Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[Cait Sith]

1 hour ago, MTABusTransitFanner said:

This is something I don’t understand at all…. Why the hell is Queens proposing a bus route that travels almost the entire length of Springfield Blvd, from 147th Avenue ALL THE WAY to Northern Blvd????? The route I’m talking about is the new Q78 which goes from JFK depot to the Bay Terrace Shopping Center, like this route along with many others in this new draft plan is straight up stupid, confusing and absolutely unnecessary

Considering that the line is serving areas that are literal transit deserts.....it's not that bad of an idea. And it's not like we don't already have bus lines that are horrendously long and have many stops, like the M3 with it's 70+ stops....

The line just looks long on paper, how it performs will be different.

Edited March 31, 2022 by Cait Sith

[Q43LTD]

I feel like with Q26 and 27 it's like robbing Peter to pay Paul. Same with 5 and 85 swap

[checkmatechamp13]

3 hours ago, MTABusTransitFanner said:

This is something I don’t understand at all…. Why the hell is Queens proposing a bus route that travels almost the entire length of Springfield Blvd, from 147th Avenue ALL THE WAY to Northern Blvd????? The route I’m talking about is the new Q78 which goes from JFK depot to the Bay Terrace Shopping Center, like this route along with many others in this new draft plan is straight up stupid, confusing and absolutely unnecessary

That actually makes sense to have a full crosstown line from one side of Queens to the other. 

2 hours ago, 7-express said:

One of the stated goals from the people running the redesign is to have more continuous north-south travel routes.  So the proposed Q78 along with modifications to the Q31/76 helps them achieve this in eastern Queens.  How people will actually use the northern end is debatable.  Bayside HS loses their direct connection to Jamaica unless everyone just walks to Bell or Utopia.  Or crowds onto the Q28 to make the connection to the Q31/78.

They might also still run trippers on routes like the Q31.

1 hour ago, Q43LTD said:

I feel like with Q26 and 27 it's like robbing Peter to pay Paul. Same with 5 and 85 swap

Both of those routes are seeing an increase in service (Q26/27)

[IAlam]

4 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

With all of the congestion that occurs around the LIRR Station especially with the cabs, along with these "vision zero improvements" completely screwing over the area, I'd rather have it end at Hillside instead of the LIRR.

I think Sutphin should just be another busy way like Jamaica and Archer. That would probably make it a lot more bearable to go down that street.

1 hour ago, Cait Sith said:

Considering that the line is serving areas that are literal transit deserts.....it's not that bad of an idea. And it's not like we don't already have bus lines that are horrendously long and have many stops, like the M3 with it's 70+ stops....

The line just looks long on paper, how it performs will be different.

Yeah I agree with you on the Q78 on top of that it would serve Queens Village and Bayside which are 2 LIRR station were people actually make LIRR to bus connections. With the added fact the Q31 isn't there anymore people from Bayside HS and LIRR will most likely shift to that route The MTA needs to make sure that they are timing the buses to meet with the LIRR. On top of that Springfield Blvd unlike Little Neck Pwky is a North South corridor that's actually well used. Buses going North South on Springfield Blvd aren't carrying air, and I can see it getting more usage than the Q45 and Q57. Although I wonder if it would be better if it went to Green Acres instead of terminating near JFK. 

[BrooklynBus]

What I don't understand is why they want to duplicate the Broadway El in Brooklyn and run a direct route from East NY to Sunnyside (B53). Who wants to go from East NY or Bed Stuy or Bushwick to Sunnyside? I would like to see their market research.

They talk about improving interborough connections. There is real demand to travel between Rockaway and Sheepshead Bay. Yet they are not proposing a bus via the Belt Parkway to connect Sheepshead Bay Station to Rockaway. A 20 minute trip by car should not take two hours by bus. So why can't we have this route? 

[Gotham Bus Co.]

4 hours ago, MTABusTransitFanner said:

This is something I don’t understand at all…. Why the hell is Queens proposing a bus route that travels almost the entire length of Springfield Blvd, from 147th Avenue ALL THE WAY to Northern Blvd????? The route I’m talking about is the new Q78 which goes from JFK depot to the Bay Terrace Shopping Center, like this route along with many others in this new draft plan is straight up stupid, confusing and absolutely unnecessary

I have wanted a "Springfield Crosstown" route for years. There's nothing wrong with being able to travel from Southeast Queens directly to QCC, the Bell Blvd commercial strip, and Bay Terrace without having to go through Downtown Jamaica or Downtown Flushing. 

[Gotham Bus Co.]

3 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

Considering that the line is serving areas that are literal transit deserts.....it's not that bad of an idea. And it's not like we don't already have bus lines that are horrendously long and have many stops, like the M3 with it's 70+ stops....

The line just looks long on paper, how it performs will be different.

 

Remember that the M3 runs through several very heavily congested parts of Manhattan and can take over 2 hours one-way (at least until the Manhattan Redesign). The Q78 will probably run a bit faster than that.

[Eric B]

22 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

If one is starting at Queensboro Plaza, then the other one should avoid QBP entirely. 

I would think if they had to go back that way (Court Sq., etc), they should start over there, and then go through QBP along the way. (Too much of a destination to completely avoid).

[P3F]

I'm not super politically active with regards to community boards and such, but would anyone be able to point me to where I might be able to voice opposition to the Quentin Rd and Avenue S stop removals on the Q35? As a child, my family took the B2 or B100 to the Q35 to the beach, and it would be quite disappointing if folks of the future were denied this choice. Especially considering the very high parking fees at Jacob Riis Park.

Edited April 1, 2022 by P3F

[Future ENY OP]

28 minutes ago, P3F said:

I'm not super politically active with regards to community boards and such, but would anyone be able to point me to where I might be able to voice opposition to the Quentin Rd and Avenue S stop removals on the Q35? As a child, my family took the B2 or B100 to the Q35 to the beach, and it would be quite disappointing if folks of the future were denied this choice. Especially considering the very high parking fees at Jacob Riis Park.

I agree with you... One should not have to take 2 or 3 buses over to Kings Plaza to pick up the Q35. Planners really goofed up the Q35 just simply to provide faster service.. The route already does good for itself.. It didn't need to have additional stops removed in Brooklyn.

 

4 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

What I don't understand is why they want to duplicate the Broadway El in Brooklyn and run a direct route from East NY to Sunnyside (B53). Who wants to go from East NY or Bed Stuy or Bushwick to Sunnyside? I would like to see their market research.

They talk about improving interborough connections. There is real demand to travel between Rockaway and Sheepshead Bay. Yet they are not proposing a bus via the Belt Parkway to connect Sheepshead Bay Station to Rockaway. A 20 minute trip by car should not take two hours by bus. So why can't we have this route? 

Essentially the B53 is the B40 but in a 2.0 version.

[Lex]

3 hours ago, P3F said:

I'm not super politically active with regards to community boards and such, but would anyone be able to point me to where I might be able to voice opposition to the Quentin Rd and Avenue S stop removals on the Q35? As a child, my family took the B2 or B100 to the Q35 to the beach, and it would be quite disappointing if folks of the future were denied this choice. Especially considering the very high parking fees at Jacob Riis Park.

I didn't mention it earlier, but that's another thing I find ridiculous about it, particularly since the route already slots into that category.

 

8 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

They talk about improving interborough connections. There is real demand to travel between Rockaway and Sheepshead Bay. Yet they are not proposing a bus via the Belt Parkway to connect Sheepshead Bay Station to Rockaway. A 20 minute trip by car should not take two hours by bus. So why can't we have this route? 

Not only do I still question this claim (primarily outside of the peaks), but we still haven't seen a Brooklyn draft. Maybe you should wait for that before flipping your shit about nothing of the sort being proposed.

Honestly, even if one was proposed, I'd expect it to eat into resources dedicated to other routes, particularly the Q35.

[B35 via Church]

12 hours ago, NBTA said:

The routes are a lot better than the initial plan that was released a year or two ago. Yeah, there’s some lines that don’t look good on paper or wouldn’t work, but it’s significantly better than the previous draft, as most of those lines were literally just drawn lines. You may not like these lines, but some of these lines are better for the average commuter who needs to go from point A to B. And plus, this is a draft, stuff can change again.

Even though I'd say that this draft is an improvement over the first draft, I'm still not all that gung ho about the type of change to the network overall.... I am still of the basic belief that a bus route should not necessarily be confined to one specific sub-type of route variant... There's nothing wrong with a local/urban bus route having an all local variant & a corresponding/complementary skip-stop variant.... To me it's like, they have some pretty good routing concepts (even back with the first draft), but the overall route composition (as in, considering everything that a bus route is comprised of) is tarnished due to the whole, (still) going too far left with the system-wide stop removal bit... 

The level of acceptance of the overall network redesign by others that's commented in this thread thus far may vary, but I'm not going to be duped (by the MTA) by having this draft's improvement (over the prior one) garnering my overall acceptance of the redesign...

14 hours ago, MTABusTransitFanner said:

This is something I don’t understand at all…. Why the hell is Queens proposing a bus route that travels almost the entire length of Springfield Blvd, from 147th Avenue ALL THE WAY to Northern Blvd????? The route I’m talking about is the new Q78 which goes from JFK depot to the Bay Terrace Shopping Center, like this route along with many others in this new draft plan is straight up stupid, confusing and absolutely unnecessary

I understand your vehemence in regards to an all out Springfield route & am in general concurrence with your point with this Q78.... To answer the question though, they're doing it for basic coverage...

5 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

I agree with you... One should not have to take 2 or 3 buses over to Kings Plaza to pick up the Q35. Planners really goofed up the Q35 just simply to provide faster service.. The route already does good for itself.. It didn't need to have additional stops removed in Brooklyn

(Even well before the redesign), I have always gotten the sense that they want to turn the Q35 into a straight express to the Junction for Queens patrons.... Remember the stop removal bit that turned the Q35 into what it is today, compared to the (height of the) GBL days... For decades now, they continue to neglect the route's potential...

 

Edited April 1, 2022 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

9 hours ago, P3F said:

I'm not super politically active with regards to community boards and such, but would anyone be able to point me to where I might be able to voice opposition to the Quentin Rd and Avenue S stop removals on the Q35? As a child, my family took the B2 or B100 to the Q35 to the beach, and it would be quite disappointing if folks of the future were denied this choice. Especially considering the very high parking fees at Jacob Riis Park.

Can't the connection still be made at Avenue U?

[Future ENY OP]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Can't the connection still be made at Avenue U?

But the logistical problem is that you have to cross over from Kings Plaza, bus stop is in the middle of the block near Raymor Flanagan. The Q35 bus stop is no longer at the corner of Avenue U and Flatbush. 

[NewFlyer 230]

I think the new draft plan is a bit better than the old one but here are some notable things I don’t like.

Don’t Like:

I still disagree with the Q10/Q64. I think the two routes should be separate to maintain reliability. 
The Q23 is doing too much. I think the route is fine running between East Elmhurst & Forest Hills Station. There is no need for it to run via Queens Blvd & Union Turnpike. I get that the MTA is trying open up new route possibilities, but the longer these routes are the worst the reliability will get. They might as well keep the route the same if they are going to make the route longer and risk it becoming more unreliable than it is now.

I don’t think the Q25 has any business going south of Jamaica. I don’t mind it terminating in Flushing-Main Street Station as the route can be a bit unreliable. As I type this there are 5 Q25’s bunched together going towards Jamaica so cutting the route at Flushing would be beneficial to the route since most people get off at Flushing anyways.However it’s route south of Jamaica should be a separate route and I feel the same about the Q65. 
Both the Q25 and Q65 should remain running between Sutphin Blvd-Airtrain to Flushing.

This is just a general thing but I don’t get what’s the obsession of have routes like the Q16 and such terminating honestly in the middle of nowhere where they should just end at the major hubs. It’s just a waste of mileage in my opinion.

I don’t like how the Q50 is serving two roles as a Co-op City to Flushing route and then a Flushing to LGA route. I get that they are trying to kill to birds with one stone but there is always the risk of making these routes unreliable. I think if a Bronx route was to serve LGA it should go straight to the airport instead of detouring. Honestly ridership on the current Q48 to LGA from Flushing is terrible. Every single time I’ve used it there might be two or three people. I personally think the port authority should run their own shuttle service from LGA to Flushing and not have the MTA waste their resources. Most people are probably doing the  to the Q70 or maybe even Q72 transfer anyways because the headways on the current Q48 suck.

I also don’t get what is the obsession with removing a crap ton of stops. On my home line the Q25 they are removing some stops that see some good usage and with that new monster of a route the MTA is proposing why can’t they just keep the Q5 and Q25 doing what they currently do with some adjustments. I like what the MTA is proposing with the Q5 but there should be a separate route serving Merrick Blvd that only runs to Jamaica.  
 

I believe the Q20 should remain the same, but have it run to Jamaica Van Wyck to serve the hospital over there. Having it end at Briarwood just seems so sudden and won’t benefit anyone. I know most people would be on the Q44 anyways but with its extension to Fordham, the Whitestone expressway and its overall length it can be unreliable at times and the Q20 is a great alternative when it’s not running slow. 
And speaking of the Q44 why is it still detouring through Union street/Parsons Blvd. After Flushing I believe it should travel up Linden Place and use the Whitestone Expressway. It can make a stop at 14th and 20th Ave but speed the thing up for Bronx riders. The Q44 is already one of the longest routes in Queens. 

Edited April 1, 2022 by NewFlyer 230

[BrooklynBus]

13 hours ago, P3F said:

I'm not super politically active with regards to community boards and such, but would anyone be able to point me to where I might be able to voice opposition to the Quentin Rd and Avenue S stop removals on the Q35? As a child, my family took the B2 or B100 to the Q35 to the beach, and it would be quite disappointing if folks of the future were denied this choice. Especially considering the very high parking fees at Jacob Riis Park.

I believe that would be CB 18. The problem with Community Boards is that they only care about residents, not visitors or this just passing through. 

When I grew up the Q35 only made intermediate stops at Kings Highway and Avenue U. 

[Union Tpke]

On 3/30/2022 at 9:20 PM, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

Cypress Hills Street should be an issue since the will still be there.

 

I've been suggesting a "3-hour pass" for years. 

You could have more than 1 bus route via Cypress Hills.

Even just having unlimited transfers within 2 hours would do a lot of good.

[Union Tpke]

On 3/30/2022 at 9:47 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

That Q1-Q6 combo seems like they just wanted to free up as many buses from terminating in Downtown Jamaica as possible. I think the proposed QT18 would've worked out better operationally (in terms of avoiding the heart of Downtown Jamaica), but the tradeoff of course is that people would've had to transfer at Jamaica Avenue.

Exactly. It is a smart move to reduce congestion.

I like the Q4 extension to Elmont, and the Q5 extension down to X63 territory. Gives people the option of catching the LIRR at Rosedale (especially with the Atlantic Ticket and expanded CityTicket).

The Q7 extension to the makes sense (With Crescent Street, I think the issue is that it's harder to find a suitable turnaround and layover location, so Eldert Lane is the next best alternative).

I suppose a Q8 extension to Livonia Avenue makes sense to connect those areas of Central Brooklyn with Jamaica. (I doubt the B6 & B15 will remain in their current forms after the Brooklyn redesign, but whatever bus connections are available after the redesign is implemented might be useful)

I definitely think the proposed QT47 via Lakewood Avenue & 130th Street was a better route than the present-day Q9. More centralized within the neighborhood, and down a more suitable street (130th Street is wider than Lincoln Street, and the Van Wyck Expressway divides the neighborhood in that area). Especially considering that it's being extended down 130th Street on the southern end anyway. If they're worried about reliability of service along Liberty Avenue, they can just add some "Q57" short-turns between Jamaica & Lefferts Blvd and call it a day.

Why do you think they changed it?

Likewise, I think the QT46 was a better route than the present-day Q40. The proposed Q40 is going to be bypassing all of the stops along Lakewood Avenue anyway (except for 142nd/143rd Street). 

The Q10, I don't think it needs to be combined with the Q64, but as mentioned, there's a little bit of logic to the combination.

It will be weird that the westbound stop will be east of Union Tpke at 80th Road, while the eastbound stop will be at 78th/Union. It makes sense, given that there is no space at the south side of 80th Road/Kew Gardens Road, but it will be weird. This would significantly change the balance of users at the subway station. The 78th Avenue mezzanine/end will become packed. I wonder if some people will board the Q10 heading south at Forest Hills to get a better chance of getting the seat.

The Q11, should still be tied in with Woodhaven Blvd. I think leaving it as a standalone shuttle (especially at those frequencies) will just have people staying on the  train all the way to Howard Beach.

Wouldn't that have been duplicative?

I think they still should've branched the Q12 and had some buses run along Marathon Parkway.

Why not revert to the original draft proposal given that the N20G already serves areas on the City  Line?

For the Q13, I think the QT51 routing (basically, a Crocheron/35th Avenue route) was fine. It just needed to run full-time.

Why do you think that route is superior?

Q14 is good.

The Q16/61/62 split doesn't make any sense. I think the original plan for the QT85 (basically, a Q16/Q28 combination) was a good idea. And then just run the QT48/49 (proposed Q61/62) full-time.

What are they even thinking with the Q16/61/62? What frequency would you have these routes run at?

Q17 is generally good, but I'd run it along 132nd Street instead of 127th Street between 14th Avenue and 20th Avenue, to maintain the direct connection from Flushing to the College Point Shopping Center, and also keep the Q17 along a wider street.

Q18 streamlining in Maspeth makes sense.

Nice to see the Q19 get a span extension, but it's a shame it will come at the expense of a slower route from Corona to Flushing. I suppose it's to allow the Q23 to remain on 108th Street and not have to deviate to serve the  at 111th Street (with the Q19 from the north and the Q58 from the south, a good chunk of the Q23 riders are covered, and the rest can either walk from Roosevelt & 108th, or make their way to the Q14).

For the Q20, I think the Q62 could be rerouted to Beechurst, and allow the Q20 to terminate by the Cross Island Parkway. (Beechurst would get less frequent service, but it would more evenly distribute the ridership across those routes).

The Q21 reroute on the southern end is a good idea. On the northern end, I guess that's their way of somewhat maintaining the connection from Glendale to the  train for former Q29 riders.

The Q22 truncation on the western end was a long time coming, unfortunately. I'm disappointed they didn't create a route for Bayswater (e.g. Combining the Mott Avenue portion of the old Q22A with the Beach 9th Street portion of the present-day Q113/114).

The Q23/Q46 short-turn combination is odd, but I suppose there is something else to consider with that and the Q10/Q64 combination: Namely that the eastern end gets access to the Queens Blvd local (for example, for access to Queens Center Mall).

Q24 truncation to Broadway Junction makes lots of sense. B53 on the other hand...especially linked to the B32 of all routes...and the removal from Jamaica Hospital...I don't see what the Q42 has to do with it (other than the fact that 24 and 42 are transposed numbers...I really hope they weren't using that as a reason somehow). Just tell people that their alternative involves the Q54/55/56 or a backtrack on the train and call it a day.

The B53 is a waste, duplicating the J/Z.

I get that it's right by the College Point Depot, but they could've at least made an effort to have the Q25 serve at least a little bit of the residential section of College Point instead of ending it in the middle of nowhere.

I'm surprised the Q26 & Q27 are both basically going to match the present-day Q27 frequencies. I thought for sure one would see a cut, but in any case good for those riders I suppose...

Also a bit surprised they're having both the Q31 & Q76 run from Jamaica to College Point. I would assume at some point, they would start truncating some Q31s to only operate from Northern Blvd to Jamaica.

No comments for the Q32/33/35/37 changes. 

Glad they kept the eastern portion of the present-day Q38. The Juniper Blvd South routing should speed buses up a little bit through the area.

I was a bit taken aback by the extension of the Q39 on the northern/western end, but I suppose if it's truncated on the southern/eastern end, it shouldn't have too much of an impact on reliability. 

For the Q42, I think they should've just gone with a simple Brinkerhoff Avenue shuttle connecting to the Jamaica LIRR station. The Liberty Avenue portion is already covered by the Q65 & Q83, and as mentioned, the extension to Jamaica Hospital has absolutely nothing to do with the Q24.

Q43 extension to LIJ Hospital is good.

Q44 extension to Fordham Plaza is good.

Q45 is a good route, but it should run full-time (even if it means taking a bit of service from the Q1 and Q43). Would also provide some weekend service to Glen Oaks.

Q47 reroute to Woodside Avenue is pretty smart...provides some coverage over there and avoids traffic on Roosevelt Avenue, while also being a bit closer to Elmhurst Hospital. I don't think it needs to do the loop by Bulova, though.

Q49 getting 24/7 service is good. Don't really see a point in the extension east along Astoria Blvd, though. If anything, it should probably get cut back to 92nd Street, and use those resources to add a few trips to the Q19.

Nice to see the Q50 get 24/7 service. It would be nice if the rush hour service to Co-Op City ran like the BxM7 rather than making a full loop.

Nice to see they added some stops along Linden Blvd for the Q51. The route map shows it ending at Springfield Blvd, but the list of stops and the Remix map show it running to the present-day Q4 terminal.

Don't really see a point to the Q52 extension to Jackson Heights. If anything, considering the Q21 is also being extended, it makes sense to keep a reliable route starting at Hoffman Drive.

Q55 extension to Jamaica is good.

Q57...I'm warming up to the idea...provides a connection from eastern Queens to the  , though the vast majority of turnover will likely happen in Jamaica.

Q58/98: Definitely a good idea (and as a bonus, provides service on a small stretch of 111th Street, which is also near the busier section of the park, with the museum, zoo, and Hall of Science).

Q59 change in Brooklyn is definitely a good one.

I'd run the Q63 along 36th Avenue instead of 35th Avenue. I'd probably have it split Roosevelt Island with the Q104 (have one route cover the southern part and the other route cover the northern part). It's the only route from 21st Street to QBP, but most of those connections are available at Court Square anyway.

I don't think the Q83 is that slow along Liberty Avenue that it needs a full-time limited, but I guess that's also their way of maintaining the connection to the  train.

The Q66 should definitely have some short-turns at Northern Blvd & Broadway.

I still think the Q67 should run down Hunterspoint Avenue instead of Borden Avenue. I also think it should be truncated to end at Court Square.

What do you think about the loss of the direct Sunnyside-Ridgewood connection?

Q68 is a good route.

I don't think it's necessary for the B62 to run to Astoria, but if it's doing so anyway, then I suppose the Q69 being turned into a rush route makes sense.

Wish the Q73 didn't have to run along Austin Street.

They could just move it to QBL-yes, it would be a longer walk, but people would save time-the Q23 crawls.

Q75 is a good idea. I suppose the different sections of Oakland Gardens trade a Jamaica route for a Flushing route, compared to the previous proposal (QT31 & QT33).

Q78 is a good idea. I'd extend it a little bit to Boundary Road to provide a connection to the Q7.

Q80 & Q82 are a good idea.

I'm surprised the Q85 will provide 24/7 service to Green Acres Mall, but good for any residents of that part of Valley Stream that use it, I suppose. (Though I assume the vast majority of riders at that stop are patrons of the mall itself)

They say no frequency or span changes to the Q88, but they made it a 24/7 route...assuming that's true (which I would assume so), that's a good thing.

Q105 is a good route.

Q109 is an interesting route...I suppose it's another way of ensuring a reliable Jamaica-Ozone Park connection, since the Q57 is coming from eastern Queens.

I'd add a stop by Rochdale Village on the Q111/114. Also, for the Q114, I'd run it down Beach 19th/20th Street, and have a shuttle route cover Beach 9th Street.

I can only assume that the B57 extension beyond Broadway & Roosevelt is due to lack of layover space.

For the express routes, I think the outbound routing should be via the Queens-Midtown Tunnel, so they don't have to take Van Dam Street and sit through that congested entrance to the LIE. Buses should do the inbound route in reverse (6th & Madison Avenue routes run down 5th Avenue, and 3rd Avenue routes run down Lexington Avenue). It'll save some unnecessary deadheading between 57th & 3rd and 6th & 36th. Maybe with the exception of the Queens Village express routes (but even then, it might not be a terrible idea...57th Street to 5th Avenue to 23rd Street to 1st Avenue, with a stop by the hospitals before getting in the tunnel). 

For the QM1/5/6, I don't see the need for off-peak service to skip stops west of 188th Street. The QM5 could cover QM4 riders along Jewel Avenue, and the QM6 should just make stops along Union Turnpike. The simplest thing is probably just to have that pattern, and run those routes hourly, instead of every 90 minutes. The hospital stop for the Downtown routes is a good idea. For the QM3, instead of eliminating it, they could try converting it to a Downtown route with a hospital stop. 

 

[Union Tpke]

18 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

 

They talk about improving interborough connections. There is real demand to travel between Rockaway and Sheepshead Bay. Yet they are not proposing a bus via the Belt Parkway to connect Sheepshead Bay Station to Rockaway. A 20 minute trip by car should not take two hours by bus. So why can't we have this route? 

@Around the HornWhat do you think?

[Cain]

3 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

This is just a general thing but I don’t get what’s the obsession of have routes like the Q16 and such terminating honestly in the middle of nowhere where they should just end at the major hubs. It’s just a waste of mileage in my opinion.

The Q16 terminating here might be due giving this corridor some coverage as the Q58 is re-routed and Q98 being a SBS.

There is a Rec Center with Pool/skating rink, Western Beef (re-opened) and Home Depot at the loop that the new Q16 route would make. Perhaps bus layover in downtown Flushing is too congested?

P.S. I actually like this change to be honest (and I am biased as I do live off the Q16 and use that gym often).

[IAlam]

 

1 hour ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I believe the Q20 should remain the same, but have it run to Jamaica Van Wyck to serve the hospital over there. Having it end at Briarwood just seems so sudden and won’t benefit anyone. I know most people would be on the Q44 anyways but with its extension to Fordham, the Whitestone expressway and its overall length it can be unreliable at times and the Q20 is a great alternative when it’s not running slow. 
And speaking of the Q44 why is it still detouring through Union street/Parsons Blvd. After Flushing I believe it should travel up Linden Place and use the Whitestone Expressway. It can make a stop at 14th and 20th Ave but speed the thing up for Bronx riders. The Q44 is already one of the longest routes in Queens. 

I wouldn't say that a bad idea from a coverage stand point. But I can already see drivers struggling to cross over with Van Wyck traffic causing delays.
 

 

52 minutes ago, Cain said:

The Q16 terminating here might be due giving this corridor some coverage as the Q58 is re-routed and Q98 being a SBS.

There is a Rec Center with Pool/skating rink, Western Beef (re-opened) and Home Depot at the loop that the new Q16 route would make. Perhaps bus layover in downtown Flushing is too congested?

P.S. I actually like this change to be honest (and I am biased as I do live off the Q16 and use that gym often).

This I was about to mention this, I can see seasonal rider ship on the Q16 with people using this to get from the park to Main St Sta. the current Q58 isn't very useful for people going to the park facilities and friends would constantly complain about the hike from Mets or Flushing when trying to go there. I told them about the proposed change and they already love it.

[Cait Sith]

-long rant-

Forgot to mention the whole Q10/Q64 merger idea in my post.....I wasn't a fan of it before, and I'm not a fan of it now. Sending the Q64 further down Queens Blvd to where the rush hour Q10 local stop is at on Queens Blvd would make more sense than sending the Q10 all the way up there.

The extension looks like one of those things that looks good on paper, but there's way too much variables that will make the line under-perform, especially the dwell time caused by subway riders going to the airport. It'll screw over both ridership bases already existing at Kew Gardens and at Forest Hills.

There's a lot of untapped potential as to what the Q64 could be, but merging with the Q10 is definitely not the right idea...it'll screw over both ridership bases.

With the Q25 solely serving Kissena as a limited with the Q17 running non-stop, those riders would want an alternative service along Kissena, the Q64 could compensate for that to/from Flushing, and it'll also directly serve Queens College students looking to go to Kew Gardens or Forest Hills instead of Jamaica. A route such as that would eliminate the backtracking a lot of people already have to do with the subway, and open up a lot more options for riders all around. Have it run from Kissena to Jewel, and then to Queens Blvd to the 80th Road stop where the local Q10s currently board. The turnaround on that end of the route wouldn't be complicated either.

A better idea could've been drawn up for the Q64, especially now for some unknown reason, Jewel Avenue will have two local routes under this first draft, but merging it with the Q10 definitely ain't it.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

2 hours ago, Cain said:

The Q16 terminating here might be due giving this corridor some coverage as the Q58 is re-routed and Q98 being a SBS.

 

By the time it's implemented, OMNY will be fully rolled out and all SBS routes will be "demoted" back to Limited.

[Kingsbridgeviewer382]

6 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I think the new draft plan is a bit better than the old one but here are some notable things I don’t like.

Don’t Like:

I still disagree with the Q10/Q64. I think the two routes should be separate to maintain reliability. 
The Q23 is doing too much. I think the route is fine running between East Elmhurst & Forest Hills Station. There is no need for it to run via Queens Blvd & Union Turnpike. I get that the MTA is trying open up new route possibilities, but the longer these routes are the worst the reliability will get. They might as well keep the route the same if they are going to make the route longer and risk it becoming more unreliable than it is now.

I don’t think the Q25 has any business going south of Jamaica. I don’t mind it terminating in Flushing-Main Street Station as the route can be a bit unreliable. As I type this there are 5 Q25’s bunched together going towards Jamaica so cutting the route at Flushing would be beneficial to the route since most people get off at Flushing anyways.However it’s route south of Jamaica should be a separate route and I feel the same about the Q65. 
Both the Q25 and Q65 should remain running between Sutphin Blvd-Airtrain to Flushing.

This is just a general thing but I don’t get what’s the obsession of have routes like the Q16 and such terminating honestly in the middle of nowhere where they should just end at the major hubs. It’s just a waste of mileage in my opinion.

I don’t like how the Q50 is serving two roles as a Co-op City to Flushing route and then a Flushing to LGA route. I get that they are trying to kill to birds with one stone but there is always the risk of making these routes unreliable. I think if a Bronx route was to serve LGA it should go straight to the airport instead of detouring. Honestly ridership on the current Q48 to LGA from Flushing is terrible. Every single time I’ve used it there might be two or three people. I personally think the port authority should run their own shuttle service from LGA to Flushing and not have the MTA waste their resources. Most people are probably doing the  to the Q70 or maybe even Q72 transfer anyways because the headways on the current Q48 suck.

I also don’t get what is the obsession with removing a crap ton of stops. On my home line the Q25 they are removing some stops that see some good usage and with that new monster of a route the MTA is proposing why can’t they just keep the Q5 and Q25 doing what they currently do with some adjustments. I like what the MTA is proposing with the Q5 but there should be a separate route serving Merrick Blvd that only runs to Jamaica.  
 

I believe the Q20 should remain the same, but have it run to Jamaica Van Wyck to serve the hospital over there. Having it end at Briarwood just seems so sudden and won’t benefit anyone. I know most people would be on the Q44 anyways but with its extension to Fordham, the Whitestone expressway and its overall length it can be unreliable at times and the Q20 is a great alternative when it’s not running slow. 
And speaking of the Q44 why is it still detouring through Union street/Parsons Blvd. After Flushing I believe it should travel up Linden Place and use the Whitestone Expressway. It can make a stop at 14th and 20th Ave but speed the thing up for Bronx riders. The Q44 is already one of the longest routes in Queens. 

I've seen and ridden Q48's that were pretty packed so its a bit farfetched to say that it carries air. Also, the Q50 is only going to Co-Op City during rush hours when the Bronx re-design takes effect in late June, so I can see why the MTA is going for a LaGuardia extension for the Q50. It can be argued that it should skip Flushing entirely, but that would anger those in The Bronx that stay all the way to Flushing and vice-versa.

[Around the Horn]

3 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

@Around the HornWhat do you think?

B44-SBS to Q35 seems fine to me...