B35 via Church Posted June 22, 2013 Share #1526 Posted June 22, 2013 when Q70 takes enough riders away from the Q33 it won't be so slow and would be short enough to extend as many current riders would abandon the Q33 for the Q70. You're mistaken if you think the route isn't slow outside of LGA.... and two, sending the route from 74th to greenpoint would still make it slow, so that's not exactly true either..... At best, A Q33 b/w E. Elmhurst & Greenpoint would be just as slow as today's Q33 b/w 74th st terminal & LGA...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 22, 2013 Author Share #1527 Posted June 22, 2013 Here's what I think would happen if SBS were implemented on Woodhaven/Cross Bay: Q52 extended north to Woodside then east to Far Rockaway Q11 and/or 21 extended to Jackson Heights to put local service on Broadway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1528 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) Here's what I think would happen if SBS were implemented on Woodhaven/Cross Bay: Q52 extended north to Woodside then east to Far Rockaway Q11 and/or 21 extended to Jackson Heights to put local service on Broadway. the stops on Q53 are not that far apart on broadway. The Q33 Greenpoint may be quicker than a merge with Q29. Edited June 23, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1529 Posted June 23, 2013 Here's what I think would happen if SBS were implemented on Woodhaven/Cross Bay: Q52 extended north to Woodside then east to Far Rockaway Q11 and/or 21 extended to Jackson Heights to put local service on Broadway. Are you saying the Q52 would be the SBS, or would there be the Q52 & the SBS route? The Q33 Greenpoint may be quicker than a merge with Q29. maybe, maybe not..... What's the point in even mentioning this anyway.... MTA generally don't make routing changes based on what's quicker.... They do it to save money. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 23, 2013 Author Share #1530 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) the stops on Q53 are not that far apart on broadway. The Q33 Greenpoint may be quicker than a merge with Q29. SMH. I made no references to the 29 or 33. Next time read. Are you saying the Q52 would be the SBS, or would there be the Q52 & the SBS?.I believe the 53 will be the SBS since it's the more "established" route and the 52 will be the LTD. Worse case scenario it's eliminated even though I don't want that to happen. Edited June 23, 2013 by Q43LTD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1531 Posted June 23, 2013 SMH. I made no references to the 29 or 33. Next time read. If that happens the Q21 needs to be eliminated the people can transfer to the Q41which is just about empty when it reaches Cross Bay Blvd. If the bus is crowded from Jamaica all the passengers get off on 127st and 109 Ave so I believe the Q41 can handle it maybe the Q11 ridership can go up again. I believe the 53 will be the SBS since it's the more "established" route and the 52 will be the LTD. Worse case scenario it's eliminated even though I don't want that to happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 23, 2013 Author Share #1532 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) [quote name="College Pt Man" post="685686" If that happens the Q21 needs to be eliminated the people can transfer to the Q41 which is just about empty when it reaches Cross Bay Blvd. If the bus is crowded from Jamaica all the passengers get off on 127st and 109 Ave so I believe the Q41 can handle it maybe the Q11 ridership can go up again. I don't think the 21 will be eliminated anytime soon. Edited June 23, 2013 by Q43LTD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterious2train Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1533 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) If that happens the Q21 needs to be eliminated the people can transfer to the Q41 which is just about empty when it reaches Cross Bay Blvd. If the bus is crowded from Jamaica all the passengers get off on 127st and 109 Ave so I believe the Q41 can handle it maybe the Q11 ridership can go up again. The Q11 and the Q21 are the exact same route north of Piktin Av. They're just branches of one route with different numbers. An increase in Q11 ridership would be completely meaningless if it came from people who ride the Q21 now (After all, their commutes would be exactly the same except the bus they're riding has a different number). As for the branches of the Q11 and the low amounts of service they have, The Q21 was just used to allow the MTA to cut local service there and on Woodhaven Blvd sneakily. Even if the Q21 had never been merged into the Q11, it's quite possible that Q11 service would have been decreased anyway. Had that happened, the runs under the Q21 name would more than likely just end at Piktin Av, which wouldn't help anybody (compared to having these buses serve Howard Beach with the Q41) The improvement of Limited service probably had a hand in decreasing Q11 service, but there's not much you can do about that except revert Limited service to the way it was pre-Q21 LTD/Q52. Edited June 23, 2013 by Mysterious2train 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1534 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) I was looking at the MTA's ridership statistics and the Q11 has over 12,000 riders back in 2007 and now it only has about 5,000. Bascially they are trying to make these routes have an even amount if ridership and equal frequencies. I always thought that the Q21 could be eliminated and have the Q11 run like it did before the Q21 went along woodhaven and people who wanted to go to Howard beach can transfer to the Q41. But it's probably never going to happen so oh well. The Q52/Q53 will still remain the same. Edited June 23, 2013 by College Pt Man 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1535 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) I believe the 53 will be the SBS since it's the more "established" route and the 52 will be the LTD. Worse case scenario it's eliminated even though I don't want that to happen. That's the thing..... If they were to ever implement SBS along Woodhaven/X-bay, I don't think they would still have a LTD also operating along it as well.... Think about the logic behind what happened w/ 34th st.... They made both the M16 & the M34 into SBS services, instead of having one of them not an SBS route & the other an SBS route...... They just so happened to renumerate the M16 to the M34a & what not.... But back to (possible) Woodhaven/X-bay service.... IMO, instead of SBS, a LTD, and the 2 locals, they would likely streamline the 2 LTD services to where the end result would be the 2 locals & the SBS route (with which service would be split to running b/w rockaway park & arverne [although you may be right w/ an SBS extension to far rockaway on that end of the rockaways])... As far as what route number they'll use for the SBS route, I suppose that's anyone's guess..... If that happens the Q21 needs to be eliminated the people can transfer to the Q41 which is just about empty when it reaches Cross Bay Blvd. If the bus is crowded from Jamaica all the passengers get off on 127st and 109 Ave so I believe the Q41 can handle it maybe the Q11 ridership can go up again. I was looking at the MTA's ridership statistics and the Q11 has over 12,000 riders back in 2007 and now it only has about 5,000. Bascially they are trying to make these routes have an even amount if ridership and equal frequencies. I always thought that the Q21 could be eliminated and have the Q11 run like it did before the Q21 went along woodhaven and people who wanted to go to Howard beach can transfer to the Q41. But it's probably never going to happen so oh well. All those numbers illustrate to me is that more & more people are flocking to LTD's instead of locals along woodhaven..... I'm not sure why you even want to revert back to the days when Q11's were crushloaded & the Q21 was the route that was shunned.... I have to agree w/ the MTA's attempt at balancing out local service along Woodhaven..... Equal frequencies on the locals? Nah, I think they'll continue to keep the Q11 with having more service than the Q21 during weekdays.... The Q11 will remain the primary local along Woodhaven, while the Q21 would remain the supplementary one...... Lindenwood is the reason why. If they were to balance out service frequencies of the Q11/Q21 during weekdays, that would mean service on the Q21 would increase - resulting in an overserving of Lindenwood - Unless they: - cut the Q41 back to the entirely (which would be a service decrease for lindenwood overall) - reduce Q41 service while keeping it running to Lindenwood - divvy up Q41 service b/w running to Lindenwood and stopping short at the train station I guess the real question is, how much service does Lindenwood need/warrant........ The Q11 and the Q21 are the exact same route north of Piktin Av. They're just branches of one route with different numbers. An increase in Q11 ridership would be completely meaningless if it came from people who ride the Q21 now (After all, their commutes would be exactly the same except the bus they're riding has a different number). As for the branches of the Q11 and the low amounts of service they have, The Q21 was just used to allow the MTA to cut local service there and on Woodhaven Blvd sneakily. Even if the Q21 had never been merged into the Q11, it's quite possible that Q11 service would have been decreased anyway. Had that happened, the runs under the Q21 name would more than likely just end at Piktin Av, which wouldn't help anybody (compared to having these buses serve Howard Beach with the Q41) The improvement of Limited service probably had a hand in decreasing Q11 service, but there's not much you can do about that except revert Limited service to the way it was pre-Q21 LTD/Q52. Exactly, that's all it is (branches of local service along woodhaven, of which serves the communites west of X-bay & east of X-bay south of Liberty).... I wouldn't put stock in the decrease of the Q11 ridership if the Q21, Q52, and Q53 (sum) ridership increase went up by just about as much as the number of riders the Q11 lost.....Now if Q11 usage continues to wane & service decreases due to it, and Q21, 52, and 53 usage remains rather stagnant, then that's a problem..... I don't think they're tryna kill off the 11 (which is what it reads to me like the concern is); they did what they did w/ local service along Woodhaven to keep the 21 alive..... The 21 was useless south of Lindenwood, and by having it help out the 11 along Woodhaven b/w the & Queens ctr. mall, it made that route MUCH more useful...... So now you have the 2 LTD routes that run to the rockaways (opposite directions of the wye) & the 2 local routes that remain on "mainland" Queens (opposite sides of cross bay)...... Edited June 23, 2013 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1536 Posted June 23, 2013 I think the Q21 operators should just go around Lindenwood and go back up to QCM without layover. They would have the layover time last at QCM, and the 15 minute headways northbound. Currently the Q21 has a 14-16 minute layover, and when originates, by the time it gets to Liberty, its behind a Q11. I personally think the Q41 can terminate at Rockaway Blvd on the weekends (making Howard Beach and Lindenwood weekdays only for the Q41). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 23, 2013 Author Share #1537 Posted June 23, 2013 That's the thing..... If they were to ever implement SBS along Woodhaven/X-bay, I don't think they would still have a LTD also operating along it as well.... Think about the logic behind what happened w/ 34th st.... They made both the M16 & the M34 into SBS services, instead of having one of them not an SBS route & the other an SBS route...... They just so happened to renumerate the M16 to the M34a & what not.... But back to (possible) Woodhaven/X-bay service.... IMO, instead of SBS, a LTD, and the 2 locals, they would likely streamline the 2 LTD services to where the end result would be the 2 locals & the SBS route (with which service would be split to running b/w rockaway park & arverne [although you may be right w/ an SBS extension to far rockaway on that end of the rockaways])... As far as what route number they'll use for the SBS route, I suppose that's anyone's guess..... I see. So this may be a possibilityQ11- Jackson Hts/Old Howard/Hamilton Beaches Q21- Jackson Hts or Elmhurst/Howard Beach via Lindenwood Q53- Woodside/Rockaway Park SBS Q53A-Woodside/Far Rockaway SBS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1538 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) I think the Q21 operators should just go around Lindenwood and go back up to QCM without layover. They would have the layover time last at QCM, and the 15 minute headways northbound. Currently the Q21 has a 14-16 minute layover, and when originates, by the time it gets to Liberty, its behind a Q11. I personally think the Q41 can terminate at Rockaway Blvd on the weekends (making Howard Beach and Lindenwood weekdays only for the Q41). In other words, you'd leave Lindenwood with 1/2 hourly service on the weekends.... Not sure if I agree with that...... As far as Q21's looping around Lindenwood w/ no layover, what exactly is the benefit to doing that if you already have the Q11 running along Woodhaven locally? This is suggestive of what very few routes do in our system do - With the M60, buses loop around LGA b/c there's really no where to terminate buses inside LGA (for as much service that is ran on the M60 anyway).... With the Bx18 & the Bx24, those are short distanced routes w/ similar headways to that of the Q21 that don't see near as much usage.... The Q21 (now) sees way more riders now than it did before it ran north of the .... Speaking of which, this idea of looping around its end terminal would've made a little more sense with the GBL-ran Q21 (that ran b/w Rockaway Park & Rockaway Blvd via Lindenwood) at Rockaway Park, than with today's Q21 that serves Woodhaven locally..... I see. So this may be a possibility Q11- Jackson Hts/Old Howard/Hamilton Beaches Q21- Jackson Hts or Elmhurst/Howard Beach via Lindenwood Q53- Woodside/Rockaway Park SBS Q53A-Woodside/Far Rockaway SBS +1.... That is also very possible.... Having the SBS' run along a longer routing (Woodside - the rockaways) for maximal ridership w/o having to xfer @ Hoffman... I'll just re-post my possibility: Q11: Elmhurst - Old Howard Bch./Hamilton Bch. Q21: Jackson Hts - Howard Bch. via Lindenwood Q53: Elmhurst - Rockaway Park SBS Q53A: Elmhurst - Arverne or Far Rockaway SBS Conversely, I happen to think Broadway is gonna lose out if they ever come out w/ a Woodhaven SBS - Focusing more on where the bulk of the usage are going to & coming from along Woodhaven/X-bay (which is from/to Queens Blvd. moreso than areas north of it)... I also think they'd try to turn Hoffman dr. into an SBS terminal (either that, or bump the SBS buses to where the old Q11 first SB pickup stop used to be at, around the corner from Hoffman on Woodhaven), have the glendale bound Q29 & the rego park bound Q38 share a stop on hoffman, and have the Q11 stop somewhere near the SBS'.... IMO, Either of our theories are very plausible. Edited June 23, 2013 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 23, 2013 Share #1539 Posted June 23, 2013 1.In other words, you'd leave Lindenwood with 1/2 hourly service on the weekends.... Not sure if I agree with that...... 2.As far as Q21's looping around Lindenwood w/ no layover, what exactly is the benefit to doing that if you already have the Q11 running along Woodhaven locally? This is suggestive of what very few routes do in our system do - With the M60, buses loop around LGA b/c there's really no where to terminate buses inside LGA (for as much service that is ran on the M60 anyway).... With the Bx18 & the Bx24, those are short distanced routes w/ similar headways to that of the Q21 that don't see near as much usage.... The Q21 (now) sees way more riders now than it did before it ran north of the .... Speaking of which, this idea of looping around its end terminal would've made a little more sense with the GBL-ran Q21 (that ran b/w Rockaway Park & Rockaway Blvd via Lindenwood) at Rockaway Park, than with today's Q21 that serves Woodhaven locally..... +1.... That is also very possible.... Having the SBS' run along a longer routing (Woodside - the rockaways) for maximal ridership w/o having to xfer @ Hoffman... I'll just re-post my possibility: Conversely, I happen to think Broadway is gonna lose out if they ever come out w/ a Woodhaven SBS - Focusing more on where the bulk of the usage are going to & coming from along Woodhaven/X-bay (which is from/to Queens Blvd. moreso than areas north of it)... 3. I also think they'd try to turn Hoffman dr. into an SBS terminal (either that, or bump the SBS buses to where the old Q11 first SB pickup stop used to be at, around the corner from Hoffman on Woodhaven), have the glendale bound Q29 & the rego park bound Q38 share a stop on hoffman, and have the Q11 stop somewhere near the SBS'.... IMO, Either of our theories are very plausible. 1. I'm just saying, because if the bulk either the QM15 or the Q21 to the rather than the 21/41 to the , there really isn't a need for the Q41 to go down south. 2. The reason is so that the Q21 can maintain a uniformed 15 minute headway without it following behind a Q11 by 2 minute 3. The Q29/Q38 sharing a sto 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 24, 2013 Share #1540 Posted June 24, 2013 (edited) The last part didn't go in. Well, I'll just post key points of it. 3. The Q29/Q38 sharing a stop is a disaster waiting to happen. If at 2 PM, the Q38 line stretches out to the Q29 bus stop (rush hours its worse), and the Q29 crowds also is the same length, (don't even start with rush hours, its worse) I don't even know how its even manageable for that to happen. I take both Q29 and Q38 buses around the 2:30-3:00 slot (I only take the Q29 if a CNG bus comes and the Q38 hasn't arrived yet, because those buses tend to be late). The Q29 is a good alternative to the Q38 riders living south of Eliot (unfortunately I live north of Eliot, but don't mind walking the extra half mile) and east of 80 street and north of Juniper Valley/Juniper Blvd. The fact that that the Q29 and the Q38 come together with 4 buses combined (2 Q29's to 2 Q38's) makes it also more hectic. Edited June 24, 2013 by Q23 Central Terminal 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 24, 2013 Share #1541 Posted June 24, 2013 (edited) 1. I'm just saying, because if the bulk either the QM15 or the Q21 to the rather than the 21/41 to the , there really isn't a need for the Q41 to go down south. 2. The reason is so that the Q21 can maintain a uniformed 15 minute headway without it following behind a Q11 by 2 minute 3. The Q29/Q38 sharing a stop is a disaster waiting to happen. If at 2 PM, the Q38 line stretches out to the Q29 bus stop (rush hours its worse), and the Q29 crowds also is the same length, (don't even start with rush hours, its worse) I don't even know how its even manageable for that to happen. I take both Q29 and Q38 buses around the 2:30-3:00 slot (I only take the Q29 if a CNG bus comes and the Q38 hasn't arrived yet, because those buses tend to be late). The Q29 is a good alternative to the Q38 riders living south of Eliot (unfortunately I live north of Eliot, but don't mind walking the extra half mile) and east of 80 street and north of Juniper Valley/Juniper Blvd. The fact that that the Q29 and the Q38 come together with 4 buses combined (2 Q29's to 2 Q38's) makes it also more hectic. 1. Except that isn't the case.... The bulk of people in Lindenwood are not taking QM15's & riding Q21's up to Queens blvd.... In suggesting that the Q41 be cut back to the from Jamaica on weekends, you're underestimating how many of those folks in Lindenwood take the bus to the - even on weekends.... They're not taking the Q21 to the QB local (subway) over taking Q21's/Q41's to the ..... Hell, there are more of those folks that take the QM15 to manhattan over taking the Q21 to the QB local (subway)..... The bulk of ppl. in that neighborhood take Q21's/Q41's to the & take the QM15 to manhattan.... That's the deal. -------------- 2. Still doesn't make sense for buses to loop around Lindenwood to have its only layover in Elmhurst when you already have Q11's running along woodhaven locally..... Since you're still stuck on the whole 2 minute thing, to remedy that, it would make more sense to simply adjust the scheduling of the Q21 & having it continue to terminate/layover on both ends of the route..... There is no more of a benefit of having Q21's take no layover in Lindenwood, over a schedule adjustment... None. You're not gonna maintain that perfect uniformity b/w Pitkin/Cross Bay & Queens Center Mall anyway.... -------------- 3. Yeah, that's the same thing that was said (disaster waiting to happen) when the first SB Q11 pickup stop was moved from Woodhaven onto Hoffman..... Anyway, if they're to keep the Q11, Q21, the (would-be) SBS's, and the Q29 & Q38 on hoffman, that would be the likely solution.... Don't really see the (current) Q29 stop being pushed too far back on hoffman.... Unlike the S79 & the M34/a SBS', If Woodhaven were to get SBS, I think they'd opt to throw artics on it - meaning more necessary space needed along hoffman.... Otherwise, something's gonna have to be kicked back to stopping around the corner from hoffman, on Woodhaven again.... Edited June 24, 2013 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 24, 2013 Author Share #1542 Posted June 24, 2013 I have some ideas for Western Queens. First extend the Q19 west to 27 Av and 2 St. Secondly, straighten out the Q102. It will no longer serve Newtown Av and Astoria Blvd, it will follow the Q18 route to 2 St. Finally, after looking at those DOT proposals, they proposed a 102A to run the entire length of 31 St. I agree with it but it wouldn't go to Roosevelt Island. I would probably end it at Queens Plaza or Queensbridge. Thoughts, comments? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 25, 2013 Share #1543 Posted June 25, 2013 (edited) I have some ideas for Western Queens. First extend the Q19 west to 27 Av and 2 St. Secondly, straighten out the Q102. It will no longer serve Newtown Av and Astoria Blvd, it will follow the Q18 route to 2 St. Finally, after looking at those DOT proposals, they proposed a 102A to run the entire length of 31 St. I agree with it but it wouldn't go to Roosevelt Island. I would probably end it at Queens Plaza or Queensbridge. Thoughts, comments? wouldn't that 102A just not get used? Now I think why not combine the short Q42 with the Q44 unless artics can't fit there. 1. I'm just saying, because if the bulk either the QM15 or the Q21 to the rather than the 21/41 to the , there really isn't a need for the Q41 to go down south. 2. The reason is so that the Q21 can maintain a uniformed 15 minute headway without it following behind a Q11 by 2 minute 3. The Q29/Q38 sharing a sto If you must truncate Q41 at the why not simply substitute the Q7 west of rockaway blvd with rerouted Q41s? Q41 to euclid? however I'd prefer B84 renumbered Q87 and extended deeper into queens via logan/fountain to euclid ave then replace Q7 to rockaway blvd or via pitkin to the casino then serves linden blvd it can end at murdock at farmers blvd. Improves links with several buses and brings new service to a corridor and makes B84 useful. SMH. I made no references to the 29 or 33. Next time read. I believe the 53 will be the SBS since it's the more "established" route and the 52 will be the LTD. Worse case scenario it's eliminated even though I don't want that to happen. Sorry that was directed at B35 guy. Edited June 25, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 25, 2013 Author Share #1544 Posted June 25, 2013 wouldn't that 102A just not get used? Now I think why not combine the short Q42 with the Q44 unless artics can't fit there Once again, you bring up routes I don't mention. Two, why would you extend the Q44 to where the Q42 ends? And 3, If the B84 gets extended, I prefer it stays in Brooklyn. B84 to St Albans, really? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 25, 2013 Share #1545 Posted June 25, 2013 If you must truncate Q41 at the why not simply substitute the Q7 west of rockaway blvd with rerouted Q41s? Q41 to euclid? Because you're not saving anything by doing that.... All that'd accomplish is sending of the route somewhere else. Although I don't agree with it, Q23 (the forum member) suggested cutting the Q41 route back from Lindenwood to the to save mileage on weekends.... I have some ideas for Western Queens. -First extend the Q19 west to 27 Av and 2 St. -Secondly, straighten out the Q102. It will no longer serve Newtown Av and Astoria Blvd, it will follow the Q18 route to 2 St. -Finally, after looking at those DOT proposals, they proposed a 102A to run the entire length of 31 St. I agree with it but it wouldn't go to Roosevelt Island. I would probably end it at Queens Plaza or Queensbridge. Thoughts, comments? FWIW, the stint b/w the [Astoria houses & 30th av ] and the stint b/w [QBP & Roosevelt Island itself] is keeping that route (102) alive.... The straightening of the 102 on 30th av, iono.... the more I think about it, the more I'm having mixed feelings about it..... To sum this up..... While I agree with sending 19's to the astoria houses, I don't agree with that DOT proposed 102a b/w RI & Steinway (the neighborhood)... Not because of the whole *it parallels the subway* notion - But because I don't see very many ppl. bothering to take it, over 69's, 100's, and 101's from QBP.... I also don't like the idea of splitting service b/w the astoria houses & steinway, which is what that proposed 102/102a entailed.... Your suggestion of the DOT's proposed 102a, well I can't really agree w/ it either because it entails taking away service from Roosevelt Island..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 25, 2013 Author Share #1546 Posted June 25, 2013 FWIW, the stint b/w the [Astoria houses & 30th av ] and the stint b/w [QBP & Roosevelt Island itself] is keeping that route (102) alive.... The straightening of the 102 on 30th av, iono.... the more I think about it, the more I'm having mixed feelings about it..... To sum this up..... While I agree with sending 19's to the astoria houses, I don't agree with that DOT proposed 102a b/w RI & Steinway (the neighborhood)... Not because of the whole *it parallels the subway* notion - But because I don't see very many ppl. bothering to take it, over 69's, 100's, and 101's from QBP.... I also don't like the idea of splitting service b/w the astoria houses & steinway, which is what that proposed 102/102a entailed.... Your suggestion of the DOT's proposed 102a, well I can't really agree w/ it either because it entails taking away service from Roosevelt Island..... Well, I didn't wanna overserve Roosevelt Island that's why I cut it back to Queens Plaza or 21 . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 25, 2013 Share #1547 Posted June 25, 2013 Well, I didn't wanna overserve Roosevelt Island that's why I cut it back to Queens Plaza or 21 . Overserving Roosevelt Island? I'm not sure I'm understanding your idea/plan then.... I get that you want to straighten the Q102 along 30th av west of the subway, and/but you say you agree w/ that proposed 102a (with the exception of serving RI)..... Again, the 102 & the 102a that the DOT proposed, entailed alternating service to the astoria houses & to Steinway (meaning, less 102 service for anyone that utilizes it b/w the astoria houses & 30th st ) - Y'know, like how the Q11 serves Old Howard & Hamilton beaches.... ------------------------------------ So my question is.... - Would you keep the 102 under current headways and add 102a's that would run from [QB or QBP] to Steinway? (in other words, a straight up service addition between [[QB or QBP] & 30th av ]) or - Would you split the headways of the current 102 - Into a 102 that would run b/w RI & astoria projects and into a 102a that would run b/w [QB or QBP] & Steinway? (in other words, a service cut for those between [QB & RI] and overall service between [[QB or QBP] & 30th av ] being exactly the same as today's 102) * (for anyone else reading, QB=queensbridge, QBP=queensboro plaza, RI=roosevelt island) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted June 25, 2013 Share #1548 Posted June 25, 2013 Q102A? Did I miss something? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 25, 2013 Share #1549 Posted June 25, 2013 (edited) Q102A? Did I miss something? Yeh, the DOT came out w/ this massive study of the routes that were formerly PBL ran.... Study I suppose took place sometime in the mid 2000's..... One suggestion was having Q102 service split into a Q102/Q102a that would run to either the astoria projects (like today's 102) or run up to 19th/hazen via along the rest of 31st st (102a)... I don't remember all of them, but some of them included: Q45/Q47 combination (which eventually happened), Q8 to Gateway (which eventually happened), Q33 extension to Woodside-61st, Q21 elimination, Q11 extension to jackson heights-74th st, and a couple I abhor: a Q22/Q35 combination, Q12/Q66 combination, and Q7 to Green Acres.... Edited June 25, 2013 by B35 via Church 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 25, 2013 Share #1550 Posted June 25, 2013 Once again, you bring up routes I don't mention. Two, why would you extend the Q44 to where the Q42 ends? And 3, If the B84 gets extended, I prefer it stays in Brooklyn. B84 to St Albans, really? The Q42 route is short enough for the Q44 to handle it meaning MTA would save $$$ on running. B84's brooklyn segment is weak as it is and many other brooklyn routes would make a brooklyn extension duplicative. You add service to all of linden blvd in queens and make getting to the casino easier from that part of queens and a direct access to the for downtown brooklyn and manhattan downtown. It creates a crosstown that actually links to many lines the Q89 failed to connect to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.