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

Lawrence's Bus Network Redesign


Lawrence St
 Share

Recommended Posts

I decided to split the redesign topic from the actual redesign thread to not clutter is.

Here's the Brooklyn Redesign I started working on last week. My objective with the redesigns is to have better connectivity while also reducing un-needed costs, in other words, being realistic and doing it the way MTA would do it, but better. Without any further ado, here we are!

Remember, this is a WORK IN PROGRESS! Any feedback would be greatly appreciated and I'd like for us to come together to better our bus network!

ROUTES:

B1: Red Hook to DUMBO via Dwntn Bklyn.

B2: Red Hook to Park Row/Manhattan via Dwntn Bklyn

B3: Downtown Brooklyn to ENY (formerly B25).

B4: Downtown Brooklyn to Myrtle-Wyckoff Av (formerly B38). (NOTE: B4 Local buses run only between Bushwick Av & Downtown Brooklyn days & evenings), B4 LTD buses run whole route.)

B5: St. Marks Av to Cortlandt St via 7 Av.

B6: Long Island City to Long Island City - East Williamsburg Circulator.

B7: Cadman Plaza to 121st St (J)(Z) via Myrtle Av. 

B8: Broadway Junction (J)(Z) to New Lots Av (3) via Gateway Mall.

B15 LCL: McDonald Av to Loring Av. Late night service runs the entire route, but alternates between Loring Av & JFK Airport.

B15 SBS: Brooklyn Army Terminal to JFK Terminal 5 via Church Av/New Lots Av/Linden Blvd. Late night service does not run.

B90: Williamsburg Bridge Shuttle

Q1: 11th St (Queens) to Downtown Brooklyn via Division Av.

 

MSutCSr.png

I4zIxil.png

UVh2STP.png

zifrQDZ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lawrence St You still depict the B38 running across Seneca Avenue (rather than Wyckoff Avenue). The B38 terminates one (M) stop north of the B26/52/54.

Is your Q1 supposed to cover the present-day Q104 (In other words, when you say 11th Street, do you mean 11th Street & 34th Avenue?)

Your B8 is way too circuitous (and the gap between directions around the Gateway Mall is way too large)

I don't see the point in a Williamsburg circulator (and in any case, it would be super-confusing considering that both halves run on one-way couplets). If anything, I'd have the Kent/Wythe portion run up Greenpoint Avenue. 

A route running along the full length of Myrtle Avenue would have pretty much complete turnover at Wyckoff Avenue. It wouldn't be worth the unreliability introduced to the combined route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@Lawrence St You still depict the B38 running across Seneca Avenue (rather than Wyckoff Avenue). The B38 terminates one (M) stop north of the B26/52/54.

Is your Q1 supposed to cover the present-day Q104 (In other words, when you say 11th Street, do you mean 11th Street & 34th Avenue?)

Your B8 is way too circuitous (and the gap between directions around the Gateway Mall is way too large)

I don't see the point in a Williamsburg circulator (and in any case, it would be super-confusing considering that both halves run on one-way couplets). If anything, I'd have the Kent/Wythe portion run up Greenpoint Avenue. 

A route running along the full length of Myrtle Avenue would have pretty much complete turnover at Wyckoff Avenue. It wouldn't be worth the unreliability introduced to the combined route.

1. Because it runs via Seneca.

2. Yes

3. It's a circulator route. If it wasn't for the traffic underneath the EL, I'd have it be a full circulator route.

4. Not really, they're doing it for the Bx11. It's not confusing as long as people pay attention.

5. That's the point. There's no reasoning behind running two routes on Myrtle Av. Myrtle Av also does not have a lot of traffic.

Edited by Lawrence St
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

1. Because it runs via Seneca.

Right, so then the terminal is Seneca & Cornelia, not Myrtle & Wyckoff.

37 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

2. Yes

Not really wild about it...also navigating that intersection at Greenpoint/Roosevelt/48th/Queens Blvd isn't that simple (basically, buses have to go a couple of blocks out of the way to get to the other side of Queens Blvd). 

37 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

3. It's a circulator route. If it wasn't for the traffic underneath the EL, I'd have it be a full circulator route.

Those things should only exist in limited circumstances (topography and/or street grid), and for small neighborhoods. ENY is much larger than Country Club or even Morris Heights.

37 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

4. Not really, they're doing it for the Bx11. It's not confusing as long as people pay attention.

You mean the Bx18...for starters, I'm not wild about the way they handled that one (that was a missed opportunity to connect Highbridge/Morris Heights to University Heights & Marble Hill). But in any case, that's one pair of one-way streets (yours has two pairs of one-way streets involved). and it's also an area where topography and the street grid make it difficult to connect to the surrounding routes.

37 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

5. That's the point. There's no reasoning behind running two routes on Myrtle Av. Myrtle Av also does not have a lot of traffic.

By that logic, we should extend the Q66 out to Little Neck because "there's no point in having two routes on Northern Blvd". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Right, so then the terminal is Seneca & Cornelia, not Myrtle & Wyckoff.

Not really wild about it...also navigating that intersection at Greenpoint/Roosevelt/48th/Queens Blvd isn't that simple (basically, buses have to go a couple of blocks out of the way to get to the other side of Queens Blvd). 

Those things should only exist in limited circumstances (topography and/or street grid), and for small neighborhoods. ENY is much larger than Country Club or even Morris Heights.

You mean the Bx18...for starters, I'm not wild about the way they handled that one (that was a missed opportunity to connect Highbridge/Morris Heights to University Heights & Marble Hill). But in any case, that's one pair of one-way streets (yours has two pairs of one-way streets involved). and it's also an area where topography and the street grid make it difficult to connect to the surrounding routes.

By that logic, we should extend the Q66 out to Little Neck because "there's no point in having two routes on Northern Blvd". 

1. Correct, sorry about that.

2. Theres special routing to avoid that.

3/4. While you do have a point, theres no need to be running two separate services from Gateway to the (3). Look at the W20 in Cross County, it has a major gap between both directions.

The B6 internally operates in a special way. Bus one operates via Kent & Drag the whole block, while bus two operates via Bedford & Driggs.

5. Don't confuse what I said with delusion. Certain routes cant be combined with each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

3/4. While you do have a point, theres no need to be running two separate services from Gateway to the (3). Look at the W20 in Cross County, it has a major gap between both directions.

Buses from both directions serve Cross Country. I'm not sure how this is remotely similar. 

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

The B6 internally operates in a special way. Bus one operates via Kent & Drag the whole block, while bus two operates via Bedford & Driggs.

You mean Kent & Wythe?

In any case, still confusing and doesn't serve much of a purpose. The point of a loop route is where people on both sides of the loop are heading to a common point (e.g. the Bx18 where riders are heading over to the subway stations along 170th Street), but you can't easily serve them with a direct route (or the ridership from two direct routes for both portions of the loop would be so low it wouldn't be worth it). This isn't the case with the B32/62.

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

5. Don't confuse what I said with delusion. Certain routes cant be combined with each other.

Just because they can doesn't mean they should. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

5. That's the point. There's no reasoning behind running two routes on Myrtle Av. Myrtle Av also does not have a lot of traffic.

 

There IS a reason for two Myrtle routes: Each gets service according to its own needs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Just because they can doesn't mean they should. 

Normally I tend to agree with the option that corridors should not be broken up, but there are exceptions. The Ridgewood Terminal is a logical split for a Myrtle Ave bus line since its right on the path it would take. Keeping the B54 and Q55 separate is better even if it means splitting a corridor. An example where it isn’t logical is what the MTA did in the Queens redesign for Francis Lewis Blvd. I personally don’t believe Francis Lewis should be split. I would rather have one bus straight down from the Cross Island to Rosedale over what the Q76 and Q77 do now. But if one had to split them, Hillside to give both north and south access to Jamaica is better than splitting at Northern between the QT73 and QT84.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jaf0519 said:

Normally I tend to agree with the option that corridors should not be broken up, but there are exceptions. The Ridgewood Terminal is a logical split for a Myrtle Ave bus line since its right on the path it would take. Keeping the B54 and Q55 separate is better even if it means splitting a corridor. An example where it isn’t logical is what the MTA did in the Queens redesign for Francis Lewis Blvd. I personally don’t believe Francis Lewis should be split. I would rather have one bus straight down from the Cross Island to Rosedale over what the Q76 and Q77 do now. But if one had to split them, Hillside to give both north and south access to Jamaica is better than splitting at Northern between the QT73 and QT84.

In that case, I think the main concern was the lack of a subway connection (they didn't want a second QT71-type route if they could avoid it). But the way they structured the QT84 in that area...just SMH...

In any case, the way they could've accomplished that without having such an obvious split at Northern is by having the QT64 run up Utopia to Francis Lewis and then head across 14th Avenue to College Point. (If one was concerned about that bit of Francis Lewis with a gap, they could run the QT73 across Crocheron instead of Northern). That way, people on the northern portion of Francis Lewis can still reach points south (and it's actually more direct than the present-day Q76 for those seeking Jamaica). For the QT73, I think their logic was that in addition to generally serving as the Francis Lewis route, it would also serve as the quick link between SE Queens & Flushing for areas beyond the reach of the QT15/31 (which replace most of the present-day Q27). Jamaica access from the southern portion of Francis Lewis isn't as much of a concern because all the other routes in that area head towards Jamaica.

But in any case, tying this back into the B54/Q55 discussion, the two routes are fundamentally different types of routes, as you can see from their route profile on the Brooklyn Existing Conditions Report. The Q55 is a feeder route (The majority of its riders are heading to/from Ridgewood itself) whereas the B54 is a grid route with more turnover. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

In that case, I think the main concern was the lack of a subway connection (they didn't want a second QT71-type route if they could avoid it). But the way they structured the QT84 in that area...just SMH...

In any case, the way they could've accomplished that without having such an obvious split at Northern is by having the QT64 run up Utopia to Francis Lewis and then head across 14th Avenue to College Point. (If one was concerned about that bit of Francis Lewis with a gap, they could run the QT73 across Crocheron instead of Northern). That way, people on the northern portion of Francis Lewis can still reach points south (and it's actually more direct than the present-day Q76 for those seeking Jamaica). For the QT73, I think their logic was that in addition to generally serving as the Francis Lewis route, it would also serve as the quick link between SE Queens & Flushing for areas beyond the reach of the QT15/31 (which replace most of the present-day Q27). Jamaica access from the southern portion of Francis Lewis isn't as much of a concern because all the other routes in that area head towards Jamaica.

But in any case, tying this back into the B54/Q55 discussion, the two routes are fundamentally different types of routes, as you can see from their route profile on the Brooklyn Existing Conditions Report. The Q55 is a feeder route (The majority of its riders are heading to/from Ridgewood itself) whereas the B54 is a grid route with more turnover. 

So how do you propose to fix the B6 & B7?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ajLM1R9.png

jMjP7Qd.png

 

Alright, I split the B6 into two routes. Less confusion, now branded as the Williamsburg Connectors. The B7 is also split into the B7 & Q2. I wasn't a fan of splitting it, but you guys were so...

 

I've also added in the B9 (formerly B37), service now runs to Cadman Plaza. 

bIkbsGq.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2021 at 11:02 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

But in any case, tying this back into the B54/Q55 discussion, the two routes are fundamentally different types of routes, as you can see from their route profile on the Brooklyn Existing Conditions Report. The Q55 is a feeder route (The majority of its riders are heading to/from Ridgewood itself) whereas the B54 is a grid route with more turnover. 

The thought process is often that riders from either route is xferring to the other in large enough numbers, when it aint the case... Q55 riders upon reaching Ridgewood Terminal by far & large gun for the subway (this includes those that take the Q55 within/from commercial Myrtle av. in Ridgewood)... Middle Village & Glendale patrons aren't thinking about taking buses deeper into Brooklyn....

OTOH, whatever B54 riders are left upon it reaching Ridgewood Terminal (the penultimate stop; Gates/Wyckoff) either:

  • xfer to other buses (usually the Q58.. but the Q55 is inclusive, for those that don't/can't do the walk along Myrtle due east),
  • xfer to the subway (pretty sure it's for the (L) in general or for the Met. bound (M) in-particular)
  • ...or commence walking along Myrtle (due east) or Wyckoff (due NW)

I'd say that the xferring to the subway is done at an equivalent rate with that of the walking along those respective parts of Myrtle or Wyckoff... The xferring to the buses from off EB B54's at Ridgewood Terminal is done at a lesser rate.... Bear in mind, these be B54 riders that usually emanate somewhere within Bushwick... Clinton Hill & Bed Stuy patrons don't really pan east of Broadway like that.... So to me, I never thought that combining the B54 & the Q55 would be this grand idea; from a logistical standpoint or from a patronage standpoint.... I don't see such a route sparking newfound ridership from either half of the route either.

....and then there's the extending of the Q55 to Jamaica on top of that... Beyond ridiculous.

-----------------------------------

Considering the real Q55, the extension of it to Jamaica is another discussion altogether (which although I never really cared for, I will admit it has more merit than extending it over the B54).... To sum it up, the Q55 has no business panning deep into Brooklyn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The thought process is often that riders from either route is xferring to the other in large enough numbers, when it aint the case... Q55 riders upon reaching Ridgewood Terminal by far & large gun for the subway (this includes those that take the Q55 within/from commercial Myrtle av. in Ridgewood)... Middle Village & Glendale patrons aren't thinking about taking buses deeper into Brooklyn....

OTOH, whatever B54 riders are left upon it reaching Ridgewood Terminal (the penultimate stop; Gates/Wyckoff) either:

  • xfer to other buses (usually the Q58.. but the Q55 is inclusive, for those that don't/can't do the walk along Myrtle due east),
  • xfer to the subway (pretty sure it's for the (L) in general or for the Met. bound (M) in-particular)
  • ...or commence walking along Myrtle (due east) or Wyckoff (due NW)

I'd say that the xferring to the subway is done at an equivalent rate with that of the walking along those respective parts of Myrtle or Wyckoff... The xferring to the buses from off EB B54's at Ridgewood Terminal is done at a lesser rate.... Bear in mind, these be B54 riders that usually emanate somewhere within Bushwick... Clinton Hill & Bed Stuy patrons don't really pan east of Broadway like that.... So to me, I never thought that combining the B54 & the Q55 would be this grand idea; from a logistical standpoint or from a patronage standpoint.... I don't see such a route sparking newfound ridership from either half of the route either.

....and then there's the extending of the Q55 to Jamaica on top of that... Beyond ridiculous.

-----------------------------------

Considering the real Q55, the extension of it to Jamaica is another discussion altogether (which although I never really cared for, I will admit it has more merit than extending it over the B54).... To sum it up, the Q55 has no business panning deep into Brooklyn.

At least you like the B35 idea LMAO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

At least you like the B35 idea LMAO!

Not in the slightest. And I'm not laughing with you, either....

It's clear that you're not being serious with these ideas of yours... It's gotten to the point that you're now mocking one of your ideas by laughing at the possibility of it being liked.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Not in the slightest. And I'm not laughing with you, either....

It's clear that you're not being serious with these ideas of yours... It's gotten to the point that you're now mocking one of your ideas by laughing at the possibility of it being liked.

I'm actually being totally serious. The current B82 service pattern goes all over the place yet that was well liked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I'm actually being totally serious. The current B82 service pattern goes all over the place yet that was well liked.

 

Even the B82 is too long. 

At the very least, maybe keep the SBS but split the local back into its component routes.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

...The current B82 service pattern goes all over the place yet that was well liked.

- B50 riders back then, did not take kindly at all to the decision to run the thing to Coney Island (in the middle of much of nothing, no less)... People tend to forget that the B82 upon its creation didn't run to Stillwell av. subway; it ended where the B5 used to, at Canal Av.....

- B5 riders were so few & far between to even have heard/read them opining on running the thing to Starrett City....

- There wasn't this consensual staunch liking of the creation of the B82 on the transit forums (namely the 2 main NYC based transit forums at the time; Subchat & Rider Diaries) either....

---------------------------------

But let's run with the notion you present here.... Even if there was this widespread liking of the B82 when it was created, you bring it up if it's supposed to be some justification of running B35's to the Brooklyn Army Terminal, let alone an extension on the other end of the route to JFK.... To compare [the combination of the old B5 & B50] to such a concoction is disgustingly disingenuous.... Both constitute being long routes, so they're equivalent in their justifications, according to you apparently.... I mean really, a specific service type of a bus route that makes less stops (SBS) than other service types (like, a local) does not give some bus route carte blanche, or further justification to be extended....

....."all over the place".

34 minutes ago, Q43LTD said:

Wasn't the plan to extend the Q55 to Jamaica had the Q56 been eliminated because it duplicates the (J) back in 2010 with the cuts? 

From random transit forum posters perhaps.....

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

- B50 riders back then, did not take kindly at all to the decision to run the thing to Coney Island (in the middle of much of nothing, no less)... People tend to forget that the B82 upon its creation didn't run to Stillwell av. subway; it ended where the B5 used to, at Canal Av.....

- B5 riders were so few & far between to even have heard/read them opining on running the thing to Starrett City....

- There wasn't this consensual staunch liking of the creation of the B82 on the transit forums (namely the 2 main NYC based transit forums at the time; Subchat & Rider Diaries) either....

---------------------------------

But let's run with the notion you present here.... Even if there was this widespread liking of the B82 when it was created, you bring it up if it's supposed to be some justification of running B35's to the Brooklyn Army Terminal, let alone an extension on the other end of the route to JFK.... To compare [the combination of the old B5 & B50] to such a concoction is disgustingly disingenuous.... Both constitute being long routes, so they're equivalent in their justifications, according to you apparently.... I mean really, a specific service type of a bus route that makes less stops (SBS) than other service types (like, a local) does not give some bus route carte blanche, or further justification to be extended....

....."all over the place".

From random transit forum posters perhaps.....

The justification for running it to the Army Terminal is to connect it with NYC Ferry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lex said:

Why?

What do you mean why? The ferry has a straight route to Lower Manhattan & the Rockaways without having to use the subway. An extra 5 minutes to the B15 runtime isn't a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once you hit the Bronx, I’ll be able to bring up many points.

As for the transfer to the BAT for the “B15”, I don’t think it’s needed, considering you have the “B9” already running on 3rd Avenue, and whatever your B11 replacement will be. You’ll potentially see a lot of empty buses and trippers from the BAT stop to 3rd/4th Avenues.

Keeping the conversation on ferry transfers, your B63 replacement should still be stopping at BBP right?

The “Q1” and the “B6A” swap is interesting, considering the portion that you changed does have ridership, if something like this were to happen, a lot of people would get confused. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NBTA said:

Once you hit the Bronx, I’ll be able to bring up many points.

As for the transfer to the BAT for the “B15”, I don’t think it’s needed, considering you have the “B9” already running on 3rd Avenue, and whatever your B11 replacement will be. You’ll potentially see a lot of empty buses and trippers from the BAT stop to 3rd/4th Avenues.

Keeping the conversation on ferry transfers, your B63 replacement should still be stopping at BBP right?

The “Q1” and the “B6A” swap is interesting, considering the portion that you changed does have ridership, if something like this were to happen, a lot of people would get confused. 

To the last point, pax simply need to pay attention. We have lots of routes with variants and no matter what you put on the bus signs, people just won't pay attention. Case in point, M34/M34A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lex said:

Why?

Yeah, IDK who & to what extent he's expecting ferry patronage from people coming off the bus route to be either, but whatever....

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

What do you mean why? The ferry has a straight route to Lower Manhattan & the Rockaways without having to use the subway. An extra 5 minutes to the B15 runtime isn't a big deal.

Sure, it isn't a big deal for you, because you wouldn't have to rely on a route running b/w JFK & Brooklyn Army Terminal via New Lots av & via Church av (of all things)..... Very easy to be flippant when it comes to other people's commutes.

2 hours ago, NBTA said:

As for the transfer to the BAT for the “B15”, I don’t think it’s needed, considering you have the “B9” already running on 3rd Avenue, and whatever your B11 replacement will be. You’ll potentially see a lot of empty buses and trippers from the BAT stop to 3rd/4th Avenues.

Keeping the conversation on ferry transfers, your B63 replacement should still be stopping at BBP right?

It wouldn't matter either way; you won't get much of anyone walking from 3rd to get to that ferry stop & the rest of SW Brooklyn in any real noticeable amounts aren't going to give up the subway to Manhattan for a bus to the BAT for the ferry.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

What do you mean why? The ferry has a straight route to Lower Manhattan & the Rockaways without having to use the subway. An extra 5 minutes to the B15 runtime isn't a big deal.

For all its problems, 4th Avenue is still more robust than the Rockaways in terms of subway service, especially around the ferry landings. Worse, most people would need to ride the bus well past the 36th Street station just to take this ferry to Lower Manhattan. While the connection to the Rockaways can certainly give it more purpose, that relies heavily on a market between areas the existing B35 serves and the Rockaways, which you'd be hard-pressed to find.

Not only am I not convinced that this would only tack an additional five minutes to the runtime each way, but you're talking about doing this with a long interborough route that uses high-traffic and/or narrow streets (for the B35, that's much of 39th Street at a width no different from Linden Place south of the Whitestone Expressway and the oft-gridlocked Church Avenue, with a considerable stretch bearing one traffic lane and one parking lane per direction). Maybe you would've had me with a light metro, but a bus route? Hard pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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