Brooklyn Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[B35 via Church]

On 2/26/2023 at 9:54 PM, SubBus said:

Yeah, was in the area yesterday.  Traffic was light for a Saturday afternoon, well at least compared to Utica/St. Johns a few blocks east...

Anyhow, the  did their thing on that two block stretch of St. Johns as usual...

Is it me, or the one block stretch of St. Johns between Brooklyn and NY Aves a different world from the rest of St. Johns Pl?

Those east-west blocks in that part of the neighborhood are all like one big blur to me, so if that particular block you mention is any different, I wouldn't know it....

[BrooklynBus]

https://bklyner.com/brooklyn-bus-network-redesign-faces-objections-from-every-community-board/

[EastFlatbushLarry]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

https://bklyner.com/brooklyn-bus-network-redesign-faces-objections-from-every-community-board/

I'm so glad it was pointed out that the B2 would be eliminated without any increase to service provided by the B100. the lame excuse that the 100 is "underutilized" and can absorb B2 ridership is a disaster waiting to happen, regardless of how stubborn or proactive they are in providing service on fillmore, which apparently won't be by much since they're clearly keeping service at spring creek depot (which is another topic for another time).

[MysteriousBtrain]

3 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

https://bklyner.com/brooklyn-bus-network-redesign-faces-objections-from-every-community-board/

Most of the stuff I do agree with, but sometimes I think people talk without understanding things. There's no point of the B15 to JFK if the B55 comes to fruition. Most of the JFK ridership comes from south of the . Maybe what they could look into is having short turn buses that go from JFK to New lots on the / but that's about it. I feel like this is the one proposal that will still like the M125/Bx15 changes (which was in part due to extreme traffic conditions on 3 Av/149 and the two bridges. 

[BrooklynBus]

3 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Most of the stuff I do agree with, but sometimes I think people talk without understanding things. There's no point of the B15 to JFK if the B55 comes to fruition. Most of the JFK ridership comes from south of the . Maybe what they could look into is having short turn buses that go from JFK to New lots on the / but that's about it. I feel like this is the one proposal that will still like the M125/Bx15 changes (which was in part due to extreme traffic conditions on 3 Av/149 and the two bridges. 

I disagree. There are roughly 12,000 daily B15 riders a day. That means that at least several thousand riders a day use the B15 to the airport and get on before the terminus of the 3. These people may have chosen their job at JFK because of a direct bus route. It would be unfair to make them have to change buses especially at off hours when they could be waiting up to an hour for a bus. Even if it’s only 1,000 a day, that is not an insignificant number. 

[checkmatechamp13]

2 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I disagree. There are roughly 12,000 daily B15 riders a day. That means that at least several thousand riders a day use the B15 to the airport and get on before the terminus of the 3. These people may have chosen their job at JFK because of a direct bus route. It would be unfair to make them have to change buses especially at off hours when they could be waiting up to an hour for a bus. Even if it’s only 1,000 a day, that is not an insignificant number. 

For starters, it's points northwest of East 98th Street, which is pretty far west of the  at New Lots/Livonia. The B15 and B35 even run together for the few blocks near Brookdale Hospital. 

We'd need to do a generalized origin-destination survey. For a westbound trip, how many riders board west of the Pink Houses (who would continue to use the B15), and how many riders alight east of East 98th Street (who would be served by the B55)? Subtract both of those groups out, add back those who are double-counted and you have your number of riders who ride from JFK (and the Linden Blvd/79th Street stop) to points west of East 98th Street. 

There might be people who chose their job (or vice versa, their dwelling) based on the one-seat ride, but I don't think that alone is enough of a reason to leave a route as-is. It's not as if they're being completely stranded. (Plus, for that matter, they may be looking to move or change jobs anyway...given that this is still at least a year for implementation, maybe somebody will take this proposal into consideration when they pick their next job or residence...and that works both ways...they might just decide to move to a location along the B55 and call it a day). 

[BrooklynBus]

10 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

For starters, it's points northwest of East 98th Street, which is pretty far west of the  at New Lots/Livonia. The B15 and B35 even run together for the few blocks near Brookdale Hospital. 

We'd need to do a generalized origin-destination survey. For a westbound trip, how many riders board west of the Pink Houses (who would continue to use the B15), and how many riders alight east of East 98th Street (who would be served by the B55)? Subtract both of those groups out, add back those who are double-counted and you have your number of riders who ride from JFK (and the Linden Blvd/79th Street stop) to points west of East 98th Street. 

There might be people who chose their job (or vice versa, their dwelling) based on the one-seat ride, but I don't think that alone is enough of a reason to leave a route as-is. It's not as if they're being completely stranded. (Plus, for that matter, they may be looking to move or change jobs anyway...given that this is still at least a year for implementation, maybe somebody will take this proposal into consideration when they pick their next job or residence...and that works both ways...they might just decide to move to a location along the B55 and call it a day). 

I am not saying the B55 is a bad idea or it is not a better route than the B15, but where is there a rule that given the importance of JFK, that Brooklyn can only have one route to the airport? And if you are forcing people to transfer when headways are very infrequent, yes that is stranding them. And I am sure that given the numbers of B15 riders, there has to be at least 1,000 per day who fit in to this category and at least several hundred a day you would be stranding. 

[B35 via Church]

17 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I'm so glad it was pointed out that the B2 would be eliminated without any increase to service provided by the B100. the lame excuse that the 100 is "underutilized" and can absorb B2 ridership is a disaster waiting to happen, regardless of how stubborn or proactive they are in providing service on fillmore, which apparently won't be by much since they're clearly keeping service at spring creek depot (which is another topic for another time).

While neither of what I'm about to say in this paragraph has anything to do with this proposed B2/B100 combination or whatever, while I wouldn't necessarily say that the B100 is underutilized, I do think the B100 has more potential.... IMO, if they can cut back B82's from CI/Mermaid bus loop to have them ending at Ulmer Park depot, I'd much rather side with cutting B82's (the locals, anyway) back to CI av/Quentin & have the B100 ending at Ulmer Park depot instead.... Of course, I'd still rather have the B82 running to Mermaid bus loop over either of those aforementioned scenarios....

More to the point (regarding the B2) though, yeah, to say that the B100 is underutilized because the B2 runs in close proximity is not only a disaster waiting to happen, it's a bunch of bullshit... The B100 is already a solid route b/w Kings Hwy & Mill Basin.... They're trying to indirectly convey a narrative that the B100 & the B2 are these "underutilized" routes, and if you were to combine them together, it'd be a formidable route.... All that shit is, is code for saving a f***ing buck....

16 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Most of the stuff I do agree with, but sometimes I think people talk without understanding things. There's no point of the B15 to JFK if the B55 comes to fruition. Most of the JFK ridership comes from south of the . Maybe what they could look into is having short turn buses that go from JFK to New lots on the / but that's about it. I feel like this is the one proposal that will still like the M125/Bx15 changes (which was in part due to extreme traffic conditions on 3 Av/149 and the two bridges. 

My basic sentiment regarding the B15 is that there are way too many trips throughout the day running b/w Woodhull Hosp. & JFK, and that the quality of the route is plagued by it.... There's a certain consensus that suggests running LTD's from Woodhull to JFK to cut down on runtime or whatever, but I still believe the route would benefit more from short turns.... You can still have buses running b/w JFK & Woodhull in general, but the number of trips doing that throughout the day should decrease...

Be there as it may, I wouldn't "M125" the B15 either.... That is, (not) have the B15 from Woodhull & the B15 from JFK both end at either New Lots or New Lots .... I think a healthy short turn terminal for the route (from JFK) would to end 'em at St. Johns. or at ENY av.... Or, something else than can be considered, is having short turn B15's continue up Ralph to end at Fulton, instead of (the MTA proposed) extension of the B45 up to Ralph av  .... More B15 riders would stand to benefit from something like that over B45 riders....

To sum it up, I would do away with a] having all B15 trips run from Woodhull Hosp. & b] the setup that has buses, from Woodhull, either running the full route to JFK, or short turning at the movie theater (Drew/Linden)....

9 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

For starters, it's points northwest of East 98th Street, which is pretty far west of the  at New Lots/Livonia. The B15 and B35 even run together for the few blocks near Brookdale Hospital. 

We'd need to do a generalized origin-destination survey. For a westbound trip, how many riders board west of the Pink Houses (who would continue to use the B15), and how many riders alight east of East 98th Street (who would be served by the B55)? Subtract both of those groups out, add back those who are double-counted and you have your number of riders who ride from JFK (and the Linden Blvd/79th Street stop) to points west of East 98th Street....

As a resident of this general part of Brooklyn, you're killing me here... Lol..... It's just simpler to use Church as the reference point.... Look at it this way - from ENY, the B55 & the B15 would diverge at Church....

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about riders continuing to use the B15 b/w that Linden/79th stop & Church av, due to B55's set to running to JFK... Another way of putting that is, I don't remotely see the B55 phasing out the B15 east of Church b/c it'd no longer go to the airport..... Not saying you're doing this, but generally speaking, I know it's easy for folks to get caught up with the B15 being "the airport route", but sometimes we have these discussions where we get too hyperfocused.... That is actually one of the reasons I signed up to Rider Diaries (after years of lurking, before the fact) back in the day; you'd have people that would talk about certain bus routes as if the most glaring aspect/rider pattern of the route was its sole purpose.... Before satellite views of all these maps online (lol), I used to actually ride these things & a lot of what some folks used to say, used to fkn drive me nuts....

I hate even saying this, but regarding NYC buses, I do honestly believe that I played a significant part in having/bringing (others into conveying) nuance into these conversations across these transit forums....

24 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I am not saying the B55 is a bad idea or it is not a better route than the B15, but where is there a rule that given the importance of JFK, that Brooklyn can only have one route to the airport? And if you are forcing people to transfer when headways are very infrequent, yes that is stranding them. And I am sure that given the numbers of B15 riders, there has to be at least 1,000 per day who fit in to this category and at least several hundred a day you would be stranding. 

That point is *whatever* to me, but his point is that the people b/w Church av & New Lots along the current B15 would still have direct bus service to JFK - it just wouldn't be on a "B15", it would be on a "B55".... So the ~1000 people you're referencing, he's saying, would be less....

[BrooklynBus]

31 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

While neither of what I'm about to say in this paragraph has anything to do with this proposed B2/B100 combination or whatever, while I wouldn't necessarily say that the B100 is underutilized, I do think the B100 has more potential.... IMO, if they can cut back B82's from CI/Mermaid bus loop to have them ending at Ulmer Park depot, I'd much rather side with cutting B82's (the locals, anyway) back to CI av/Quentin & have the B100 ending at Ulmer Park depot instead.... Of course, I'd still rather have the B82 running to Mermaid bus loop over either of those aforementioned scenarios....

More to the point (regarding the B2) though, yeah, to say that the B100 is underutilized because the B2 runs in close proximity is not only a disaster waiting to happen, it's a bunch of bullshit... The B100 is already a solid route b/w Kings Hwy & Mill Basin.... They're trying to indirectly convey a narrative that the B100 & the B2 are these "underutilized" routes, and if you were to combine them together, it'd be a formidable route.... All that shit is, is code for saving a f***ing buck....

My basic sentiment regarding the B15 is that there are way too many trips throughout the day running b/w Woodhull Hosp. & JFK, and that the quality of the route is plagued by it.... There's a certain consensus that suggests running LTD's from Woodhull to JFK to cut down on runtime or whatever, but I still believe the route would benefit more from short turns.... You can still have buses running b/w JFK & Woodhull in general, but the number of trips doing that throughout the day should decrease...

Be there as it may, I wouldn't "M125" the B15 either.... That is, (not) have the B15 from Woodhull & the B15 from JFK both end at either New Lots or New Lots .... I think a healthy short turn terminal for the route (from JFK) would to end 'em at St. Johns. or at ENY av.... Or, something else than can be considered, is having short turn B15's continue up Ralph to end at Fulton, instead of (the MTA proposed) extension of the B45 up to Ralph av  .... More B15 riders would stand to benefit from something like that over B45 riders....

To sum it up, I would do away with a] having all B15 trips run from Woodhull Hosp. & b] the setup that has buses, from Woodhull, either running the full route to JFK, or short turning at the movie theater (Drew/Linden)....

As a resident of this general part of Brooklyn, you're killing me here... Lol..... It's just simpler to use Church as the reference point.... Look at it this way - from ENY, the B55 & the B15 would diverge at Church....

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about riders continuing to use the B15 b/w that Linden/79th stop & Church av, due to B55's set to running to JFK... Another way of putting that is, I don't remotely see the B55 phasing out the B15 east of Church b/c it'd no longer go to the airport..... Not saying you're doing this, but generally speaking, I know it's easy for folks to get caught up with the B15 being "the airport route", but sometimes we have these discussions where we get too hyperfocused.... That is actually one of the reasons I signed up to Rider Diaries (after years of lurking, before the fact) back in the day; you'd have people that would talk about certain bus routes as if the most glaring aspect/rider pattern of the route was its sole purpose.... Before satellite views of all these maps online (lol), I used to actually ride these things & a lot of what some folks used to say, used to fkn drive me nuts....

I hate even saying this, but regarding NYC buses, I do honestly believe that I played a significant part in having/bringing (others into conveying) nuance into these conversations across these transit forums....

That point is *whatever* to me, but his point is that the people b/w Church av & New Lots along the current B15 would still have direct bus service to JFK - it just wouldn't be on a "B15", it would be on a "B55".... So the ~1000 people you're referencing, he's saying, would be less....

The B2 is underutilized except for rush hours and always has been especially since many from Southern Brooklyn abandoned Kings Plaza. Your idea to extend the B100 west is good. Similar to my idea to extend the B2 west. Both ideas would strengthen these routes. 

Short turns would benefit many routes. I do not know enough about B15 usage to be specific. 

Even if it’s only a few hundred a day you would be stranding, it is still significant. In any case the MTA has no reason not to provide us with the actual numbers. You can’t do responsible planning without them. 

[B35 via Church]

47 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The B2 is underutilized except for rush hours and always has been especially since many from Southern Brooklyn abandoned Kings Plaza. Your idea to extend the B100 west is good. Similar to my idea to extend the B2 west. Both ideas would strengthen these routes. 

Short turns would benefit many routes. I do not know enough about B15 usage to be specific. 

Even if it’s only a few hundred a day you would be stranding, it is still significant. In any case the MTA has no reason not to provide us with the actual numbers. You can’t do responsible planning without them. 

The B2 is, but again, let's keep it a stack.... They're only saying the B100 is underutilized (knowing that the B2 is already underutilized) to justify combining the two routes...

Yeah, my original/ideal idea was/is to have the B100 run out to Caesars Bay.... Run all the way out to where Bay Pkwy (the street) ends & carve a bus loop over there.... With the changes they made over there now, forget it....

Edited March 18, 2023 by B35 via Church

[BrooklynBus]

A bus loop there would be a great idea.

[checkmatechamp13]

14 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about riders continuing to use the B15 b/w that Linden/79th stop & Church av, due to B55's set to running to JFK... Another way of putting that is, I don't remotely see the B55 phasing out the B15 east of Church b/c it'd no longer go to the airport..... Not saying you're doing this, but generally speaking, I know it's easy for folks to get caught up with the B15 being "the airport route", but sometimes we have these discussions where we get too hyperfocused.... That is actually one of the reasons I signed up to Rider Diaries (after years of lurking, before the fact) back in the day; you'd have people that would talk about certain bus routes as if the most glaring aspect/rider pattern of the route was its sole purpose.... Before satellite views of all these maps online (lol), I used to actually ride these things & a lot of what some folks used to say, used to fkn drive me nuts....

I hate even saying this, but regarding NYC buses, I do honestly believe that I played a significant part in having/bringing (others into conveying) nuance into these conversations across these transit forums...

I agree...I remember one time when an MTA rep tried to act like a know-it-all, talking about how the S93 is "for the college students" (Which would be illegal BTW, since it would be essentially running a subsidized charter service)...coming from the same agency that ended up copy-pasting sections of the old "X" schedules onto the new "SIM" routes when they first came out, because they happened to share the same endpoints...

But yeah, totally agree that each route needs to be analyzed in the context of all of its ridership patterns.

14 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

Even if it’s only a few hundred a day you would be stranding, it is still significant. In any case the MTA has no reason not to provide us with the actual numbers. You can’t do responsible planning without them. 

For starters, stranded means literally unable to get to where you need to go. There's very few cases where people are legitimately "stranded" for trips within New York City.

In any case, the low frequencies only apply during the overnight period. And on top of that, there are alternate routes to the general areas covered by the B15 (the B46 and B47 both connect to the B55, and during overnight hours, the local  connects directly to the Q10, and of course the  ( overnights) and  connect with the B55 and Q10 respectively). That the B46 only runs once per hour overnight is an issue in and of itself that should be rectified...for all riders using it, regardless of whether they connect to the B55 or not.

[NBTA]

Don’t know too much about Brooklyn ridership, but I’m slightly against the B55. How would a B15 Limited/Local be (I would think the local would terminate at Fulton Street on the north end, and the cinemas on the south end)?

[BrooklynBus]

6 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I agree...I remember one time when an MTA rep tried to act like a know-it-all, talking about how the S93 is "for the college students" (Which would be illegal BTW, since it would be essentially running a subsidized charter service)...coming from the same agency that ended up copy-pasting sections of the old "X" schedules onto the new "SIM" routes when they first came out, because they happened to share the same endpoints...

But yeah, totally agree that each route needs to be analyzed in the context of all of its ridership patterns.

For starters, stranded means literally unable to get to where you need to go. There's very few cases where people are legitimately "stranded" for trips within New York City.

In any case, the low frequencies only apply during the overnight period. And on top of that, there are alternate routes to the general areas covered by the B15 (the B46 and B47 both connect to the B55, and during overnight hours, the local  connects directly to the Q10, and of course the  ( overnights) and  connect with the B55 and Q10 respectively). That the B46 only runs once per hour overnight is an issue in and of itself that should be rectified...for all riders using it, regardless of whether they connect to the B55 or not.

Having to wait an hour to transfer is being stranded.

[B35 via Church]

17 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I agree...I remember one time when an MTA rep tried to act like a know-it-all, talking about how the S93 is "for the college students" (Which would be illegal BTW, since it would be essentially running a subsidized charter service)...coming from the same agency that ended up copy-pasting sections of the old "X" schedules onto the new "SIM" routes when they first came out, because they happened to share the same endpoints...

But yeah, totally agree that each route needs to be analyzed in the context of all of its ridership patterns.

The S93 had to be the worst in that category on these forums (here, SC, & RD)... @aemoreira81 back in the day in-particular on here was the worst culprit when it came to that route, with all the ideas he would have (as if it were solely for CSI students).... You yourself would even chime in/correct him (in so many words) that the thing wasn't solely for students....

17 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

For starters, stranded means literally unable to get to where you need to go. There's very few cases where people are legitimately "stranded" for trips within New York City.

In any case, the low frequencies only apply during the overnight period. And on top of that, there are alternate routes to the general areas covered by the B15 (the B46 and B47 both connect to the B55, and during overnight hours, the local  connects directly to the Q10, and of course the  ( overnights) and  connect with the B55 and Q10 respectively). That the B46 only runs once per hour overnight is an issue in and of itself that should be rectified...for all riders using it, regardless of whether they connect to the B55 or not.

11 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

Having to wait an hour to transfer is being stranded.

I've never put any thought into the concept of being stranded being subjective, but what I will say regarding this (interesting) back & forth is that I've never been stranded in NYC.... Pissed that I've had to wait abnormally long for a certain mode, or ended up getting frustrated by waiting for a particular mode to the point where I've ended up taking some other mode, yes... But stranded? Nah..... I don't use that term that loosely.

13 hours ago, NBTA said:

Don’t know too much about Brooklyn ridership, but I’m slightly against the B55. How would a B15 Limited/Local be (I would think the local would terminate at Fulton Street on the north end, and the cinemas on the south end)?

A lot of the Bed-Stuy folks from the north (as in, due south), ride it well past Fulton.... Heading towards Woodhull, Fulton isn't as big of a destination (that you would think it would be, anyway) on the B15 either... Large reason for that is due to the fact that it doesn't connect to the Fulton line (subway).... On top of it, turnover b/w the B15 & B25 isn't all that high.... Way I see it, at that point, you may as well run buses up to the at Broadway (I'm actually inclined to believe that's one of the main reasons why they have all those trips running to Woodhull) once it passes a certain point, due north.... IMO, that point is within the confines of Crown Heights...

Edited March 19, 2023 by B35 via Church

[Lawrence St]

I’d like to know why a Brooklyn-Manhattan route was not considered with this redesign, despite people saying they wanted the B53 back.

[Nova Fly Guy]

On 3/17/2023 at 3:53 PM, MysteriousBtrain said:

Most of the stuff I do agree with, but sometimes I think people talk without understanding things. There's no point of the B15 to JFK if the B55 comes to fruition. Most of the JFK ridership comes from south of the . Maybe what they could look into is having short turn buses that go from JFK to New lots on the / but that's about it. I feel like this is the one proposal that will still like the M125/Bx15 changes (which was in part due to extreme traffic conditions on 3 Av/149 and the two bridges. 

The B15 has unpredictable ridership between Woodhaul & E 98th/Church. The B47 & B65 also don’t help as they are both filter For the  at Sutter-Rutland. There are a good amount of JFK workers North of Fulton but you could take the  which is ADA. 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Nova Fly Guy

[aemoreira81]

On 3/19/2023 at 5:53 PM, Lawrence St said:

I’d like to know why a Brooklyn-Manhattan route was not considered with this redesign, despite people saying they wanted the B53 back.

I have to wonder if the MTA doesn’t want to duplicate the J train fully with a bus route.

[Lawrence St]

4 minutes ago, aemoreira81 said:

I have to wonder if the MTA doesn’t want to duplicate the J train fully with a bus route.

Since when does the  come from southern brooklyn?

[checkmatechamp13]

On 3/19/2023 at 5:53 PM, Lawrence St said:

I’d like to know why a Brooklyn-Manhattan route was not considered with this redesign, despite people saying they wanted the B53 back.

 

6 hours ago, aemoreira81 said:

I have to wonder if the MTA doesn’t want to duplicate the J train fully with a bus route.

 

6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Since when does the  come from southern brooklyn?

Since you mistook the former B51 from Downtown Brooklyn to City Hall with the proposed B53 from Broadway Junction to Sunnyside.

[dkupf]

The B53 is proposed to have overnight service.  This would give the MTA the excuse to cut back the B46 from Williamsburg Bridge Plaza to Woodhull Hospital and the Q24 from Lafayette Ave/Patchen Ave to Broadway Junction.  This opinion could be taken both ways.  In fact, the community is divided on this issue.    The MTA may take advantage of the situation.

But if the B15 is left alone, as requested by the community, there may not be enough room near Woodhull Hospital to effectively turn buses for the B46 Local.  If so, some suggest that the Q33 could absorb, and be linked to, the northern segment of the proposed B53.  But Q33 riders, in Jackson Heights, currently enjoy seamless transferring between the bus and subway.  And this will not be sacrificed.

If it follows the Q32, the MTA would complain about its duplicity with other services.  That is why the B53 may only be the northern segment, with no overnight service.  Greenpoint riders could be shafted.

I hope that this could be resolved.  What do you think?

[checkmatechamp13]

9 minutes ago, dkupf said:

The B53 is proposed to have overnight service.  This would give the MTA the excuse to cut back the B46 from Williamsburg Bridge Plaza to Woodhull Hospital and the Q24 from Lafayette Ave/Patchen Ave to Broadway Junction.  This opinion could be taken both ways.  In fact, the community is divided on this issue.    The MTA may take advantage of the situation.

But if the B15 is left alone, as requested by the community, there may not be enough room near Woodhull Hospital to effectively turn buses for the B46 Local.  If so, some suggest that the Q33 could absorb, and be linked to, the northern segment of the proposed B53.  But Q33 riders, in Jackson Heights, currently enjoy seamless transferring between the bus and subway.  And this will not be sacrificed.

If it follows the Q32, the MTA would complain about its duplicity with other services.  That is why the B53 may only be the northern segment, with no overnight service.  Greenpoint riders could be shafted.

I hope that this could be resolved.  What do you think?

Only the portion from WBP to Broadway Junction (i.e. The section under the  ) would receive overnight service. The corridors where it is the only form of transit would be left without overnight service (similar to the situation with the overnight Bx39). 

The Q33 being extended to Broadway Junction via Sunnyside would be way too long, and there is debate about whether there is even demand between Sunnyside/Greenpoint and Broadway Junction, let alone between Jackson Heights and Broadway Junction.

[BrooklynBus]

I went to the Pop up session yesterday at Sheepshead Bay Station and stayed for the entire three hours. First the team stationed themselves in a corner of the entrance near the employee bathrooms away from all the foot traffic with two signs hanging on the bathroom doors. I asked them to move where they could be more readily seen. So they moved outside the station which was an improvement, but still in effective because of they thousands entering and leaving the station entrance in the three hours, they only were noticed by about 100 people and only about 12 stopped to speak to them. One from Government Relations told me she went to one of the bus stops to speak to 12 more since people weren’t talking to them at the station. She said she met their goal of having two dozen quality conversations at these pop up events. They did spend 20 minutes speaking to some people, but it would have been impossible to explain the plan to them without any handouts such as maps. 

So speaking to 400 riders at these events and another 600 at the virtual workshops, or 1,000 bus riders out of the 625,000 daily Brooklyn bus riders or 0.1% of bus riders is considered effective and adequate public participation. Even if they speak to twice as many riders, that would still be only 0.2%. If one of the goals is to make riders aware of the changes, wouldn’t it make more sense to set up a table on the closed E 15 Street outside the station to distribute several thousand one sheet summaries of the proposals for the area with a map on the reverse? The only handout was the MTA website which doesn’t help seniors who are not computer savvy. They also could have used a megaphone to get people’s attention instead of just waiting to be approached. One was angry at me for criticizing them. So do you really believe they are interested in what you have to say?

What I am asking for really isn’t that difficult. This is what the sheet could have said with a map on the back.

“Brooklyn Bus Redesign highlights for Your Area

Swap of B49 B68 Southern Terminals to the B49 goes to Coney Island and the B68 goes to Manhattan Beach.

Terminating the B44 SBS at Coney Island Hospital following the existing B36 route and no longer serving Emmons Avenue and Knapp St.

Rerouting the B4 around Coney Island Terminal instead of serving 86 St.

Shortening the B82 SBS to 25 Avenue, no longer serving Coney Island.

Rerouting of the B64 from Harway to Cropsey Ave.

Discontinuing the B2 and B49 Limited.

Ending Saturday express bus service.

Elimination of many bus stops.

We would like to know what you think of these ideas or if you have any of your own.

Additional details on our website.”

Is that too much to ask? 

 

[limitednyc]

i was there, i had a long talk with a youmg lady, who seemed to be very verse in the full plan. she took notes on all my concerns about the full plan.  also i relayed ideas i have and a loong standing idea, ie: the b49 straiting and split. and idea for a canarie, spring creek to jfk..

also i asked way there wasn't a pop-up event in williamsburg i was told they are working on that.

 

 

 

 

-

[BrooklynBus]

18 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

i was there, i had a long talk with a youmg lady, who seemed to be very verse in the full plan. she took notes on all my concerns about the full plan.  also i relayed ideas i have and a loong standing idea, ie: the b49 straiting and split. and idea for a canarie, spring creek to jfk..

also i asked way there wasn't a pop-up event in williamsburg i was told they are working on that.

 

 

 

 

-

I assume you spoke to the planner. She took a lot of notes and seemed to care. The other two were from Government Relations. One of those was very angry with me for criticizing them. But what bothered her the most was that I didn’t remember her name from the the dozen of MTA employees who attended the workshops.  She said that said a lot about me. I think it says more about her that she thought it was important.