn in question, the B57 (all things considered) still isn't nearly as valued as the B67/69 (even though the MTA f**ked things up) along 7th, the B63 along 5th, and the B61 in Red Hook proper..

In plain english, folks along 7th are more prone to taking a bus than folks along Smith/Court are.... In terms of appeal, 7th also has more going for it than Smith/Court (although the latter has bridged the gap exponentially in the last decade or so - because all things considered, I remember when Smith/Court used to be pretty... dead... While this is no fault of the B75 per se, it most certainly hampered any growth the route could've attained)....

There is this train of thought that a few ppl. have that the B68 should run to Red Hook to take over most of the B61's duties in Park Slope.... Considering the portion of the routing b/w Brighton Beach & Coney Island, I wouldn't bother - even though the B68 has a tendency to die at Church... Instead, due north, I would truncate/divert the B68 to Church av with the B35 local & I'd carve a route to run b/w Cortelyou/Flatbush (old B23 terminal) & the Red Hook IKEA to take over the B61's stint east of 5th & the B68 in Windsor Terrace....

I'll draw a map of what I'm mentioning shortly.

 ...and Here is said map in question.... It features 4 routes & not every layer is shown (you'll have to select/deselect the route/layer you want to see)... This is done for clarity purposes, as there is overlap.... Both directions are drawn for each route.

Again, this is to portray what I'd do if the MTA decides to eliminate the [B62 for the QT1] & the [B57 for the QT4].

 

3 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

Again, I cannot see the   trying to eliminate the B52.  First off the B38 doesn't even stop at Ridgewood Terminal, that line goes into Ridgewood- Seneca Ave and Metro Ave. I get what you are saying with regards to patronage for the 38. However, that shouldn't warrant elimination for the 52. Those 2 sectors don't operate the same. The worse I could probably see is the 52 being cut to Gates/Ralph/Broadway and discontinue Bushwick and Ridgewood service for the B38.

I can see the B26 & the B52 getting consolidated somehow & I can also see one of the B38's branches getting eliminated... If the Met. av branch goes, that's going to free up BPH for the Seneca branch (even if all the resources for the Met. av branch doesn't go towards the Seneca branch).... OTOH, if the Seneca branch goes, the B38 overall is going to see a noticeable decrease in service, as I don't see close to most of the BPH dedicated to the Seneca branch being doled out to the Met. av branch... Quite frankly, the Seneca branch of the B38 in Ridgewood garners more patronage than any one of the Downtown - Ridgewood routes individually at or around Ridgewood terminal (which includes the B52)... This isn't to say that the B52 SHOULD get eliminated.... You've been paying attention to these redesigns, so you know they're all in with this frequency vs. coverage shit....

Something else I believe they're going to look into, is the sheer number of BPH operating in/out of Ridgewood Terminal itself... Unlike Jackson Heights patrons that are vociferously fighting for the routes serving Moore terminal. Ridgewood patrons have been complaining about the amt. of buses clogging up their streets for decades now & this is the perfect opportunity for the MTA to address it - especially since that Ridgewood's gained an immense amount of clout over the years now.... I want to see how far they're going to go with decreasing the amt. of buses entering/leaving Ridgewood Terminal... Cumulatively speaking, Ridgewood itself does not warrant all that service...

If the MTA does nothing with any of the Brooklyn routes serving Ridgewood Terminal, I'm going to pay close attention to Queens CB5 (who's going to be up in arms over such a decision) & Brooklyn CB4 (who's going to favor such a decision).... Believe it or not, the former of the two CB's care less about the (horse that is the) Q58 & much more about the Q55 - both of which appear to be kept serving Ridgewood Term., so no harm, no foul as far as that goes....

Edited August 29, 2021 by B35 via Church

[Lawrence St]

I was bored and decided to start doing a redesign of my own;

Opinions? 

[Future ENY OP]

1 minute ago, Lawrence St said:

I was bored and decided to start doing a redesign of my own;

Opinions? 

The B68 to KCC isn't really a bad idea.  How would this be marketed? 

I see you have the 49 ending at Stillwell replacing the portion of the B68.  (explain further on this logic)

Unless the 49 ends at Foster/Flatbush than 49 to CI is essentially dead on arrival.  Personally, in the last couple of posts there's a notion about reducing the 49 service.

How does Bedford Avenue service gets addressed?

[Lawrence St]

5 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

The B68 to KCC isn't really a bad idea.  How would this be marketed? 

It would promote more usage to KCC as well as reduce an unnecessary transfer. The B68 would only run to KCC on weekdays, othertimes ending at Brighton Beach.

Quote

see you have the 49 ending at Stillwell replacing the portion of the B68.  (explain further on this logic)

Honestly I'd get rid of that portion entirely, but some people still use it as an alternative to the for whatever reason that is. There's also no suitable place to end the B49 there without causing an issue to the B68.

Quote

Unless the 49 ends at Foster/Flatbush than 49 to CI is essentially dead on arrival.  Personally, in the last couple of posts there's a notion about reducing the 49 service.

See above. Perhaps rerouting it to Knapp St would be better.

Quote

How does Bedford Avenue service gets addressed?

Nothing, the B4 now continues on Neptune instead of doing that un-needed detour around Sheepshead Bay.

[Future ENY OP]

8 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

It would promote more usage to KCC as well as reduce an unnecessary transfer. The B68 would only run to KCC on weekdays, othertimes ending at Brighton Beach.

Honestly I'd get rid of that portion entirely, but some people still use it as an alternative to the for whatever reason that is. There's also no suitable place to end the B49 there without causing an issue to the B68.

See above. Perhaps rerouting it to Knapp St would be better.

Nothing, the B4 now continues on Neptune instead of doing that un-needed detour around Sheepshead Bay.

I should been a bit more specific on the Bedford Avenue service (for the B49), Not for the B4..

I currently live on the line. First off the line sucks with it's 12-15 min headways during rush hours. Sheepshead Bay, Midwood needs adequate bus service. I wouldn't advise anyone taking the to justify an alternative.

[Lawrence St]

7 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

I should been a bit more specific on the Bedford Avenue service (for the B49), Not for the B4..

I currently live on the line. First off the line sucks with it's 12-15 min headways during rush hours. Sheepshead Bay, Midwood needs adequate bus service. I wouldn't advise anyone taking the to justify an alternative.

Then the B49 to Coney Island would be better. I would have buses depart in-between  departures.

And the Bedford Av service is eliminated from the B49.

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

I was bored and decided to start doing a redesign of my own;

Opinions? 

- I will admit having the B49 take over the B68 b/w Brighton Beach & CI is original.... That said, while it would make the B49 more useful, it would make the B68 a little less useful... The (older) people that use the B68 & the B82 interchangeably b/w CI & Kings Hwy/CI av would all take the B82.... While you never state how often those part time B68's would run to KCC, I would still have most (if not all) B68 service in a network scenario like this terminating at CI av/Brighton Beach av... SB buses would go CI av - Neptune - West End - Oriental - Corbin - Brighton Beach av, then hang that right turn on CI Av. to stand (terminate)...

- The B64 runs like hot garbage & is no replacement whatsoever for the B74... That would have more people unfortunately gunning for the B36 out there.... Adding more service for the CI folks for a B64 of sorts won't do the trick either, as it would overserve the rest of the route... That's the problem with that.

- Lol.... It's far from an unneeded detour (as you put it), it's downright absurd to have B4's bypassing the subway station... That's a major ridership generator for Sheepshead patrons east of the subway! You're not going to get people to walk up from Emmons either, so that's out....

Edited August 30, 2021 by B35 via Church

[Lawrence St]

18 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

- I will admit having the B49 take over the B68 b/w Brighton Beach & CI is original.... That said, while it would make the B49 more useful, it would make the B68 a little less useful... The (older) people that use the B68 & the B82 interchangeably b/w CI & Kings Hwy/CI av would all take the B82.... While you never state how often those part time B68's would run to KCC, I would still have most (if not all) B68 service in a network scenario like this terminating at CI av/Brighton Beach av... SB buses would go CI av - Neptune - West End - Oriental - Corbin - Brighton Beach av, then hang that right turn on CI Av. to stand (terminate)...

- The B64 runs like hot garbage & is no replacement whatsoever for the B74... That would have more people unfortunately gunning for the B36 out there.... Adding more service for the CI folks for a B64 of sorts won't do the trick either, as it would overserve the rest of the route... That's the problem with that.

- Lol.... It's far from an unneeded detour (as you put it), it's downright absurd to have B4's bypassing the subway station... That's a major ridership generator for Sheepshead patrons east of the subway! You're not going to get people to walk up from Emmons either, so that's out....

For your last point, isn't there an entrance/exit a block away from Brighton Beach that people can still use to transfer to the B4?

The B64 would alternate between Coney Island & 37th St so it's not getting overserved.

The B68 would run to KCC every 24 minutes during non rush hours and every 12 minutes during rush hours, and 30 minutes during off-peak.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Lawrence St

[Future ENY OP]

51 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Then the B49 to Coney Island would be better. I would have buses depart in-between  departures.

And the Bedford Av service is eliminated from the B49.

Where would those patrons flock to?  As far as I know you are leaving Bedford Avenue with no bus service at all between Franklin and Flatbush/Foster.

Everything isn't dependent on the B44, and the rest of the crosstown buses btwn Crown Heights & Flatbush.

[Future ENY OP]

36 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

- I will admit having the B49 take over the B68 b/w Brighton Beach & CI is original.... That said, while it would make the B49 more useful, it would make the B68 a little less useful... The (older) people that use the B68 & the B82 interchangeably b/w CI & Kings Hwy/CI av would all take the B82.... While you never state how often those part time B68's would run to KCC, I would still have most (if not all) B68 service in a network scenario like this terminating at CI av/Brighton Beach av... SB buses would go CI av - Neptune - West End - Oriental - Corbin - Brighton Beach av, then hang that right turn on CI Av. to stand (terminate)...

- The B64 runs like hot garbage & is no replacement whatsoever for the B74... That would have more people unfortunately gunning for the B36 out there.... Adding more service for the CI folks for a B64 of sorts won't do the trick either, as it would overserve the rest of the route... That's the problem with that.

- Lol.... It's far from an unneeded detour (as you put it), it's downright absurd to have B4's bypassing the subway station... That's a major ridership generator for Sheepshead patrons east of the subway! You're not going to get people to walk up from Emmons either, so that's out....

The 49 to CI is not a bad idea at all.  However, it's the rest of the 49 service i'm a bit concerned about as the route is a major generator along central brooklyn.  Personally, a Bed-stuy to Coney Island and some bus stop spacing can work with some modifications to the 49 Limited. However, as one person mentioned to eliminate Bedford Ave service between Crown Heights and Flatbush.  (How does this issue get addressed) and I don't want to hear about the B44 and the and the B41.

Coney Island needs a complete overhaul. Personally, I'd extend the mermaid avenue (B74) at least to Sheepshead Bay via Emmons/Neptune to Knapp Street.

[B35 via Church]

5 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

For your last point, isn't there an entrance/exit a block away from Brighton Beach that people can still use to transfer to the B4?

The B64 would alternate between Coney Island & 37th St so it's not getting overserved.

The B68 would run to KCC every 24 minutes during non rush hours and every 12 minutes during rush hours, and 30 minutes during off-peak.

-  IDK what entrance/exit you're referring to, but the B4 (as you have it drawn) would not serve the Brighton line whatsoever...

- What do you mean "alternate between Coney Island & 37th St"? It's all Coney Island... Regardless, the B74 warrants more service than the B64 offers... Alternating trips won't solve much of anything down there.... Never understood this fixation from as many people that want to combine the B74 with *something*.... B64 & B74 should remain as two separate services...

- Alright.

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

Honestly I'd get rid of that portion entirely, but some people still use it as an alternative to the for whatever reason that is. There's also no suitable place to end the B49 there without causing an issue to the B68.

Lot of that ridership along Brighton Beach Av on the B68 is of elderly people & neither Ocean Pkwy nor Brighton Beach subway stations have elevators.

2 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

The 49 to CI is not a bad idea at all.  However, it's the rest of the 49 service i'm a bit concerned about as the route is a major generator along central brooklyn.  Personally, a Bed-stuy to Coney Island and some bus stop spacing can work with some modifications to the 49 Limited. However, as one person mentioned to eliminate Bedford Ave service between Crown Heights and Flatbush.  (How does this issue get addressed) and I don't want to hear about the B44 and the and the B41.

Coney Island needs a complete overhaul. Personally, I'd extend the mermaid avenue (B74) at least to Sheepshead Bay via Emmons/Neptune to Knapp Street.

You'd have to ask him about justifying taking buses off Bedford... I don't agree with that either.

As for the B49 south of Flatbush (the neighborhood), the B49 is hurting for ridership along Ocean av. & for the life of me, I will never understand why it continues to crawl along Ocean - even during the periods when there's little traffic to speak of... That crawling has been a problem along that route for decades now.