Brooklyn Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[Nova Fly Guy]

On 5/14/2020 at 5:47 PM, MTADieselBuses said:

Your response here is abridging my actual reply; you are going outside the scope of my reply, with the addition of random generalizations.

I'm not going to waste my time here, I'll keep each response short and sweet.

You're repeating what you've said previously, I already explained this whole B36 and B74 phenomenon. The reason I mentioned Ulmer Park, contrary to what you see it is as, was to hint the fact that the depot can handle extra equipment regardless of its size. Thus making a more serviceable B36 actually possible with the right circumstances.
 

 

We're talking about the B6, I don't know why you're bringing that statistic up. I'd say this is deserving of the irrelevant title.

 

 

The B11, with my proposal, is still going to have that connection..? I rest you said, I response with a hefty 'Ok.'

 

It's my perspective, can't get mad at someone's opinion right? Get some propriety.

 

 

You misinterpreted my usage of 'pivotal'. I was referring to Vanderbilt and Vanderbilt only. I never mentioned the 'B67 being a pivotal giant', with that, I can care less for the rest said as it was said based off a misinterpretation.

 

 

Well assuming you didn't make any counterargument to that B100 justification, I can safely say you do not have anything else to say about that. There are other roads that B41's at layover can take to get back to the main King Plaza terminal? That wouldn't exacerbate anything, it'll give the terminal more breathing room in terms of bus presence.

 

 

For Canarsien very rare will you find anybody that gets on before Remsen going pass the  for Flatbush junction. The B60 is the option for  service as the is about 10-15 vs 25-30 going to Flatbush in Rush Hour or the B17 I almost never seen anybody ride from Rockaway Parkway to Flatbush in the morning for subway service . The problem with the B6 is the streets are narrow and the 40FT are at capacity so more buses is not the answer.

Edited June 21, 2020 by Nova Fly Guy

[Q101 E Midtown]

On 6/7/2020 at 11:18 AM, B61In2002 said:

DOT had to fix the 9 St lift bridge for a few months which caused that, but last time i rode it (which was around 2-3 weeks ago) service was running normally.

 

Personally, I think the Redesign should get rid of a decent number of Bed Stuy routes, namely the 48 and either the 52 or 26 (leaning more towards the 26) or merge some Bed Stuy routes. Theres too much service going through those areas, and it really causes a problem in Downtown Brooklyn and Williamsburg. (If I get flamed for this, oh well)

 

Getting rid of the B52 would force some passengers to head north for the 38, which , eastbound is hindered by Classon, and westbound, gets stalled by traffic from Classon to Nostrand, and sometimes as far back as Tompkins. 

[B61In2002]

1 hour ago, Q101 E Midtown said:

Getting rid of the B52 would force some passengers to head north for the 38, which , eastbound is hindered by Classon, and westbound, gets stalled by traffic from Classon to Nostrand, and sometimes as far back as Tompkins. 

Then provide a merger of the 52 and 26 to give some distance between routes. So many of them are blatant carbon copies of each other.

[Future ENY OP]

On 6/7/2020 at 11:18 AM, B61In2002 said:

Personally, I think the Redesign should get rid of a decent number of Bed Stuy routes, namely the 48 and either the 52 or 26 (leaning more towards the 26) or merge some Bed Stuyroutes. Theres too much service going through those areas, and it really causes a problem in Downtown Brooklyn and Williamsburg. (If I get flamed for this, oh well)

 

Honestly fam.. Leave those Bed-Stuy routes alone.. The 26, 38, 48, 52, 54 all serve different parts of Bed-Stuy. If you eliminate any of those routes than it's going to be hell to get Downtown. The 48 serves as a feeder between all of those routes within bed-stuy for Downtown Brooklyn access. The doesn't perform very well to be a true crosstown-bed stuy train, and for certain neighborhoods you need one of those buses to get to the train on Fulton. So essentially you need all those fore-mentioned buses within Bed-Stuy. So what if they all serve RIdgewood Terminal .  Unless you have a real solution on how to fix the bed-stuy bus network. Don't talk about eliminating the lines.   

[Iron Valiant]

30 minutes ago, B61In2002 said:

Then provide a merger of the 52 and 26 to give some distance between routes. So many of them are blatant carbon copies of each other.

The B26 and 52 are fine the way they are.

[jaf0519]

54 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Honestly fam.. Leave those Bed-Stuy routes alone.. The 26, 38, 48, 52, 54 all serve different parts of Bed-Stuy. If you eliminate any of those routes than it's going to be hell to get Downtown. The 48 serves as a feeder between all of those routes within bed-stuy for Downtown Brooklyn access. The doesn't perform very well to be a true crosstown-bed stuy train, and for certain neighborhoods you need one of those buses to get to the train on Fulton. So essentially you need all those fore-mentioned buses within Bed-Stuy. So what if they all serve RIdgewood Terminal .  Unless you have a real solution on how to fix the bed-stuy bus network. Don't talk about eliminating the lines.   

Even though all these routes play slightly different roles in the neighborhoods they serve, I have a feeling that they, alone with some other routes that are close together will be cut due to “duplication.”

From Flushing Ave to St. John’s Place, a lot of the routes are close together.

This is what I predict the MTA is going to do:

• B57 replaced by QT4 in Queens Bus Redesign 
• B54 kept the same
• B38 Stanhope St branch eliminated and Seneca Ave branch rerouted to Ridgewood Terminal
• B52 eliminated with the portion east of Broadway replaced by a rerouted B47 since Broadway service duplicates the B46, 
• B26 kept
• B25 I feel they will attempt to cut it again like 2010, plus since it is duplicated by the B26,  
• B45 kept only if B25 is eliminated (B65 cut instead)
• B65 kept only if B25 is not eliminated (B45 cut instead)

Plus in other areas:

• I have a feeling that one of the B37 and B63 will get cut
• Plus in the area between Fulton St and Prospect Park, I cannot imagine that the draft will have the B48, B49, B44, and B43 all within a block from each other.

Just like Queens, I think their will be a lot of condensed corridors where a super bus runs on one block instead of four buses on different blocks. But I also believe that that super bus won’t have a frequency matching what the four routes once had combine. It will amount to a service cut.

As for what I bolded in your post: That’s exactly what the MTA will not be doing.

[B61In2002]

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

Honestly fam.. Leave those Bed-Stuy routes alone.. The 26, 38, 48, 52, 54 all serve different parts of Bed-Stuy. If you eliminate any of those routes than it's going to be hell to get Downtown. The 48 serves as a feeder between all of those routes within bed-stuy for Downtown Brooklyn access. The doesn't perform very well to be a true crosstown-bed stuy train, and for certain neighborhoods you need one of those buses to get to the train on Fulton. So essentially you need all those fore-mentioned buses within Bed-Stuy. So what if they all serve RIdgewood Terminal .  Unless you have a real solution on how to fix the bed-stuy bus network. Don't talk about eliminating the lines.   

Classson Av is a short walk away from Bedford Av & if anything most people can walk from their houses to the crosstown route they need. If it shouldnt be eliminated, then move its southbound portion to Grand & Washington to better serve the area. 

As for the 26 and 52, a service on Madison and Putnam that runs at the combined frequency of both services could replace them both. Its within a 3 block distance of Gates and Halsey, so riders from both still are served by their community.

If demand for both routes are there then sure, keep them but reduce their frequencies & remove some stops that they both stop at. Make it like a skip stop service between the 2 of them. Otherwise, just combine them. 

Besides, didn't MTA say they didnt want 4 routes on a single street that terminate within the same area? Sure, they run on different streets but the same rules apply. 

[B61In2002]

41 minutes ago, jaf0519 said:

Even though all these routes play slightly different roles in the neighborhoods they serve, I have a feeling that they, alone with some other routes that are close together will be cut due to “duplication.”

From Flushing Ave to St. John’s Place, a lot of the routes are close together.

This is what I predict the MTA is going to do:

• B57 replaced by QT4 in Queens Bus Redesign 
• B54 kept the same
• B38 Stanhope St branch eliminated and Seneca Ave branch rerouted to Ridgewood Terminal
• B52 eliminated with the portion east of Broadway replaced by a rerouted B47 since Broadway service duplicates the B46, 
• B26 kept
• B25 I feel they will attempt to cut it again like 2010, plus since it is duplicated by the B26,  
• B45 kept only if B25 is eliminated (B65 cut instead)
• B65 kept only if B25 is not eliminated (B45 cut instead)

Plus in other areas:

• I have a feeling that one of the B37 and B63 will get cut
• Plus in the area between Fulton St and Prospect Park, I cannot imagine that the draft will have the B48, B49, B44, and B43 all within a block from each other.

Just like Queens, I think their will be a lot of condensed corridors where a super bus runs on one block instead of four buses on different blocks. But I also believe that that super bus won’t have a frequency matching what the four routes once had combine. It will amount to a service cut.

As for what I bolded in your post: That’s exactly what the MTA will not be doing.

B57: probably not getting eliminated, i think the QT4 is just a B57 SBS.

B52/B47: Im curious, why do you think the B47 will replace the B52 segment east of Broadway? The 46 and 47 run together on Broadway for a few blocks. If anything, they should send the B46 SBS via Gates to replace that segment. But agreed, either the 26 or 52 is getting eliminated, I just know it.

B25: 50/50. It gets decent ridership now compared to 2010. But we never know so.

B45/B65: They defintely are duplicates but idk if they should be cut. If anything, i think a reroute of their westbound terminals would suffice. Swap the B45 and B63 terminus to have a more smoother run in Downtown Brooklyn, and reroute the B65 via Court and Smith to Red Hook.

B37/B63: Of the 2, probably the B37. Sure, Industry City is on a rise (if ridership there is wanted you could easily reroute the B35, B70, or B11 down 3 Av to serve that section) but otherwise the B37 doesnt have much going for it.

B48/B49/B44/B43: Agreed 110%. The B44 isnt going anytime soon, but I think a B49 merger with the B43 or B48 (or take segments of both routes and merge all 3) would suffice. Either way, something is getting truncated or rerouted (or both). For the B43, I think the B15 should be rerouted on its NB segment to serve Throop Av instead of Lewis & the B43 should be truncated to Woodhull Hospital or Myrtle Av and Tompkins Av. B49 can be rerouted onto Ocean Av for its full segment or Bedford & have the B44 local take over the Rogers segment. If demand is needed a New York Av service can be created. 

We will just have to wait and see what they propose.

 

[Trainmaster5]

2 hours ago, B61In2002 said:

B57: probably not getting eliminated, i think the QT4 is just a B57 SBS.

 

B25: 50/50. It gets decent ridership now compared to 2010. But we never know so.

B45/B65: They defintely are duplicates but idk if they should be cut. If anything, i think a reroute of their westbound terminals would suffice. Swap the B45 and B63 terminus to have a more smoother run in Downtown Brooklyn, and reroute the B65 via Court and Smith to Red Hook.

 

B48/B49/B44/B43: Agreed 110%. The B44 isnt going anytime soon, but I think a B49 merger with the B43 or B48 (or take segments of both routes and merge all 3) would suffice. Either way, something is getting truncated or rerouted (or both). For the B43, I think the B15 should be rerouted on its NB segment to serve Throop Av instead of Lewis & the B43 should be truncated to Woodhull Hospital or Myrtle Av and Tompkins Av. B49 can be rerouted onto Ocean Av for its full segment or Bedford & have the B44 local take over the Rogers segment. If demand is needed a New York Av service can be created. 

We will just have to wait and see what they propose.

 

The B25 isn't going anywhere,  IMO. Look no further than the Franklin Shuttle fight.  Your B43, B44, B48, B49 paragraph has been discussed by some of our posters for years now. My question for you is didn't you overlook something in your B43 idea? The old B62 segment that the present B43 took over?  I mean Graham to Box Street.  Just curious.  BTW, I'm old school so 43,44,48,and 49 are Kingston-Tompkins, Nostrand,  Franklin and Rogers to us Bed-Stuy and Prospect-Lefferts Flatbush folks. Carry on. 

[Future ENY OP]

6 hours ago, jaf0519 said:

Even though all these routes play slightly different roles in the neighborhoods they serve, I have a feeling that they, alone with some other routes that are close together will be cut due to “duplication.”

From Flushing Ave to St. John’s Place, a lot of the routes are close together.

This is what I predict the MTA is going to do:

• B57 replaced by QT4 in Queens Bus Redesign 
• B54 kept the same
• B38 Stanhope St branch eliminated and Seneca Ave branch rerouted to Ridgewood Terminal
• B52 eliminated with the portion east of Broadway replaced by a rerouted B47 since Broadway service duplicates the B46, 
• B26 kept
• B25 I feel they will attempt to cut it again like 2010, plus since it is duplicated by the B26,  
• B45 kept only if B25 is eliminated (B65 cut instead)
• B65 kept only if B25 is not eliminated (B45 cut instead)

Plus in other areas:

• I have a feeling that one of the B37 and B63 will get cut
• Plus in the area between Fulton St and Prospect Park, I cannot imagine that the draft will have the B48, B49, B44, and B43 all within a block from each other.

Just like Queens, I think their will be a lot of condensed corridors where a super bus runs on one block instead of four buses on different blocks. But I also believe that that super bus won’t have a frequency matching what the four routes once had combine. It will amount to a service cut.

As for what I bolded in your post: That’s exactly what the MTA will not be doing.

Outside of the B57.  There’s no real conversation to be done with this. That route has its own issues and runs thru a tiny area of Bed-Stuy. I’m talking about more immediate Bed-Stuy- Crown Heights since you want to bring up the B25/45/65. 
 

People want to talk about eliminate but unless if you haven’t taken that particular line. Again, don’t talk about eliminating. I get that the  wants do trim down on the bus network but these planners don’t live or commute on the lines that affect of Brooklynites a lot of the routes that are feeders to Downtown Brooklyn, Crown Heights, Bed-Stuy, Bushwick and Ridgewood are to be left alone with minimum change.
 

As for your predictions. 
B25/45/65. Staying put. I know that the TA’s notion of getting rid of the 25 b/c of the  duplication but if you don't address subway service along Fulton Street I cannot see the 25 getting the ax. As for the 45/65. Although they both run on different segments in Crown Heights to Ralph Avenue which other lines do you replace within Crown Heights. 
 

B26/38/48/52/54. First off I cannot see the 38 being trounced to Ridgewood Term. There’s no room currently for the 38 to be at the terminal. You already have: 26/52/54/13 plus the Q55 & Q58 all at Ridgewood. Seneca Avenue + Stanhope needs the service. You cannot replace that with the B20. So I say the 38 will be left alone. 
 

As for the 52: Past Broadway there’s no additional service until Wilson Avenue for the B60 so I’m not solid with a trounce to Gates Avenue or even a B47 merger. Taking away Bushwick service in that area wouldn’t be the wisest thing. 
 

All other Bed-Stuy routes kept with some changes. 

[Future ENY OP]

6 hours ago, B61In2002 said:

Classson Av is a short walk away from Bedford Av & if anything most people can walk from their houses to the crosstown route they need. If it shouldnt be eliminated, then move its southbound portion to Grand & Washington to better serve the area. 

As for the 26 and 52, a service on Madison and Putnam that runs at the combined frequency of both services could replace them both. Its within a 3 block distance of Gates and Halsey, so riders from both still are served by their community.

If demand for both routes are there then sure, keep them but reduce their frequencies & remove some stops that they both stop at. Make it like a skip stop service between the 2 of them. Otherwise, just combine them. 

Besides, didn't MTA say they didnt want 4 routes on a single street that terminate within the same area? Sure, they run on different streets but the same rules apply. 

I’m just going to ignore what I just read here b/c what you just said doesn’t make sense at all. Your not going to have seniors and disabled walk blocks at a loss of bus service in this case the B26 and B52.  Again, Halsey, Gates, Lafayette, Myrtle all need bus service. Any elimination of bus service on those corridors will create disaster. Your not going to have people walk or take additional buses to get into Downtown Brooklyn. 

[B61In2002]

11 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

I’m just going to ignore what I just read here b/c what you just said doesn’t make sense at all. Your not going to have seniors and disabled walk blocks at a loss of bus service in this case the B26 and B52.  Again, Halsey, Gates, Lafayette, Myrtle all need bus service. Any elimination of bus service on those corridors will create disaster. Your not going to have people walk or take additional buses to get into Downtown Brooklyn. 

Less than 10% of the Bed Stuy population as of 2018 is above 65 years old. The same is said for the disabled population. Combined they make less than 20% of the entire Bed Stuy community, so im pretty sure most people can (and probably will) walk 3 short blocks (notice how I said blocks not avenues) for service. Rerouting service onto a nearby street that is within equal distance of Halsey and Gates can better serve the community. Would you rather 2 buses that run the same exact route just 5 blocks apart or one combined route that serves the middle ground between both routes that in worst case scenario the most displaced person walks 3 blocks or just takes the  or  instead. 

[MysteriousBtrain]

51 minutes ago, B61In2002 said:

Less than 10% of the Bed Stuy population as of 2018 is above 65 years old. The same is said for the disabled population. Combined they make less than 20% of the entire Bed Stuy community, so im pretty sure most people can (and probably will) walk 3 short blocks (notice how I said blocks not avenues) for service. Rerouting service onto a nearby street that is within equal distance of Halsey and Gates can better serve the community. Would you rather 2 buses that run the same exact route just 5 blocks apart or one combined route that serves the middle ground between both routes that in worst case scenario the most displaced person walks 3 blocks or just takes the  or  instead. 

25% of all of the subway system's stations are fully accessible to people who are over 65 years old and/or with disabilities. Would you rather walk 30 minutes minimum to get an accessible station or a couple alternative stations that are close to you?

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, B61In2002 said:

.....Would you rather 2 buses that run the same exact route just 5 blocks apart or one combined route that serves the middle ground between both routes that in worst case scenario the most displaced person walks 3 blocks or just takes the  or  instead. 

Ignoring the fact that "the same exact route just 5 blocks apart" makes no logical sense, I would rather have a network that considers adequate coverage AND adequate frequency..... You speak as if you're being balanced here, but it's anything but that in this discussion.....

If you're going to combine/streamline the B26 & the B52 (routing-wise & frequency-wise) & give that resultant route the combined frequency of both of those two routes, then what exactly is the benefit for the majority of the current riders of either of those two routes? Frequency would be the same (the combined route would have the combined service levels of the two routes) & network coverage in the area would decrease (the combined route would be further away from the current B26 & further away from the current B52)... This amounts to a net negative - at that point, you're having more people walk to catch the bus for the simple sake of it..... What is the big deal with the B26 running on Halsey & the B52 running on Gates? Neither one of those routes are poorly utilized, so what's really the issue here....

If the MTA were to combine those same two routes, they aren't going to give that resultant route the combined frequency of the two routes.... With the MTA with these redesigns, they are clearly adopting the coverage vs. frequency concept....

13 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

People want to talk about eliminate but unless if you haven’t taken that particular line. Again, don’t talk about eliminating. I get that the  wants to trim down on the bus network but these planners don’t live or commute on the lines that affect of Brooklynites a lot of the routes that are feeders to Downtown Brooklyn, Crown Heights, Bed-Stuy, Bushwick and Ridgewood are to be left alone with minimum change.

I agree with your sentiment, but the MTA doesn't care about any of that.... It's all a numbers game & any mention of combinations or eliminations out of them AFAIC is directly proportional to solely seeking to trim the budget off the backs of riders.... Keep it up & the bus network will ultimately be comprised of quote-unquote super-routes & dinky shuttles.... Oh, and less 40-ers & more artics system-wide too, since the number of routes will end up dwindling..... Less resources, less drivers, less money, less headache

The idea of combining two routes (B26/B52) that each, almost transports 10k riders/day, takes the cake..... Won't be at all surprised if the MTA attempts to pull something of the sort in Bed-Stuy though - that is, without the combined frequency levels...

16 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

The B25 isn't going anywhere,  IMO. Look no further than the Franklin Shuttle fight.  Your B43, B44, B48, B49 paragraph has been discussed by some of our posters for years now. My question for you is didn't you overlook something in your B43 idea? The old B62 segment that the present B43 took over?  I mean Graham to Box Street.  Just curious.  BTW, I'm old school so 43,44,48,and 49 are Kingston-Tompkins, Nostrand,  Franklin and Rogers to us Bed-Stuy and Prospect-Lefferts Flatbush folks. Carry on. 

 Yeah, the ole *combine the B48 & B49* BS was quite rampant on these transit forums back in the day....

The decision to combine the old B62 (Greenpoint - Downtown Bklyn.) with the old B47 (WBP - Prospect Park subway) to form today's B43 made sense from a usage standpoint back then.... To combine either the B43 or the B48 with the B49? Yikes.....

Edited July 2, 2020 by B35 via Church

[B61In2002]

21 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

If you're going to combine the B26 & the B52 (routing-wise & frequency-wise) & give that resultant route the combined frequency of both of those two routes, then what exactly is the benefit for the majority of the current riders of either of those two routes? Frequency would be the same (the combined route would have the combined service levels of the two routes) & network coverage in the area would decrease (the combined route would be further away from the current B26 & the current B52)... This amounts to a net negative - at that point, you're having more people walk to catch the bus for the simple sake of it..... What is the big deal with the B26 running on Halsey & the B52 running on Gates? Neither one of those routes are poorly utilized, so what's really the issue here....

I mean its not a really an issue, I'm just looking at this logically. If you have 2 routes less than 0.5 miles apart for their entire route, naturally something is getting axed or merged into another route. If its coverage v. frequency as you said, then naturally a route that covers the area that the 52 and 26 both cover already serves the community better suits the area. The only section where coverage is an issue east west wise is between Marcus Garvey and Saratoga south of Halsey & north of Fulton.

33 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

25% of all of the subway system's stations are fully accessible to people who are over 65 years old and/or with disabilities. Would you rather walk 30 minutes minimum to get an accessible station or a couple alternative stations that are close to you?

This is why Access A Ride exists. The MTA can only build elevators so fast y'know.

[B35 via Church]

13 minutes ago, B61In2002 said:

I mean its not a really an issue, I'm just looking at this logically. If you have 2 routes less than 0.5 miles apart for their entire route, naturally something is getting axed or merged into another route. If its coverage v. frequency as you said, then naturally a route that covers the area that the 52 and 26 both cover already serves the community better suits the area. The only section where coverage is an issue east west wise is between Marcus Garvey and Saratoga south of Halsey & north of Fulton.

You can argue/opine that it's excessive coverage, but you can't logically argue serving a community better by decreasing coverage by streamlining two routes into one - especially in a community where its patrons patronize both the current services quite well... You aren't going to get any community that wants bus service in their area, being gung-ho about less coverage in their area....

[jaf0519]

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Ignoring the fact that "the same exact route just 5 blocks apart" makes no logical sense, I would rather have a network that considers adequate coverage AND adequate frequency..... You speak as if you're being balanced here, but it's anything but that in this discussion.....

If you're going to combine/streamline the B26 & the B52 (routing-wise & frequency-wise) & give that resultant route the combined frequency of both of those two routes, then what exactly is the benefit for the majority of the current riders of either of those two routes? Frequency would be the same (the combined route would have the combined service levels of the two routes) & network coverage in the area would decrease (the combined route would be further away from the current B26 & further away from the current B52)... This amounts to a net negative - at that point, you're having more people walk to catch the bus for the simple sake of it..... What is the big deal with the B26 running on Halsey & the B52 running on Gates? Neither one of those routes are poorly utilized, so what's really the issue here....

If the MTA were to combine those same two routes, they aren't going to give that resultant route the combined frequency of the two routes.... With the MTA with these redesigns, they are clearly adopting the coverage vs. frequency concept....

I agree with your sentiment, but the MTA doesn't care about any of that.... It's all a numbers game & any mention of combinations or eliminations out of them AFAIC is directly proportional to solely seeking to trim the budget off the backs of riders.... Keep it up & the bus network will ultimately be comprised of quote-unquote super-routes & dinky shuttles.... Oh, and less 40-ers & more artics system-wide too, since the number of routes will end up dwindling..... Less resources, less drivers, less money, less headache

The idea of combining two routes (B26/B52) that each, almost transports 10k riders/day, takes the cake..... Won't be at all surprised if the MTA attempts to pull something of the sort in Bed-Stuy though - that is, without the combined frequency levels...

Even if the MTA doesn’t eliminated one of the two outright, they may do what they did in Queens. A problem the MTA made clear was the number of different routes serving Downtown Brooklyn. You have the B38, B54, B52, and B26 all operating from Downtown Brooklyn to Ridgewood. There is no way these routes will remain unscathed. Something will be cut or rerouted so that it either doesn’t serve Ridgewood and/or Downtown Brooklyn. Similar to how the Q65 duplicates the Q25/34 between Jamaica and Flushing, so now the QT65 won’t serve Flushing. All for the name of improved access to communities I wouldn’t be surprised if one bus is cut from Downtown and instead covers some part of Queens that lost service in the Queens Bus Redesign. It may not be where people want to go, but the MTA will say now they can get there.

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, jaf0519 said:

Even if the MTA doesn’t eliminated one of the two outright, they may do what they did in Queens. A problem the MTA made clear was the number of different routes serving Downtown Brooklyn. You have the B38, B54, B52, and B26 all operating from Downtown Brooklyn to Ridgewood. There is no way these routes will remain unscathed. Something will be cut or rerouted so that it either doesn’t serve Ridgewood and/or Downtown Brooklyn. Similar to how the Q65 duplicates the Q25/34 between Jamaica and Flushing, so now the QT65 won’t serve Flushing. All for the name of improved access to communities I wouldn’t be surprised if one bus is cut from Downtown and instead covers some part of Queens that lost service in the Queens Bus Redesign. It may not be where people want to go, but the MTA will say now they can get there.

I'm not arguing that the routes will end up being unscathed.... I'm arguing against this apparent concurring of worsening the network in that part of Brooklyn & passing it off as being tantamount to better serving the community.....

 

[Bay Ridge Express]

23 hours ago, B61In2002 said:

B37/B63: Of the 2, probably the B37. Sure, Industry City is on a rise (if ridership there is wanted you could easily reroute the B35, B70, or B11 down 3 Av to serve that section) but otherwise the B37 doesnt have much going for it.

Oh no... don't tell me they're gonna pull that B70 loop crap again...

The B37 is also often utilized by seniors/those on 3 Av/the west side of Sunset Park/Bay Ridge, and with (a bit) less stops than the B63, is a good alternative for whenever the  craps up.

Edited July 2, 2020 by Bay Ridge Express

[B61In2002]

On 7/2/2020 at 1:10 AM, Bay Ridge Express said:

Oh no... don't tell me they're gonna pull that B70 loop crap again...

The B37 is also often utilized by seniors/those on 3 Av/the west side of Sunset Park/Bay Ridge, and with (a bit) less stops than the B63, is a good alternative for whenever the  craps up.

Bit confused on what B70 loop stuff you're talking about, unless you mean that segment on 39 St where it curves off to serve the 36 St station then head on the regular route.

B37 averages around 400-600 passengers a day in both directions, compared to the 63, which averages 2000 passengers on a weekday, with an increase in the summer because Brooklyn Bridge Park. Unless the 37 sees a sudden increase, its probably getting cut again.

Side note: is Delancey St-Essex St ADA accessible so we can get rid of the most useless route in the city?

[Lex]

14 minutes ago, B61In2002 said:

Bit confused on what B70 loop stuff you're talking about, unless you mean that segment on 39 St where it curves off to serve the 36 St station then head on the regular route.

Do you recall how the route ran during the B37's absence?

[B61In2002]

16 minutes ago, Lex said:

Do you recall how the route ran during the B37's absence?

Nope, sorry. Guessing it did a U around Sunset Park?

[P3F]

8 minutes ago, B61In2002 said:

Nope, sorry. Guessing it did a U around Sunset Park?

They are referring to the B70's route in Bay Ridge. While the B37 was discontinued, the B70 had a ridiculous looking route, backtracking to cover 3rd Avenue between Shore Road and Bay Ridge Avenue.

https://www.tourister.ru/files/busbkln.pdf

[B61In2002]

25 minutes ago, P3F said:

They are referring to the B70's route in Bay Ridge. While the B37 was discontinued, the B70 had a ridiculous looking route, backtracking to cover 3rd Avenue between Shore Road and Bay Ridge Avenue.

https://www.tourister.ru/files/busbkln.pdf

Ohhh ok. Just saw it, that seems pretty useless ngl.

[Bay Ridge Express]

8 hours ago, B61In2002 said:

B37 averages around 400-600 passengers a day in both directions, compared to the 63, which averages 2000 passengers on a weekday, with an increase in the summer because Brooklyn Bridge Park. Unless the 37 sees a sudden increase, its probably getting cut again.

And then it will get restored again, due to the same opposition that cut faced a few years after 2010... unless they provide a convincing alternative, there will be outrage.

Edited July 3, 2020 by Bay Ridge Express