IAlam

7 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

Did the MTA ever loan buses to the WMATA? In the description of this video it says that bus 2656 (Castleton X3-45) was seen on a subway shuttle for the dc metro back in 2017. Didn’t find any pictures or videos of it though.

I think based on the description the person is saying the last time they road a Prevost in general was an MTA Prevost.

8 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The most ridiculous thing out of all of this is...that the Q23 is the route with the most frequent service up there, out of all of them. Without it headed to Corona Plaza, that section north of Corona Avenue is gonna be carrying a whole lotta air for most of the day. The only way I can see running Q23 service via 108th Street (north of Roosevelt) is if it deviates to Corona Plaza, because that's generally a populated area, even into the night. The same thing cannot be said for 111th Street. Even with that said, the frequencies for the Q23 would be way too frequent to have every single trip operate north of Roosevelt Ave, so it would be ideal to have short-turns at Corona Plaza throughout the week.

I wonder if the Q23 going to college point could be a reality. While the route wouldn't be very efficient it could offer a one seat rider to the people from Corona who work in the industrial areas of College Point. The lines towards College Point in the morning can sometimes be as long as lines in the evening. It would even just go directly on College Point Blvd and bypass downtown Flushing but outside of peak ridership I have no clue how it'd function. 

14 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Yes, I brought it up by having it operate via Whitestone Expressway and 20th Avenue, to terminate with the Q76. I was thinking of having it go via 130th Street & 20th Avenue, but there isn't a way to turnaround coming from the west. I mean perhaps they can use that turnaround at the north end of Petracca Place, but I don't know how that would be received by the businesses in that area. In the process, the Q25 would be truncated to Jamaica (going to the LIRR station as it currently does), and that Merrick Boulevard segment can be its own route (which should happen regardless of this proposal). 

An alternative would be to have the Q19 run up to the shopping center via Linden Place & the NY Times Distribution Center. That way, you would either have the Q15 running between Main Street  and 7th Avenue/Clintonville Street up in Beechhurst, and the Q25 terminate at Main & Roosevelt, or have the Q25 as one route from Beechhurst to Jamaica, with short-turns between Flushing and Jamaica on Weekdays and Saturdays. 

Yeah there's quite a chunk of riders along 73rd Avenue that are going to/from points west of Kissena along the Q88 (particularly QCM), which is why I'm vehemently against the whole Q88 via Horace Harding (east of 188th Street). The Q73 wouldn't do anything for those folks. 

While I don't have much of a problem with having a 73rd Avenue route, it has to go places where people want to go, which it largely fails to do so the further out east you go (save for QCC, at the very end of the route). Also, quite frankly, I don't know what to do with the Q73 out east. I don't know whether Little Neck would be as receptive to Forest Hills for subway access versus Flushing (and there's more around Main Street than at Continental Ave), so I think the ideal route headed east of Springfield on Horace Harding might actually be the Q17 instead of the Q73. The Q17 would serve more of HHE than the existing Q30, along with Kissena Boulevard and downtown Flushing. If that were to happen I would have Q17 short-turns during the day at 188th Street, since the proposed headways would be more than double the frequency for the existing Little Neck Q30. Perhaps I would have the Q73 head up 188th Street to 64th Avenue and terminate there instead of heading out to QCC.

I don't really know what to do with that route once you get to 188th Street, especially since much of the route along 73rd Ave is residential, so it's not like having the Q73 on HHE or 73rd Avenue east of 188th Street would provide a non-duplicative service on either corridor of importance. 

I'd rather the Q25 than the Q19. Whether from the east or west though I wouldn't say it matters too much. But I know people on 130th street would be very happy if the Q25 went that way. 

I fell the Q73 should remain is maybe with minor changes. Because of the Q26, the Q26 is already providing service to 73rd Ave and with the terminal at QCC allows for more local connects for people making trips not too and from the subway. The MTA is trying to make a hub at QCC which is great because hubs like can help boost connections to the Q78 and make the route more usable. Also as for QCM, I know people who live in that area and alwasy complain about how hard it is to get to Flushing. They would rather have a direct bus to Flushing over QCM any day of the week. QCM as a final destination as some demand yes, but it's also being used as a transfer point to the subway and serves as a terrible one. Under this plan 
people on 73rd now have 2 transfer points at Flushing an Forest Hills which are both express stations. That's a big win for them. If QCM is the final destination however it is still reachable with one ride either transfer to the Q88 at LIE or taking the  or  to Woodhaven.

As for little neck, people in that area aren't gunning for the bus to go to Jamaica. A lot of them are just riding to travel to other parts of Queens more than the subway. The Q88 does seem more of a throw away route but I can't see that neighborhood too upset as all of the core routes in that area are still intact. I think making it easier for them to get to Bayside is more important that getting to Flushing.

4 hours ago, Cain said:

Thinking about new Q12 terminus at Sanford Ave, it is going to be tough turning into this road (given Q12 uses artics) from Kissena Blvd without adding a bus lane or removing the bike lane/parking there. It serves as a traffic turn off for when Kissena becomes a busway. I see buses get stuck here often when cars clog the intersection, like just now. DOT needs to fix the traffic patterns and signals in Flushing to resolve this.

I added comments to the Remix but it feels like a black box of nothingness...

<image>

Yeah this is my big issue with the Q12 Sanford by Kissena and Main is a traffic nightmare often taking multiple lights to go one block throughout the day. It'd need to be at a better turn around point that's further away from the congestion. That's why I'd rather have it terminate near Queens College. Since i's a ridership generator, and it would make up for Kissena residents loosing the Q27.

8 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

As far as the stops are concerned, the Q10 and Q23 (if it indeed remains combined as is) can stop with the Q60. Then you would have the Q46 use the LIJ stop, the Q48 use the Glen Oaks Stop, and the Q20 use the existing Q46 layover stop. 

I guess since I brought it up, my one question regarding the proposed Q23 (regardless what happens south of Queens Boulevard), is whether it's necessary north of Roosevelt Avenue. Anyone else can chime in too, but I personally don't see it, the more I thought about it. You have the Q14 covering the existing Q23 route through to 43rd Ave, it doesn't serve 111th Street , and the Q19 has that section of 108th Street pretty much on lock. I would turn the Q23 on Roosevelt Avenue, to/from 103rd Street - Corona Plaza , and call it a day. 

Regarding Kissena Blvd service, I would personally would run Q25 local and LTD service during rush hours (and local at all other times). I would also split it apart from Merrick Boulevard service. That Merrick Boulevard portion can be named something else (Q87, in order to have a number around the others). As I've said before, during overnight hours the Q5 and Q85 can serve all local stops (and maybe some local service with all three running local during late evening hours, IDK).

For the Q10 and Q23 proposal if it survived both redesigns the way it did, there a good chance regardless of how we feel the MTA won't budge. They were willing to make a lot of changes on a lot of lines but the fact they were still set on combining the Q10 and Q64 and the Q23 with Union Tpk is the second time around a good sign they might not budge at all. 

Honestly once people realize what the new Q14, Q19, and Q58 are doing the Q23 will become an afterthought in that area. I can't imagine the line getting much ridership north of the LIE in the long run. It'll become some combination of the northern part being over served and/or the southern part being underserved. 

I think most if not all of the rush routes should have some form of local version for late night and weekend service. It makes no sense to continue running express when demand is low.

7 hours ago, mikecintel said:

I think there still bugs..... yes. Did you call the OMNY customer service and report the problem them?  They can check on there end on the server "did you pass your ride limit and was it exceeded or not".  Like you said it should not say that but it always good to know what's going on the back end.  We don't access to that information . What did the driver do he/she let you and your family go like to sit on the bus or in the subway the agent let you go through the gates? 

6 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The other thing that happens sometimes is if someone before you taps and you tap too fast, it won't recognize your tap. Definitely a bug. I try to wait a bit if it doesn't take my tap.

I tired again on my return trip it worked fine for both of us, so at that point I really didn't care anymore. As for speed that might have been the issue but who knows.

2 hours ago, NBTA said:

Why are several people saying that they should extend the Q44 to JFK? I just see no benefit for a line to go from Fordham to JFK via the Q44s routing.

Where is that being said? I haven't seen that anywhere.

On 3/29/2022 at 7:55 PM, mikecintel said:

While today I am coming home from work. I got on my usual bus route to home and when I tap my OMNY card it says "Card Not Accepted".  There are no hold or negative balance at all.  Then I re-tap it again and it went through.  Did any one while using the OMNY card receive that message before on the bus or subway.  This is first time I receive this message.  While taking the subway taping on the reader I never had a problem before.  I am think it's on the bus OMNY reader that has a problem.  Also sometimes I tap on the reader going work on the bus and it says "Tap again" which I just hold my card in front of the reader and it says that.  Perhaps the NFC chip is not communicating correctly to the reader something. 

If there is a double charge which I am not concern about because using the MTA own OMNY card they care "refund you automatically" if they detect a double charge which is good unlike if I use the good old Metro Card pay per ride and I get double change and when  I call or email the MTA they said "no your card was double charged" but it was because I put it on a Excel Worksheet to calculate my rides and if there is a double charge I will know it.

Ahh I had to tap in family and the 1st tap worked fine. But the second time I tapped for me it said the ride limit was exceeded. Definitely still needs to work out bugs. 

7 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Q20/Q44: lol @ the Q44 they finally did it. Q20s at Briarwood makes more sense, they carried air east of there. Can't speak about College Point, though 20 Av is just a bunch of big box stores that I can't imagine had high ridership anyways.

7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Agree with your Q20 assessment... I've also called for scaling back Q20's to Briarwood subway in the past, because there's far too many people in Jamaica gunning for Q44's - it's as if the Q20 is a straight up afterthought... Doesn't help that the Q20 tends to crawl from start to finish, and I started noticing that shit in the early 2010's along Main st in-particular... Like b/o's were being told to do that, to make the Q44 more appealing (is how it seemed to me).... The Q20B should've been stopped being a thing, and as far as the Q20a goes, you simply don't see that consistently moderate-to-somewhat heavy patronage b/w Flushing & that shopping ctr. in College Point along 20th av much anymore....

I still can't agree with ending the Q20 at Briarwood. Granted there isn't high usage to Jamaica like Flushing, but I ride the Q20 regularly enough on both ends of the line to know that people especially those getting on south of Union Tpk are going to Jamaica. The bus regularly dumps out at Sutphin Blvd. Especially with stops north of Sutphin on the Q44 being more spaced out the Q20 has it's own ridership albeit not as big as 44, but not enough where it's not useless. The only time I see empty Q20's going east/south are when they're in close proximity to the Q44. Going west/north the are usually people waiting for only the Q20 as well as those who just want whatever comes first the Q44 already suffers from reliability issues and the Q20 helps a lot to pick up the slack. Having the Q20 end at Briarwood will make it more of an afterthought that it already is. Also for Sutphin Blvd. on page 15/16 it is noted that it is one of the corridors that the DOT is looking to improve for buses. So I'd expect something is coming down the line to make the situation better there.

For the north end the shopping center is a regular ridership generator for the Q20a with people going towards Flushing. Granted it's not a massive amount of people getting on or off there but there aren't really many buses line you'll see crowded as it get further from the subway. Granted the Q20 doesn't need to be the route that goes there as it not the most efficient route. But is should still have a line that goes to Flushing. IIRC someone here mentioned earlier that the Q25 should be extended to 20th Ave.

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.

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. 

4 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Sure... What neighborhood are you in? From there you can figure out what district you are in and who your reps are.

I'll send you a DM

Does anyone know where I can find out who my local community representatives are?

14 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q20 - Overall not a bad route except for the southern portion of the route. I don't know why they would think Briarwood is a better terminal than Union Turnpike subway. However I do share the same concern that College Point Retail Center is left with only the Q76. The Q17 on 130th Street is not that close from most parts of the place, it's pretty huge. I would extend the Q25 there instead (see below for more specifics).

Q25 - Wow, they have this route really doing the most with it being the local for both Merrick Boulevards and Kissena Boulevards. I would have those segments separated from each other for the sake of reliability. Also, whatever happensI would also extend the route on its northern end, operating via Whitestone Expressway and 20th Avenue to serve College Point Center to replace the Q20A. It would still serve the beloved NY Times processing plant, lol. I would have it end with the Q76. Also, regardless what ends up happening (split or not), you don't need the Q5, Q85, and Q25 on Merrick during overnight hours. 

For the Q25 now that I look at it again yeah it would make more sense to go past Whitestone and all the way to 20 Ave for the shopping center. 

2 hours ago, Union Tpke said:

 

• The Q20 should go to Union Turnpike, not Briarwood.

 

1 hour ago, Cait Sith said:

As for the Q20, I'd rather keep it at Briarwood, the turnaround for the buses is a lot easier than Union Turnpike. It's also a decent option for those getting off the and , as subway riders already get off of there to get the Q20 or the Q44.

1 hour ago, R32 3838 said:

The Only issue is that the doesn't serve briarwood during the day, Only the . Only Off peak and Weekends the serves briarwood. I think that's why he thinks union turnpike is a better terminal since you can connect to both the  24/7.

For the Q20 I would rather have it terminate at the very least at Jamaica LIRR. For a couple of reasons being that first the old Q74 wasn't really popular route and people in that area will still have the Q73 and Q10 which will take them to Forest Hills. The only reason I'd even consider diverting the Q20 to Union Tpk is to make a connection with the Q10 which is now possible on Jewels Ave. As for why Jamaica LIRR as opposed to Briarwood is the , the LIRR, and AirTrain. The ride from Union Tpk to Briarwood to Archer doesn't take that long and people who are riding the Q20 from Jamaica usually fall under 2 camps. Either people who will take whatever comes first or deadset on the Q20 only. The people who would take whatever comes first wouldn't be happy if they have to figure out if they should get off at Union or Sutphin to catch the next bus. Also deadset Q20 riders who won't even consider using the Q44, even though these 2 buses go to the same place. This is because this route operates on some hills that people do not want to go up or down, particularly near Flushing and Briarwood (Even though some of this hills aren't even that big.). With the combined fact this route also appeal more to local students and seniors commuting usually traveling shorter distances not really for people going to the train (with the exception to Flushing of course.). Some of the Q44 stops can be far from the local stops and these people they would rather wait for the Q20. I usually switch between being on whatever comes first to deadset on the Q20, usually when I'm going home too. It's best to just keep it simple and have both routes go to Jamaica.

26 minutes ago, NBTA said:

You know the Q25 still exists right?

The Q26/27 transfer would work well. You wouldn’t have to transfer at Flushing, as you can prolong it to Hollis Court, or you can even transfer at QCC or Bell, for the Q78 to head further south onto Springfield. 

Either way, nowadays you have to transfer between the 25/65 to get to the 27/17, or to points east on Northern with the 12/13, so, it wouldn’t change much.

Q25 is only a north south route that is not getting any major buff in service to account for the loss of all the other routes in the area. (Specifically referring to SOUTH of FLUSHING) Q27 was an east to west route that also served the south of Flushing but is now being diverted. To make up for the loss of frequency and a one seat ride, IMO the Q12 should go beyond Sanford and Terminate near Queens College. This also creates new connections for people that are traveling within the neighborhood as now you can go from and area like Kissena to Murray Hill without transferring.  

The more I look at the plan the more it' feels like the MTA took a hands off approach with the express buses really just minor adjustments with some service cuts slipped in to see if people will notice. Like the fact they still didn't match the stops on Linden Blvd with the QM21 and 63 and then decided to remove the Main St stop on the QM68 but not the QM21. They didn't put in the effort to make proper off peak express routes like the did with Staten Island and it shows. Putting all the buses on the LIE is just as bad as putting them on Queens Blvd. It seems they really didn't put as much effort on this part of the proposal as they did with the local buses.

28 minutes ago, NBTA said:

Quote

I wonder why the MTA wanted to swap the Q25 and Q65 with the Q17 and Q27 in College Point? Other than frequency I can't see any good reason. I can also see these routes being swapped from CP to JA and QV.

The depot swap would be unnecessary for the 25/65, as they still terminate/run near CP. Also, the 25 still runs to Linden and Whitestone. Also, I suppose they sent both the 17/27 up to CP for terminal feasibility. Flushing went from 13 buses terminating in the box to 9.
 

Quote

For the Q12, Id like to see it get extended to Queens college to make up for the express Q17 and lack of Q27 & Q34. Also idk if a bus can turn easily around on Sanford the corner is very sharp and street is usually congested anyways. Also would like to see it replace the n20G still but that's a pipe dream.

The Q12 is coming down Main, so it wouldn’t need to turn off of Sanford. But you want the Q12 to run from Queens College to Little Neck? That’s bad. 

Ok so Even though the Q25/65 is the through route, the buses usually empties out in Flushing and you get a whole new batch of passengers. Routes like the Q17 and Q27 have more intermediate, from the Flushing Area (Not just station) to other parts of the neighborhood as well as Fresh Meadows. So now having them both express through the area makes it a more inconvenient for local travel. That being said, there isn't really any way of getting from the South part of Flushing to the east. Before you'd take the Q27 going via Holly, with the new route for the Q27 you'd have to go to Flushing Main st Sta and transfer. If the Q12 went to Queens College it would kill 2 birds with one stone. Lack of a south Flushing to point east connection and restore service that being gutted on Kissena from the Q17 no longer making any stops, Q27 which was diverted, and the Q34 which is eliminated. It wouldn't be for people going from Queens College to Little Neck but rather for people going to Flushing from Kissena, and for people going from points like Holly and Elder to destinations on Northern, as far as Utopia.

OK after finally finishing reading the whole thing. some of my major takeaways:

The Q4 being extended into Nassau to connect with the n1 is intresting.

I still think it'd be better if the Q10 went to Fresh Meadows as it'd be faster than the Q23.

I wonder why the MTA wanted to swap the Q25 and Q65 with the Q17 and Q27 in College Point? Other than frequency I can't see any good reason. I can also see these routes being swapped from CP to JA and QV.

For the Q12, Id like to see it get extended to Queens college to make up for the express Q17 and lack of Q27 & Q34. Also idk if a bus can turn easily around on Sanford the corner is very sharp and street is usually congested anyways. Also would like to see it replace the n20G still but that's a pipe dream.

The Q20 needs to go to Jamaica LIRR at the very least. Cutting it back before Jamaica just makes it inconvenient for everyone especially with the Q25/34/65 no longer going to Jamaica LIRR.

I'm glad the Q32 is still going to Penn as it's still the only bus that does it atm.

On the Q44 removing the stop on Kissena going northbound but not south bound confuses me. Also unless they move the 39th Ave stop to Roosevelt Ave I am against it.

The Q50 Looks great on paper but they need to address reliability of that line. I can't see how that would be a reliable service.

I am a big fan of the Q62 I think that route is going to be great.

The Q73 I'd make a minor adjustment and have it use Kissena Blvd instead of Main St to get to 73rd Ave.

Also for the 24/7 rush routes they need to be local during night hours and on weekends in some cases, when frequencies on their local counterparts are lower. Otherwise have long wait on routes that aren't even that crowded to begin with are just going to make the bus network seem more unappealing. 

For the Express buses we need better frequencies 10,12,15,20,30, or 60 none of this 23 min, 16 min, or 90 min off peak stuff. we also need double bus lanes on 6th Ave, maybe 57th St turned into a bus way?, and a bus lane on Van Dam St with a bus only signal for the left turn to the LIE.

The cuts on QM3/4/20 are not gonna fly.

For the QM2/3/20/32 I'd suggest the route change to LIE, BQE, to GCT on par with what the super express buses currently do.

For the QM buses that get off Queens Blvd or Woodhaven, I'd suggest LIE to BQE to Queens Blvd FOR PEAK BUSES ONLY off peak buses can stay on the LIE. It seems according to the DOT Queens Blvd is already getting a bus priority project so that can probably help out. 

For the QM4 maybe during off peak hour the bus can use 108th St to provide off peak service to QM12 customers. I'd still in the camp it should be extended to Fresh Meadows during all hours. 

For the QM1/5/6 I think all off peak QM6 buses should still make pick ups and drop offs until Main St. The QM5 buses that are still running when the QM1 isn't should still run on Union to Main St.

For the QM21/63/64/68:
QM21:
Should match stops of QM63/68 on Linden Blvd and Queens Blvd.
Add a stop at Linden Blvd & Guy R Brewer Blvd to compliment QM63. 
Add a stop at Linden Blvd & VanWyck Expy to compliment QM63..
Add a stop at Queens Blvd & 78th Ave.

QM63:
Should bypass all stops on Queens Blvd and go to the LIE via VanWyck Expy.
Adjust the location of the stop on Linden Blvd & Guy R Brewer Blvd to compliment QM21.
Add a stop at Linden Blvd & 142nd St to compliment QM21.
Remove stop at Queens Blvd & Hoover Av.
Remove stop at Queens Blvd & 78th Ave.

QM64:
Should bypass all stops on Queens Blvd and go to the LIE via VanWyck Expy.
Remove stop at Queens Blvd & Hoover Av.
Remove stop at Queens Blvd & 78th Ave.

QM68:
Keep the stop at Queens Blvd & Main St to compliment the QM21.
Maybe add a stop on Hillside Ave & Parsons Blvd. to help encourage ridership. (Area with new development occurring)

For the QM65 I'm not sure how well this new route would do since SE Queens has the Atlantic ticket for a cheaper price with more itineraries for people going into Downtown Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan. But in the end I don't live there so it'd really depend on the community and it they would utilize it. 

Also I'm still annoyed there is no replacement for the X51 or any new route the are of Queens below Northern and above the LIE. There is no LIRR or express buses in this area, and under this plan the people in this area are still being shoved down local buses into Flushing. Also NE Queens still lacking Downtown service. LIRR to Midtown only, bus to to Midtown only, or the existing express buses to Midtown only. It'd be nice if there was an express bus that served Fresh Meadows & Flushing, and then went to Lower Manhattan serving LES, Chinatown, and Downtown. Especially with many in the Asian community being afraid of the subway lately, It's show the MTA is listening to their concerns and provide service to an area that currently has no express bus service and is far from the LIRR.
 

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

Yes. TA messes up again.  They really need to suspend the express bus re-alignments for all boroughs. There’s not enough study to this.  Where is the TA getting these #’s from for low ridership on the QM3? But also, does the QM3 in a way duplicate the LIRR to an extent in NW Queens? 

58 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

It parallels the Port Washington branch. 

The PW line AM peak service is terrible if you're west of Bayside the QM3 provide an alternative to that.

Still reading the plan but other than minor issues the plan on the local side so far looks a lot better.

4 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Any school that sees those school trips that the provides, they are running them because they are needed because there are lots of kids around the City that travel substantial distances to go school. The DOE knows this and so does the . It's not even something that should be disputed, given how easy it is to verify (and I don't mean looking at how crowded the buses are either). The schools know how many kids from outside of the zoned areas attend. Regardless, if they don't provide school trippers, they would have to provide some sort of supplementary service either way.

The reasons why vary, from kids traveling to specialized schools, to overcrowding forcing kids to have to travel further to a school with availability and so on, and as I said, none of this is new.

I remember back when I was in HS the G train after school would be slammed enough so that you could probably fill up an entire train just with kids going to Court Sq. The amount of kids that would commute 90+ min just to get to school was insane, and iirc I remember some people that had 2 hour commutes. That's was and probably still is common for some kids in Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Sci, or Staten Island Tech.

On 3/17/2022 at 4:08 AM, dkupf said:

For Queens, I believe that for the premium that the people pay for express bus service, the service variations within Manhattan should be maximized, but simple and easy to understand.  For the Old Draft Plan (ODP), I commended the MTA for the express bus routing nomenclature.  The middle digit determined the route path within Manhattan:

·         0 = Downtown

·         1 = 34th Street

·         3 = 3rd Avenue

·         5 = Madison Ave

·         6, 7 = 6th Avenue

I also commended the MTA for adding more Downtown Manhattan express bus service.  But they know the Service Guidelines Manual (SGM) and should not have violated them in most situations.  There were significant amount of express bus services, in the ODP, when the first trip started at 4:00PM, and the second at 5:00PM.  Note that the 4:30PM trip was missing.  And, during the weekday PM Peak, most trips left at the same time.  This would have been a recipe for disaster!  But this was only a draft; I am sure that there would have been adjustments.

The QMT169  and QMT170 (QM17), would have given riders in the Rockaways a faster trip.  The result was backlash in Howard Beach.  But the two stops in Howard Beach that are currently utilized by the QM15 are only served, appropriately, during the weekday peak.  QMT168 riders would have benefited because it would have served more of Howard Beach, especially during the weekday off-peak and Saturdays.

The ODP showed that the only express bus services that would have operated outside of the Weekday Peak were the QMT164, QMT166, and QMT168, and none on Sunday!  Was express bus service ridership in Queens before The Pandemic that low?!  I doubt it.

I thought that those who live in Beechhurst and Bay Terrace had the right to be upset with the ODP.  The express bus stops at 160th Street & Cross Island Pkwy are currently well-utilized.  Hence, stops should be added in this area.  I also thought that reverse peak, weekday evening, and weekend service were, and are currently, viable. In the ODP the QMT163 and QMT165 were proposed to have weekday evening trips.  This meant that the corridors for these two routes, as per the SGM, should also have had weekday midday trips and, possibly, Saturday trips.  Here are what I suggested for northern Queens compared to the ODP:

·         QMT103 – Operate via Beechhurst with more stops, more trips, and more frequent service.

·         QMT133 – Mimics the QM32 route path in Queens, with more stops in Beechhurst, more trips, and more frequent service;

·         QMT163 – Operate weekdays only.  Operate in a clockwise loop with more stops in Beechhurst and more frequent service;

·         QMT164 – Operate weekdays only.  Service span as per the SGM; and

·         New QMT171 – Mimics the QM2 weekend route path in Queens.  Operates reverse peak, weekday evenings, and weekends, i.e. when the QMT163 and QMT164 did not operate;

Electchester, Forest Hills, Glen Oaks, and Lake Success were also upset with the ODP.  The MTA wished to eliminate all express bus stops from Queens Blvd for 3rd Ave and 6th Ave Manhattan service, forcing people onto an already overcrowded subway.  The SGM already makes this an exception to the rule; express bus service should be maintained at these stops.  The MTA also wished to eliminate 3rd Ave Manhattan service via Union Turnpike east of Fresh Meadows.  Here are what I had suggested for central and eastern Queens compared to the ODP:

·         QMT135 – Mimics the QM36 in Queens;

·         New QMT136 – Mimics the QM44 route path east of Queens Blvd.  Makes stops on Queens Blvd between Jewel Ave/69th Road and the Long Island Expressway;

·         QMT162 – Operate weekday evenings and Saturdays as per the SGM.  Makes stops on Queens Blvd between Jewel Ave/69th Road and the Long Island Expressway;

·         QMT167 – Mimics the QM6 in Queens.  Operate weekday evenings and weekends as per the SGM; and

·         QMT157 – Mimics the X68 route path in Queens;

I thought that all other QMT routes in the ODP should have been done as proposed.

What are your thoughts regarding what I had suggested?  What could I have done to make it better?  Though this would be hindsight, I still wish to know.

On 3/18/2022 at 12:40 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

As for off-peak QM service, I've definitely been on a decent amount of trips where I was the only one on the bus. A lot of reverse peak trips, you have to run them in that direction anyway, so the marginal cost of running them along a route and making them available for passengers is lower, but still, ridership should be considered. To have a B/O spend half his/her shift (whether that's a single round-trip or two peak direction trips with a deadhead in between) transporting single-digit numbers of passengers in an area where there are alternatives is not the best use of resources.

Off peak QM ridership is poor because the routes themselves don't adjust for off peak ridership. There is no reason buses at 8-9AM should be using Northern Blvd and Queens Blvd to get to Queens. It's hard to find the appeal of a return QM bus when these buses are usually going no faster than the subway on their return trips. On top of that most off peak QM routes are run by CP which is by far the worst express bus operating depo in the city. This was the depo that was regularly kicking passengers off at Herald Sq so bus ops could take a longer layover. On top of that before the advocacy group, we'd regularly see buses no show for the trip. It was common to wait for a 10AM bus for it only to not show up and then have to wait an hour for the next bus. CP was (kinda still is) so bad at running their buses it's no surprise that no one want to rely on them anymore. Honestly only after the pandemic has things gotten somewhat better. Which were also, surprise surprise seeing, more ppl ride off peak. But some of the main issues that I see with the Queens express buses that isn't being addressed, is the fact Queens needs an off peak network similar to SI where the off peak routes are different than their peak counterparts. Additionally we need service in more areas that are lacking subway access. Since 2010 there has not really been any express bus to serve the area of Queens north of the L.I.E. and south of Northern Blvd. People in those areas are currently riding in packed buses into and out of Flushing, and the MTA wanted to remove service to and from Flushing and make those people go to stations further away. But at the same time they did not provide an express bus alternative. It also amazes me the DOT was able to spend the time and money to add a bike lane to Queens Blvd but not add any bus lanes. Granted there is more than enough space to reconfigure the street to add a proper bus way. 

2 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

 

Never say never.

Remember that the scheme it has now is just a wrap, they can just remove it and use the SBS scheme that's underneath it. They could also use it at is for both lines, much like how the Q10 and Q52 shares artics.

I've seen the Q12 pool on the Q44 and the Q44 pool on the Q12 fairly regularly. At the end of the day as long as it's a 60ft bus I doubt the depo really cares. 

7 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I have noticed this problem on only a few express bus rides... This morning coming home, and the other night coming home. I filed formal complaints for each one. I would suggest you do that each time because when I follow up on this, I will be asked for specific examples so that they can try to get this under control. That's really the only way to address it. College Point is the worst offender though, no question.

I haven't taken any trips on other lines to see how service is in a while, but I will plan that sometime soon. The College Point drivers, some of them know my face from when I was riding years ago when I first started the group to see what issues riders were having to have addressed. They would see me on the QM2, QM5 and QM6 on weekends, so they knew something was up. lol 

I have not done that in a few years in part because I was under the impression that quite a few issues have resolved themselves, such as the whole saga with drivers not wanting to go up to 57th and 3rd. Has that been an issue recently?

When it comes to any problem on express buses, College Point is always the worst offender.

Luckily I haven't had any drivers kick me off the bus it's rare I ever go that far nowadays. But I know for a fact I would not put up with that today. If a BO tries to kick me off at Herald, I'm not walking off with out a badge number. 

I'm doing a some traveling outside of the city this week so I doubt I'll be on any express buses for a while, although I was always an occasional rider. 

20 hours ago, QM1to6Ave said:

Today's adventure...took the subway into the city, which was actually not too bad. In the evening, the 8:10 QM5 was PACKED...I was the last one on, and every single row was taken, and 3 people sitting in the back row. The B/O had his bag blocking the front row so I thought to myself "f*** this" and sat down in the row right next to his bag. I'm not taking this nonsense. B/O didn't say a word to me or he would have gotten a mouthful from me.

I hope more people do the same so we stop this nonsense.

I've been noticing that people have been spreading out more on QM trips. I used to remember late mornings and midday buses into the city being nearly empty and this week I'm seeing 2-3x the amount of passenger as I did pre pandemic. I really hope the MTA is keeping track of ridership in both peak and off peak periods because overall ridership doesn't alwasy paint a great picture of what's happening. 

On 3/3/2022 at 7:27 AM, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Two things...

1. If the chains have been removed on your express bus, that means you can sit in any seat. Any bus with seats being blocked with personal items in the first three rows is unacceptable and if it happens, I want to know about it. I was on an express bus the other day where a driver had three rows blocked off with his personal items, but two of the rows were still chained off, but as seats re-open with the chains removed, we will be monitoring this situation. Many disabled or elderly people use these seats because they have mobility problems and those people are now starting to take the express bus again and need them.

2. We have been receiving a number of complaints of bus operators claiming that there are no more seats available on express buses, forcing people to wait for the next bus. In some cases, there have been 20 seats. That too is unacceptable and it is a form of discrimination, which is strictly prohibited by the . These buses are in service to pick people up and trying to place arbitrary seat limits that don't exist or denying paying passengers access to buses with seats cannot continue.

Oh I wished I saw this earlier, because almost every single CP bus I was on this week had belonging on the front. With the only exception being on one trip where there was another employee on the route with the driver.

I made some trips to Staten Island this week and some buses did have belongings on the front seats, but the rest we're fine

On 3/4/2022 at 3:45 PM, QM1to6Ave said:

I wish i could say seat blocking is isolated but EVERY SINGLE CP bus I caught this week (2 trips per day M-F) had either first row or first two rows blocked off with personal items. Ridiculous. I think the SLDs in CP need to remind all BOs to stop this nonsense. These BOs in CP have become a bunch of selfish babies since the pandemic began. Every other day its some other nonsense and I am sick of it. 

It's funny you mentioned it because a lot of them aren't even wearing masks either. They're afraid of passengers sitting near them because of covid, but not enough to put on a mask.

12 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

If you ride the express bus first, you pay the full $6.75, and nothing goes towards the fare capping, since the transfer to the local bus or subway would be free. Now just today, the  claims that you can see which trips actually go towards fare capping.

By Wednesday, I should have paid enough via OMNY to see what happens with my account.  What I will do this week is experiment where I tap at some random subway station and see if there is anything noted in my OMNY account.  I don't plan on using the subway this week, but just for sh*** and giggles I can tap and then check my account.

*sigh* That's what I was worried about just like the current unlimited you need to swipe on the subway or bus before hopping on the express.