Queens Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[bobtehpanda]

finished working on it 

 

x51 revival is a rush hour route, terminates at central park.

 

via kissena blvd and via LIE/HHE  via queens midtown tunnel both ways,

 

in manhattan 6th ave dropoffs, 5th ave pickups and 40th street pickups.

 

route is based at college point as an MTA BUS route,

 

stops noted with stickys and pickup and dropoffs.

 

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=us&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=218345366120084192601.0004de31812f33e79df94

 

Nothing would really change, since the exists to ferry people to that area and is reasonably fast, and the LIRR exists for those willing to pay the price for even faster, more comfortable service (and with ESA, is going to be more convenient). It also doesn't help residents heading Downtown (of which there are a lot), since the Chinese vans will always be the fastest, cheapest, most frequent way to get there (if we're assuming that time is expensive).

 

In Flushing, the outbound routing of the Flushing vans is up the LIE to Main St, so it's nearly perfect duplication. Inbound, it only makes one stop in Flushing (by the LIRR parking lot), but everyone is headed there anyways to take the , so there's no need to make additional stops. This is something that the MTA didn't understand when it operated the x51 - the Flushing hub is so strong that that's really the only place you need to stop for a premium express service out of the area.

[qjtransitmaster]

-The AirTrain is faster than pretty much every other mode of transport out of Jamaica to JFK, including private transportation so it's not "time consuming".

 

-Assuming that you're picking up people in Rosedale, Queens Village, and Bayside, it's going to be just as slow, if not slower, than the current Q44 LTD, which already has subway-like stop spacing. These Queens commuinities are already linked by the Q27, and the amount of jobs in these areas (and the low amount of jobs in Co-op) mean that there is no reasonable ridership base for any sort of route like this.

 

-Did you not read the whole thing I posted in the Manhattan thread? There is a reason most routes don't really do outer-borough service - New York is ridiculously centralized on Manhattan, and this has not changed over the past century. Creating new, long, routes is just going to result in low ridership, low reliability, and high fuel costs that the MTA cannot pay.

 

-Trips using your route are still "long and tedious", because MTA still runs the slowest bus service in the nation, and not even limited service will change that (The Q58 LTD still runs at 7mph, doesn't it?)

Why do you think MY Q51 DOES NOT USE VAN WYCK!!! Q27 doesn't go to the bronx next. It can't be compared to the Q44 cause Q44 serves another market altogether. What point of Clearview do you not get? Don't even try to bring up Q50 2 different areas. If no demand was there why is the cross island so slow? Fyi it only uses cross island one exit over. Airtrain can't be compared since it goes to jamacia and costs $5 plus the local bus. There is no way this will be slow cause well Q44 serves a different market. You do realize from those areas you have to get to the Q44 via slow local buses. This line is LTD and won't be as slow cause Q44 isn't there. This line stops at 3 bayside stops LIRR station and northern blvd at bell and northern at clearview. Next stop is hillside that isn't exactly slow you know. It's stops will be spaced 4 blocks apart on 212th street via Q36 routing then via queens village LIRR on some runs next stop is linden when it's mapped out you will see how it works. Also it offers access to nassau via connections to ALL queens to nassau NICE bus lines. Those for N20/21 get a faster connection JFK is not the only market this bus targets. Edited June 3, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[bobtehpanda]

Why do you think MY Q51 DOES NOT USE VAN WYCK!!! Q27 doesn't go to the bronx next. It can't be compared to the Q44 cause Q44 serves another market altogether. What point of Clearview do you not get? Don't even try to bring up Q50 2 different areas. If no demand was there why is the cross island so slow? Fyi it only uses cross island one exit over. Airtrain can't be compared since it goes to jamacia and costs $5 plus the local bus. There is no way this will be slow cause well Q44 serves a different market

 

You say your route isn't slow, but you also point out that you're using highways that frequently see traffic jams due to congestion and car accidents (Cross Island, Clearview)...

 

The Cross Island is busy because it's the only north-south route in the area. The Clearview stops in what might as well be the middle of nowhere, so there is no alternate route. It has nothing to do with Throgs Neck travel, where all the delays and closures are due to either wind, car accidents, or both. The Throgs Neck Bridge actually flows pretty smoothly when there isn't a car accident. (And before you conjure up a bus line to parallel the Cross Island in Queens, there already is one - the Q27. Guess which bus is often the most crowded out of Flushing? The Q27.)

 

You say it "links" Eastern Queens, but it doesn't stop there... so what's the point of making it sound like a giant connective route? The only thing this thing sounds like it stops in is JFK, which is not a big enough hub to pull in that many riders (no hotels or offices in the Bronx, and few JFK workers - check the Census data). You also specifically said it didn't use the Van Wyck... you can't have your cake and eat it too. And before you say "I never said anything like that!", here's this little gem.

 

No a bus shouldn't use the van wyck. My aim wasn't end to end travel. It was to create a new connection to eastern queens and link eastern queens to not only JFK but to places beyond see Brooklyn bus' B22 idea. This makes previously long tedious trips shorter and possible via transit

 

So don't start whining and calling people names when you can't even get your own crappy ideas straightened out.

[qjtransitmaster]

You say your route isn't slow, but you also point out that you're using highways that frequently see traffic jams due to congestion and car accidents (Cross Island, Clearview)...

 

The Cross Island is busy because it's the only north-south route in the area. The Clearview stops in what might as well be the middle of nowhere, so there is no alternate route. It has nothing to do with Throgs Neck travel, where all the delays and closures are due to either wind, car accidents, or both. The Throgs Neck Bridge actually flows pretty smoothly when there isn't a car accident. (And before you conjure up a bus line to parallel the Cross Island in Queens, there already is one - the Q27. Guess which bus is often the most crowded out of Flushing? The Q27.)

 

You say it "links" Eastern Queens, but it doesn't stop there... so what's the point of making it sound like a giant connective route? The only thing this thing sounds like it stops in is JFK, which is not a big enough hub to pull in that many riders (no hotels or offices in the Bronx, and few JFK workers - check the Census data). You also specifically said it didn't use the Van Wyck... you can't have your cake and eat it too. And before you say "I never said anything like that!", here's this little gem.

 

 

So don't start whining and calling people names when you can't even get your own crappy ideas straightened out.

Really did I call you a name? Cause for the van wyck Q44 to airtrain does it with Q50. The clearview rarely sees bad jams except well friday afternoons and that is it as I did frequent that area a few times. Plus it only uses the cross island between hempstead tpk and linden blvd if it's jammed there is a service road there so you can't even use the traffic argument cause it is simply not true. If worst comes to worst then service road it is. I used shortline on the clearview from queens village to white plains the whole trip was less than an hour at rush hour mind you. I've also taken the 4:30 trailways bus it got to new rochelle in 30 mins from queens village nuff said. Q51 has nothing to do with flushing dude. That is what Q27 is for. You are now using unrelated routes to compare that is just stupid. Q27 is well slow this is express you can't use Q27 as an example nice try. you are just looking for a BS excuse to nullify anything I say.

Edited June 3, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[B35 via Church]

This guy's getting backlash from every end..... This is what happens when you're a know it all that knows little to nothing....

 

 

I thought this Q51 of yours was dead?

You didn't know... lol.... It's only dead when he gets overwhelmed with criticism at a particular moment in a discussion..... That's the pattern.

 

....so what's the point of making it sound like a giant connective route?

He made that same pitch to me about this wakefield-JFK route....

 

What it is, is that this guy doesn't want us to look at this concoction solely as a Wakefield-JFK route because there is zero demand for a direct/point-to-point route doing as such.... So instead, to try (emphasis on try) to make this idea more appealing, he has it making whatever stops he has it making between wakefield & JFK.... What he doesn't realize is, tryna make it this big connective route doesn't help either...

 

The fact of the matter is, there's no need for a route that runs between the two points, in any form - Whether it runs directly between the two points, or having it make any amount of stops b/w the two endpoints....

[qjtransitmaster]

This guy's getting backlash from every end..... This is what happens when you're a know it all that knows little to nothing....

 

 

You didn't know... lol.... It's only dead when he gets overwhelmed with criticism at a particular moment in a discussion..... That's the pattern.

 

He made that same pitch to me about this wakefield-JFK route....

 

What it is, is that this guy doesn't want us to look at this concoction solely as a Wakefield-JFK route because there is zero demand for a direct/point-to-point route doing as such.... So instead, to try (emphasis on try) to make this idea more appealing, he has it making whatever stops he has it making between wakefield & JFK.... What he doesn't realize is, tryna make it this big connective route doesn't help either...

 

The fact of the matter is, there's no need for a route that runs between the two points, in any form - Whether it runs directly between the two points, or having it make any amount of stops b/w the two endpoints....

The wakefield version was an experiment that was random unlike this co-op city one.  Previously this Q51 ended in queens village till I realized that is a bit short.  Isn't that what most local buses do? I don't care about virtual backlash cause I know it's BS anyway.

[bobtehpanda]

The wakefield version was an experiment that was random unlike this co-op city one.  Previously this Q51 ended in queens village till I realized that is a bit short.  Isn't that what most local buses do? I don't care about virtual backlash cause I know it's BS anyway.

 

Local buses do not use highways. They use service roads.

 

The Cross Island and Clearview do not have service roads. Go figure.

[qjtransitmaster]

Local buses do not use highways. They use service roads.

 

The Cross Island and Clearview do not have service roads. Go figure.

err look closely dude between northern blvd and that segment I pointed out. On the clearview it has a service road to the LIE service road then frances lewis IF traffic is really bad which is not often. And that part of the cross island does have backroads look closer at the area you clearly don't see it.

 

LTD come up with a valid reason rather than slamming without an argument that shows travel patterns to the contrary. Ohh FYI from parkchester you can use the to this line. Q27 is the most used there huh ok how much use does it get on 46th ave and 48th ave?

 

Can it swap east-west segments with Q13 for connectivity or just let em use Q31.

Edited June 3, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[Q43LTD]

The thing about is, it doesn't connect to a subway! Do you know why routes like the Q89 was discontinued? Here's some advice: when creating a new route, have it connect to at least one subway station. Forget about LIRR or Metro North

[qjtransitmaster]

The thing about is, it doesn't connect to a subway! Do you know why routes like the Q89 was discontinued? Here's some advice: when creating a new route, have it connect to at least one subway station. Forget about LIRR or Metro North

Err it connects to the pelham what are you talking about? 

 

And it links to many east queens lines and NICE it is targeted for nassau to the bronx so NICE doesn't have to touch the bronx. And Bronx to queens  and queens(east) to JFK. If some Q46 DHs were converted to revenues then one can go from JFK or parts of brooklyn to LI jewish med center via Q51 to Q46. If origin is JFK or rosedale. If beyond than 3 buses. If transferring is a problem then a transfer policy to favor this can be made. Q89 failed cause it ran hourly and ended early and started too late. Q89 should have however at least went to the .

Edited June 3, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[bobtehpanda]

err look closely dude between northern blvd and that segment I pointed out. On the clearview it has a service road to the LIE service road then frances lewis IF traffic is really bad which is not often. And that part of the cross island does have backroads look closer at the area you clearly don't see it.

 

LTD come up with a valid reason rather than slamming without an argument that shows travel patterns to the contrary. Ohh FYI from parkchester you can use the to this line. Q27 is the most used there huh ok how much use does it get on 46th ave and 48th ave?

 

Can it swap east-west segments with Q13 for connectivity or just let em use Q31.

 

1. A backroad is not a service road.

 

2. You mention it yourself - alternate routes (Francis Lewis, Clearview) to the Cross Island are not usually congested - that's because the Cross Island is a bottleneck, and nothing else. It is not actually indicative of true demand, especially since a free flowing lane has a capacity of only 2000 people per hour. 6000 people per hour per direction is not enough to justify a new bus route that is this expensive to run, especially since nearly all of these people come from and go to areas outside the immediate surroundings of the highway. Your "travel patterns" don't exist.

 

3. That service road doesn't lead anywhere useful, and it's not clear how that would fit into your plans anyways - the ONLY connection between the Clearview and the Cross Island is at the Throgs Neck Bridge. I assumed the bus went straight off the Clearview onto the Cross Island there, completely avoiding the service roads you mentioned.

 

4. Who the hell wants to go out of their way from Eastern Queens to take the , when all of Eastern Queens is already a 30 minute bus ride from a subway station? Going to Parkchester takes time.

 

5. The Q27 is packed to QCC, and ridership drops south of there. Hmm, the section paralleling the Cross Island has significantly lower ridership! Let's add another bus route!

 

6. They all feed into the subway because people want to use the subway. No one wants a cross-borough or north-south trip by bus. This is why 66% of Queens residents own a car.

 

Err it connects to the pelham what are you talking about? 

 

And it links to many east queens lines and NICE it is targeted for nassau to the bronx so NICE doesn't have to touch the bronx. And Bronx to queens  and queens(east) to JFK. If some Q46 DHs were converted to revenues then one can go from JFK or parts of brooklyn to LI jewish med center via Q51 to Q46. If origin is JFK or rosedale. If beyond than 3 buses. If transferring is a problem then a transfer policy to favor this can be made. Q89 failed cause it ran hourly and ended early and started too late. Q89 should have however at least went to the .

 

Now you're talking about NICE and beneficial transfer policies. All aboard the crazy train!

[B35 via Church]

I don't care about virtual backlash cause I know it's BS anyway.

Yeah yeah, you keep trying to convince yourself that any backlash you recieve is BS & how you don't care...

Yet you say things like:

 

....come up with a valid reason rather than slamming without an argument....

People that really don't care about the backlash they recieve don't say things like this....

If you really thought what we say on here is such BS, then you wouldn't be on here asking questions & tryna mine for data from us....

 

So really, cut the crap.... You are affected by what people say about your ideas & you do care.... Enough with this whole *everyone else is wrong except me & I have ironclad feelings* type of attitude.... You're not fooling anyone but yourself with that.

 

 

 

The wakefield version was an experiment that was random unlike this co-op city one.  Previously this Q51 ended in queens village till I realized that is a bit short.  Isn't that what most local buses do?

Isn't what most local buses do?

Don't understand whatever it is you're asking with that....

 

The thing about is, it doesn't connect to a subway! Do you know why routes like the Q89 was discontinued?

 

Here's some advice: when creating a new route, have it connect to at least one subway station. Forget about LIRR or Metro North

...and carefully consider the markets/riderbases you're running service to, what their general transportation needs are, and try to cater to as much of the masses as best as possible..... It isn't as arbitrary as picking two random points & "connecting the dots", so to speak....

 

Q89 failed cause it ran hourly and ended early and started too late.

Yeah, and let's not forget the fact that all the north-south routes that it connected to (whilst along linden blvd), connected to a subway station.... While the Q89 itself didnt.....

[qjtransitmaster]

Yeah yeah, you keep trying to convince yourself that any backlash you recieve is BS & how you don't care...

Yet you say things like:

 

People that really don't care about the backlash they recieve don't say things like this....

If you really thought what we say on here is such BS, then you wouldn't be on here asking questions & tryna mine for data from us....

 

So really, cut the crap.... You are affected by what people say about your ideas & you do care.... Enough with this whole *everyone else is wrong except me & I have ironclad feelings* type of attitude.... You're not fooling anyone but yourself with that.

 

 

 

Isn't what most local buses do?

Don't understand whatever it is you're asking with that....

 

...and carefully consider the markets/riderbases you're running service to, what their general transportation needs are, and try to cater to as much of the masses as best as possible..... It isn't as arbitrary as picking two random points & "connecting the dots", so to speak....

 

Yeah, and let's not forget the fact that all the north-south routes that it connected to (whilst along linden blvd), connected to a subway station.... While the Q89 itself didnt.....

To be honest based on data I get I drop some ideas I admit I use buses more often outside nyc than within NYC so yeah which was why I shocked a few here about my knowledge of the bee-line. NICE I admit was the most difficult proposal to make besides in order for it to work buses have to be ON-TIME but as of late they aren't so until that is fixed my nassau ideas are not gonna fly yeah they sound good on paper but buses have to be reliable for em to work. NYC is a bit out of my usual consolidation element of constricting networks by linking employment centers via timed transfer points if you knew about philly I'd go more into detail with you about it. I chose the Q51 to do JFK cause the Q5 already goes to green acres and that my belt structure feeder network proposal can't find a route to go to queens village. The routing via conduits and or 147th was to avoid the parking lot that is the belt parkway along that segment. I can't understand why it gets so slammed there yet it isn't enough to bring the nassau to it's knees. That Q51 there is more to it than what I typed up and can be very useful if one doesn't wish to drive. Sadly LIRR service to rosedale is too inconsistent that can pose a problem BUT I assume people would prefer jamacia for that anyway.

[bobtehpanda]

To be honest based on data I get I drop some ideas I admit I use buses more often outside nyc than within NYC so yeah which was why I shocked a few here about my knowledge of the bee-line. NICE I admit was the most difficult proposal to make besides in order for it to work buses have to be ON-TIME but as of late they aren't so until that is fixed my nassau ideas are not gonna fly yeah they sound good on paper but buses have to be reliable for em to work. NYC is a bit out of my usual consolidation element of constricting networks by linking employment centers via timed transfer points if you knew about philly I'd go more into detail with you about it. I chose the Q51 to do JFK cause the Q5 already goes to green acres and that my belt structure feeder network proposal can't find a route to go to queens village. The routing via conduits and or 147th was to avoid the parking lot that is the belt parkway along that segment. I can't understand why it gets so slammed there yet it isn't enough to bring the nassau to it's knees. That Q51 there is more to it than what I typed up and can be very useful if one doesn't wish to drive. Sadly LIRR service to rosedale is too inconsistent that can pose a problem BUT I assume people would prefer jamacia for that anyway.

 

There is no sort of complex data on jobs in Queens, and the data that does exist shows that, surprise, most airport employees live close to their airport.

 

New York City already has four grid networks for the four dense boroughs. There's really no need to superimpose a super-grid on them.

 

There's also no need to time transfers when a good deal of the bus network runs at 10 minutes midday weekdays, or better.

 

Driving in Queens doesn't suck. So long as parking is freely available, most people will drive. (Airport employees get free parking/AirTrain as well, so the cost is irrelevant to them.)

 

And to shoot your Belt feeder network proposal out of the sky, all trucks and buses are prohibited on the Parkway system by NYCDOT due to weight restrictions, height restrictions, and tight turns.

[qjtransitmaster]

There is no sort of complex data on jobs in Queens, and the data that does exist shows that, surprise, most airport employees live close to their airport.

 

New York City already has four grid networks for the four dense boroughs. There's really no need to superimpose a super-grid on them.

 

There's also no need to time transfers when a good deal of the bus network runs at 10 minutes midday weekdays, or better.

 

Driving in Queens doesn't suck. So long as parking is freely available, most people will drive. (Airport employees get free parking/AirTrain as well, so the cost is irrelevant to them.)

 

And to shoot your Belt feeder network proposal out of the sky, all trucks and buses are prohibited on the Parkway system by NYCDOT due to weight restrictions, height restrictions, and tight turns.

I can see why interesting but what about those who can get to lines like Q5 and the belt feeder network is only after the belt bridges are redone as long as buses are 10"4 it should be no problem not all the routes in belt feeder network would even use the belt. Again it is more than just going to JFK that is like saying there is a huge market for people taking a bus from sheepshead bay all the way to williamsburg very few people use the B44 that far same for my proposed route. It really is part of something else based out of something I learned about the bronx when I master google I will show it.

[Q43LTD]

yeah my proposal does that as well to improve links and create travel opportunities to far rockaway under the 147th routing rather than conduit but I haven't even decided on the south of queens village routing. Torn between rendering N2/8 useless on hook creek or serving spring field blvd. Should a conduit stop be added for the Q113 LTD? I would need to map it out for you to see how it works I admit the wakefield routing was random and was kinda weak.

What the hell do Queens Village, the N2/8 have to do with the Q113? SMH

 

 

 

 

Regarding the Q113 LTD, I agree with you... I don't think the MTA realizes just how important the 113/113LTD is.... I'd go as far as to say it's the most important route in all of the rockaways....

 

Regarding the Q6 LTD & Q10 LTD.... I dunno, what stops would you add to those routes, respectively ?

 

 

 

It sure is. I was considering extending the LTD hours by at least an hour. Example: the last LTD leaves Far Rockaway at 9:13 PM. The last LTD leaves Jamaica at 10:13 PM. For the Q6 LTD, I would add a stop at Liberty Av for transfers at to the Q8/9. For the Q112 backtracking 2 blocks shouldn't be a problem. For the Q10 LTD adding a stop at 109 Av for transfers to the Q41.

[qjtransitmaster]

What the hell do Queens Village, the N2/8 have to do with the Q113? SMH

 

 

It sure is. I was considering extending the LTD hours by at least an hour. Example: the last LTD leaves Far Rockaway at 9:13 PM. The last LTD leaves Jamaica at 10:13 PM. For the Q6 LTD, I would add a stop at Liberty Av for transfers at to the Q8/9. For the Q112 backtracking 2 blocks shouldn't be a problem. For the Q10 LTD adding a stop at 109 Av for transfers to the Q41.

N2/8 Had nothing to do with Q113 I should have worded it better. Should evening Q111 get upgraded for more Q113 LTD service?

[Q43LTD]

N2/8 Had nothing to do with Q113 I should have worded it better. Should evening Q111 get upgraded for more Q113 LTD service?

No upgrades to Q111 service

[qjtransitmaster]

No upgrades to Q111 service

ok but that is what keeps Q113 locals there with LTD's service hours.

[B35 via Church]

finished working on it 

 

x51 revival is a rush hour route, terminates at central park.

 

via kissena blvd and via LIE/HHE  via queens midtown tunnel both ways,

 

in manhattan 6th ave dropoffs, 5th ave pickups and 40th street pickups.

 

route is based at college point as an MTA BUS route,

 

stops noted with stickys and pickup and dropoffs.

 

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=us&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=218345366120084192601.0004de31812f33e79df94

Well, the problem w/ the x51 was usage... I suppose you can garner a few more riders by having it utilize more of kissena...

(not nearly enough to say that the route should come back, though)

 

...But FWIW, I'm not understanding why you'd have (outbound) buses taking 40th from 5th to the tunnel approach.... You're better off tryna to cater to as many pax as possible, and forget about accomplishing that by having expresses take side streets for any significant time period in manhattan.... Not sure why you'd take stops off 34th either.....

 

Guess what I'm asking in a nutshell is....

Compared to the old/discontinued route, how would your idea be an overall improvement? Taking away stops isn't always a good thing....

 

 

p.s., after the last dropoff on 57th/3rd, buses deadheaded back to queens..... There's no point in having a "terminal" on 59th st, especially on that side of 59th (opposite central park)....

[aemoreira81]

 

proposal 1) What would serve rikers then ?

 

proposal 2) This looks to me like you want to sacrifice route mileage for route duration.... Quite frankly, I think the current 100 makes more sense than what you're suggesting here (it's a quicker LTD that best serves the riders that it does).... You're bastardizing the Q100 into a slower LTD that would only run to rikers during shift changes & visiting hrs.... Don't agree with this at all....

 

And also.... If the aim is to lure steinway (the neighborhood) riders from having to put up w/ the 101 if they're going to QBP, At best, I would only add 1 Q100 stop somewhere b/w [steinway/20th, inclusive] & [the current stop by the parking lot, short of the bridge] - While leaving the current 100 service pattern alone.....

 

Proposal 1: Corrections could use its own shuttle bus to run between Steinway and Rikers' Island with timed connections between the Q100/1 stops in Steinway and Rikers' Island if that is done---it would reduce deadhead mileage.

Proposal 2: Under Queens Surface, the Q101R had a special Monday and Tuesday schedule, Wednesday and Thursday schedule, and then a Friday through Sunday schedule. However, it is no longer a special RIkers' Island only line...and I see unlocked value in the line.

[qjtransitmaster]

Well, the problem w/ the x51 was usage... I suppose you can garner a few more riders by having it utilize more of kissena...

(not nearly enough to say that the route should come back, though)

 

...But FWIW, I'm not understanding why you'd have (outbound) buses taking 40th from 5th to the tunnel approach.... You're better off tryna to cater to as many pax as possible, and forget about accomplishing that by having expresses take side streets for any significant time period in manhattan.... Not sure why you'd take stops off 34th either.....

 

Guess what I'm asking in a nutshell is....

Compared to the old/discontinued route, how would your idea be an overall improvement? Taking away stops isn't always a good thing....

 

 

p.s., after the last dropoff on 57th/3rd, buses deadheaded back to queens..... There's no point in having a "terminal" on 59th st, especially on that side of 59th (opposite central park)....

If he wants x51 to get useful then merge it with QM3 it should take a different Manhattan route than it did beforehand.

[B35 via Church]

If he wants x51 to get useful then merge it with QM3 it should take a different Manhattan route than it did beforehand.

You can always direct that suggestion to him (instead of me)....

 

Proposal 1: Corrections could use its own shuttle bus to run between Steinway and Rikers' Island with timed connections between the Q100/1 stops in Steinway and Rikers' Island if that is done---it would reduce deadhead mileage.

 

Proposal 2: Under Queens Surface, the Q101R had a special Monday and Tuesday schedule, Wednesday and Thursday schedule, and then a Friday through Sunday schedule. However, it is no longer a special RIkers' Island only line...and I see unlocked value in the line.

Well that's why the current Q100 works - It's a line that provides LTD service along 21st (which I'd say is most definitely needed) & a line that brings w/e visitors & workers to Rikers in a rather efficient fashion..... Yes, I remember the old 101R & there's nothing that really suggests that we should re-visit the way it used to run - for the sake of saving mileage....

 

It's not like usage to/from rikers is ill-used (if this was infact the case, then maybe I'd agree w/ what you're posing here).....

 

With that 1st proposal you posed, that would give the MTA all the more reason to consider merging/fusing the 100 into a 69 LTD or something (which would likely mean less LTD service than what those patrons get with the current 100).... And the second proposal, even though you're keeping service to rikers intact, it would be at an irregular basis....

[Bounad Hanhic]

But the best thing with the Q69 is to give the Q69 its own limited instead of having the Q100 be the limited stop service. I would set up a Q69 limited to be a slower limited than the Q100.

 

 

Also the X51 should not merge with the QM3. NYCT and MTA Bus routes cannot merge and the QM3 as is a fast route, it is a route that is hard to revise regardless of the area that it traverses. Merging it with the X51 would make the route slower, taking it off Northern in the Auburndale Bayside area would get NIMBY opposition (we tried to address a possible express bus service that serves the more residential parts of Auburndale and Bayside unlike the current QM3 which runs on Northern and we met NIMBY opposition that ultimately killed any chance of us doing it). The best thing that can be done with the QM3 is to throw an extra bus or two on the line to expand the span of service on the QM3 and to see what happens as the later two AM trips on the QM3 can get seated loads (sometimes the QM3 can get SRO or people opt not to take the bus because of lack of seats)

Edited June 4, 2013 by Bounad Hanhic

[B35 via Church]

But the best thing with the Q69 is to give the Q69 its own limited instead of having the Q100 be the limited stop service.

You could set it up that way, but I don't agree it would be the best thing....I still think there's more of a benefit to keeping the current 100 around, compared to giving the 69 a LTD....

 

I gotta be honest...

I'm not quite getting this fixation (from you & AE Moreira) with wanting to alter the 100... I saw your post in the june 2013 agenda thread - you're bringing this all up about the 100 because they're increasing headways on the route.... Your (suggestion) reaction to the headway changes the MTA plans on doing to the route, I think is rather overreactive - *They're increasing headways on the 100, so let's bring back the 101R* (or as you put it, the old QSC style).....

 

Also the X51 should not merge with the QM3. NYCT and MTA Bus routes cannot merge and the QM3 as is a fast route, it is a route that is hard to revise regardless of the area that it traverses. Merging it with the X51 would make the route slower, taking it off Northern in the Auburndale Bayside area would get NIMBY opposition (we tried to address a possible express bus service that serves the more residential parts of Auburndale and Bayside unlike the current QM3 which runs on Northern and we met NIMBY opposition that ultimately killed any chance of us doing it).

Yeah, don't even take that seriously; merging the x51 w/ the QM3.... Of course doing that would make it a slow ass express.....

Edited June 4, 2013 by B35 via Church