B35 via Church

On 1/22/2024 at 4:05 AM, JAzumah said:

If similar people exist in two places culturally, a bus between the two places has a shot....

This is one reason why I've long been of the belief that an Astoria - Williamsburg route would do quite well... When they came out with the current B32, I thought that was a golden opportunity to have that be accomplished.... However, of course, they stunted it, to only opt to run it to the (ass end of) Court Sq..... As for that proposed B62 in the Brooklyn redesign plan, they're doing the exact opposite - having it run well past Williamsburg from Astoria, to Downtown Brooklyn...

I would much rather combine the WBP - Downtown Brooklyn portion of the current B62 with that proposed B27 of theirs (in other words, a WBP - Red Hook route), over having the entirety of their proposed B62 come to fruition....

54 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church At one point earlier in the process, the maps mentioned which routes interlined. So the 52A/52B interline in Gordon Heights, the 11/17 interline in Hauppauge, and the 51 interlines with the 53/55 at Port Jefferson Shopping Plaza (evenings/weekends, the 51/53 interline and the 55 turns around on itself). Those were from earlier maps of the proposed network. 

Also, I forget if I mentioned it, but I know the 7 & 12 are interlined to a certain degree on weekends. And the 3 & 10 are interlined at Babylon. (Those two aren't mentioned on any old maps, similar to the 2 & 77Y that you mentioned).

My guess is that the 51 B/O changed his sign to 55 somewhere around Downtown Port Jefferson or over by the LIRR station just to make things easier for people heading south down NY-112. 

For the 2 & 77Y, my guess would be that the B/O takes a meal break in Yaphank (judging by the long layover on that end)

Yeah, that crossed my mind also (about that #55 likely having been a #51 before the fact), but to be picking up pax. before you're supposed to be picking them up, has never sat well with me.... Reeks of favoritism... But while I agree with having gotten rid of ending buses at the PJ Ferry like the old S61 did, you create the situation where #51's don't layover on the northern end of the route - doing straight (as in, layover-less) interlines with #53's & #55's on weekdays, and with the #55 on weekends (now that I'm looking at the schedules here)... Come to think of it, the 2 stints that had me in Patchogue, I did not see a #51 at all.... The only time I saw a #51 was earlier in theday, after the #58 I took pulled out of Smith Haven....

In any case though, the #53 I took up there went OOS & made the left turn onto Chereb lane to turnaround or whatever.... Crazy enough, I forgot to write the bus number down... Was hoping that said #53 would arrive back at Patchogue during my wait for the #6 after I got off the #55... So I sat inside the LIRR waiting room (train fans would've loved seeing the two diesels at the station; one was on the opposite side/track at the station, and another train (that ended at Patchogue) pulled in, not too long after I went inside.... At least it's good that the MTA opened up the waiting rooms during these frigid temperatures (I also waited inside the waiting rooms at Amityville & at Rockville Centre btw)... But yeah, as I was about to board the #6, that same #53 driver I had stepped off the bus to stretch his legs or whatever... Both buses ended up pulling out at the same time.... So yeah, I lucked out in that regard.

The one thing that's still gotta get straightened out, is the situation with the bus stop signs.... When we got to Coram Plaza, I CTFU'd at the fact that they put up a fence between the sidewalk & the property, and got rid of the bus shelter as well.... That's one way to get rid of the riff-raff that used to congregate there.... At the same time though, there was no semblance of knowing that buses even stopped there!! None of those bus stop placards (which is so tacky to me) or nothing..... But throughout the day, I still saw shelters up where buses don't stop at anymore... Furthermore, it's odd that they have new bus stop signs along West st. NB in Patchogue; alongside the district court bldg. - that have the old bus route designations (S40, S54, S66, etc).... Like, what are we doing here....

Being that buses run later under the new network, I thought about prolonging the trip (by doing the #3 to the #5 to the #51 to get to the main line) after having gotten off the #6 at Whitman, but apparently I just missed the #3.... So I waited inside Whitman for a bit & eventually caught that n79... Of course I was the only one waiting for it... Of course I was the only passenger on the bus within Suffolk county.. SMH.... At least it picked up a fair amt. of pax along Manetto Hill.... I knew Indians moved out to Hicksville, but I didn't know as many also moved out to Plainview... Nobody got on or off along OCR though.... As much as I like the n79, I think it may be time to consider taking it away from Whitman & having it tap into that latent demand in Syosset....

On 1/19/2024 at 11:26 PM, CenSin said:

I live in Midtown Manhattan now and I go to work basically in the opposite direction of where everybody else is going: away from the central business district. So I get on the train in the AM and it gets less and less crowded until I get off. In the PM, the train gets more and more packed as I get closer to home.

It used to be the opposite. I don’t think I can quite get used to this reversal.

I work in LI & no longer take public transit, but I don't miss peak direction commuting to/from Manhattan for shit.... Last time I did so was back in the early 2010's; used to do the whole to the to get to Christopher bit.... Sometimes I'd take the & walk from West 4th on a good (brisk, cold) day.....

Back on MLK jr day, I finally went out to Suffolk County.... Killed two birds with one stone, with fanning the full n70 (which I haven't done in a good minute) & trying out the first SCT route I embarked on - the #12.... Rode that to Bay Shore, where I just jumped on the first thing that pulled up in service - which was the #7.... Rode that the full way, then doubled back on (another) #7 & took that to Brentwood.... At Brentwood (the first #7 I took), we sat there for exactly 20 mins due to a driver change... All the other routes had been pulled off after one of those SCT transport cars sped up to the front of the bus out of nowhere, that contained the b/o that eventually took us up to the VA medical center.... Speaking of which, that 20 minute wait seemed to serve a dual purpose - the driver change, and the fact that buses can't layover inside the hospital facility, due to the construction/renovation going on, that has it picking up/dropping off a a temporary bus stop (nice little tent setup they did for it btw, as an attempt to protect pax. from rain & snow - although it did nothing for the cold... lol)....

Unsatisfied with how the above trip got stymied (after the 2nd trip on the #7, I ended up taking the LIRR at Brentwood to Hicksville to do some NICE fanning, because.... mother nature called ), I did some SCT fanning yesterday.... On top of it, I got a free ride in the morning from Jamaica to Amityville (c/r never came up to the car that I was in, so I still have that ticket for maybe... a trip next week )....

So I ended up doing the #4 - #58 (to Riverhead) - #66 - #53 - #55 - #6 - n79 - n24 (east) - n15 (to RVC), then the LIRR, , and the B35 home.... Routes bolded, I rode the whole route of... I would bold the #55, but I can't figure out where that route ends at, on the northern end.... As soon as I crossed the street after getting off the #53, I saw a #55 in the distance... There was someone waiting for said #55 back to Patchogue, so it was the 2 of us standing there.... When we boarded the bus though, there were 2 other people already on it (one of which was some dude talking about conspiracy shit involving the Holocaust with the b/o; talking about fake or real gas chambers or some shit).... So I was like, where the hell does this thing start at? Because on the site, it supposedly starts at the PJ shopping plaza - meaning it & the #53 supposedly terminate there....

One thing I'll say right off the bat that, of the 4 rides that were over a hour long (#4, #58, #66, #6), none of them felt as long as they ended up being, time-wise.... The buses definitely move at a better pace.... Being perfectly honest though, while it definitely felt more like a cohesive network of routes (compared to the old network), I didn't feel like I was riding a public transportation system... Felt more like I was riding a private transportation system that's trying to make the jump into becoming a public transportation system.... That can be a good thing & a bad thing at the same time.

Just for shits & giggles I guess, few things:

• At Amityville, the #4 I ended up taking was the last bus to pull out, by a significant margin.... There was a #1 on layover, but it never went in service; not sure if there was an issue with the bus or what, because I did see the b/o circling around the bus, as if something was wrong.... The only bus that left on time was actually the #10... The #2 a] arrived out of nowhere, b] left early as shit (6 mins. to be exact), and c] sped o ff, almost hitting someone crossing the street... Not sure what her problem was.... Anyway, the lady I had on the #4 left late, to stop off to use the bathroom (which I wasn't tripping about).....
• Speaking of the #2, there was no way in hell I was taking an ARBOC from Amityville to Patchogue.... After having gotten off the #4 at Smith Haven though, I boarded the only bus that was standing waiting at the time (to get out the cold) - which was that #58... Which unfortunately, was also a damn ARBOC.... That ride was fu**ing brutal....
• The terminal situation at Riverhead... Confusing as shit.... I didn't know what the hell anything was (as in, what route was what, as all the buses were turned off & there were no signs on any of the poles... guess they blew off in the wind or something, IDK), nor what route in what direction was leaving from where.... I had to ask her (the driver of the #58 I had) where does the #66 stop... She told me to cross the street, but mentioned something about not knowing if that's a bus stopping at the hospital or not, and to go up the last bus (there were 4 buses on that side of the street standing idle) & ask {if that was a #66}..... In the interim, this cute, thick little cookie asked "you waiting for the #62", I said "nah, the #66".... She pointed behind her bus (which was the same bus that the driver on the #58 I had, told me to go ask... problem was, no driver was there - the doors were open though)....
  • Long story short, IDK what route that last bus in the line of 4 actually was, because the #66 I eventually took, pulled up behind that bus, from that small pocket proximate to Osborn av, proximate to the RR tracks... None of those 4 buses in question left before the #66 I ended up taking did..
• Apparently, the #11 & 17 interline (there's a paper on one of the ARBOC's I saw along the way , that had a paper 11 sign on one side of the doors, and a paper 17 sign on the first window next to the door.... Same apparently goes for the #2 & the..... 77Y.... *shrugs*
• The #58 had the most passenger activity out of all the routes I took.... The least was easily the #53 (the trip only transported 3 pax from end-to-end - myself included).... The ride I enjoyed the most was actually the #6.... The #55 driver I had was absolutely flying down rt. 112 though!.... I would say I got lucky with the #66, but at the same time, even with the old network, it always seemed like the EB S66 had more passenger activity along the way than the WB S66... When I got off the #66 at Patchogue, I'd say there were about 20-30 people waiting for the bus back east.... I'd say the entire trip garnered about 20 people total (4 of which, myself included, got off at Patchogue)....
• I made the right call getting off that n15 at RVC.... I would've been screwed if I'd have rode it full to Long Beach... It'd have had me waiting over an hour for that last n33 trip back to Far Rockaway... Also, there was (IMO, what looked to be) an asylum seeker that was acting erratically.... I was already sitting at the back of the bus, so I wasn't getting up to move to another seat (like this one other dude did).... Pacing back & forth, stretching out on the seats (dude was about the same height I am; 6'3", so I know that shit was uncomfortable), continually switching seats, continually taking off his shoes, to name a few things... I'm in the back doing my number puzzles, and dude pulls out a burgundy wool hat - as if to suggest that it's up for sale ... He didn't say anything the whole time; I'm not so sure if he even knew english..... But whatever.

Any questions, have at it.... Nothing else on my mind right this second that I can think of sharing

On 1/18/2024 at 12:32 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q31: I wouldn't have a route from Flushing do that either (go down Tremont Ave). Way I saw it, it would take Zerega to Westchester, then Waters Place (passing by Westchester Square along the way, no weird loops needed around that area. As far as the Bx24, I brought it up since we were discussing such a route (and given that it would mimic the Bx24, why not kill two birds with one stone?).

Overall I do agree that dealing with the Bx24 overall is a Bronx issue, I do think it is worth discussing that as it specifically pertains to this proposal. There would be a notable overlap between Westchester Square and Hutchinson Metro Center between the two routes, and the Bx24 both runs infrequently and has very little through riding at Westchester Square. The rest of the Bx24 of course is another conversation, although I wouldn't hesitate to can the Bx24 out of there should a route like this come to fruition. Also, if not the 911 call center, where would those buses u-turn, near the Amazon facility? That's probably the only other place I see feasible (both operationally and in terms of coverage).

Alright, so that's where the difference lies... You'd have it approach all those medical facilities from the west (of the Hutch)... I'd still have the route run along the current Q50 up until a certain point (Jarvis); operationally severing the current Q50 into 2 complementary routes, instead of having all service run to/from Co-op (with, again, increased service... and not just completely cutting into current Q50 service to come up with this route of sorts.... The latter is what was done with the Q53 to have created the Q52, but that's neither here nor there).... That's where you mentioned it being a separate/standalone route & what not - and now I see why you say that, with having such a route go Zerega-Westchester-Waters, etc....

As far as the Bx24 goes, well in coming out with this Flushing - *Bronx Medical Centers* type of a route, not only am I not looking to create competition with the Bx24, I wasn't even thinking about the Bx24 (not in the sense that IDK that the Bx24 exists, but in the sense that the Bx24 is irrelevant to the task at hand).... The Bx24 b/w Westchester Sq. & HMC is already in competition with those HMC shuttles, so if it's any reason to (want to) can the Bx24 north of Westchester Sq., it would be for that reason.... Those shuttles do quite well up there.... I don't want to turn this into a *what should be done with the Bx24* discussion, so I'll stop here...

As for where would the buses u-turn, there's a roundabout just past the security checkpoint at HMC (to access Montefiore - Hutchinson, Mercy College, etc) .... Having it cut through the (access to the) Atrium parking lot (over there by the gym; LA fitness) to get to Bassett, as I see it, would more or less defeat the purpose of even having it run up Marconi....

On 1/18/2024 at 12:32 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q18/Q67: Alright, so the Q18 would essentially be the bus that connects 69th Street in that area down to the . I guess I'm not too opposed with such a Q67 setup, when you mention it that way. One thing I will say though is that either the frequency of the Q18 would need to be boosted or there would need to be short-turns to/from 61st Street during parts of the day, because the waits on the branched sections (since you mention between Woodside Ave and the LIE) will add up. It would make the route straighter of course, but infrequent....

In having the Q18 branched, I'd increase service for the purpose of running short turns b/w Roosevelt & Metropolitan.

On 1/19/2024 at 12:23 AM, Ex696 said:

There's something I've been thinking about since the Bx18 was turned into a loop/circulator route. What if the Q38 was also turned into a loop/circulator? Considering the terminals aren't that far from each other, it seems like a decent idea.

10 hours ago, Ex696 said:

I don't see why those 2 are being split while the Bx18 got the circulator treatment. I'm not sure if length plays a large factor in it, though.

Wait, what?

Turning the Q38 into a circulator is a decent idea on what front? What need is there to connect the Corona & Rego Park spurs of the route? It isn't a situation like with the southern portion (as in, south of QB) of the route, where the Eliot & the Juniper Valley segments of the route converge to serve Middle Village ... Being that the Corona spur & the Rego Park spur is divided by the LIE, they serve the QB line at 2 different stations... The having of the Juniper Valley segment & the Eliot segment serving Middle Village in & of itself is far less necessary for the overall network than splitting the Q38....

To juxtapose the Bx18 & the Q38 I find to be quite bizarre... The Q38 shouldn't be turned into a circulator due to the proximity of the Corona terminal & the Rego Park terminal, because they currently have the Juniper Valley & the Eliot segment connecting to the at Metropolitan.... The point of a circulator, generally speaking, is to bring commuters on opposite ends and/or sides of a community/-ies, that would be typically transit deprived otherwise, to a central (major) location.... Not even counting the express routes, I'd bet you'd need more than two hands to count the amount of local bus connections that the Q38 offers from terminal to terminal..... That is proof alone that the last thing the network needs is to have the Q38 exist as a circulator - regardless of the mileage the current Q38 racks up.

I'd say you don't see why the current Q38 is being split, because you're apparently being spoofed by the MTA's frugality & are coming to a conclusion that would further defend it.

19 hours ago, Ex696 said:

The Q50 section in the Bronx is 7.3 miles, the Q44, with the proposed Fordham extension, is 4.6 miles. making the Q50 a Select bus service route isn't gonna make it faster than the Q44.

,,,,nor in any more of a demand.

The main issue with a mileage swap or w/e of that sort isn't even the added distance, it's the fact that demand towards PBP & Co-Op CIty from points south of Flushing doesn't remotely come close to that of the current Q44 north of Flushing, let alone an extension towards Fordham.... At that point, it's counterproductive.... The speed of a route of a direct commute people have little to no use for, is irrelevant.... If you're going to induce turnover, there's not much of a point to increase the footprint of the route in The Bronx (emanating from Jamaica) to Co-Op City... You may as well go about doing that whole, running Q44's b/w Jamaica & Flushing, and running a Flushing - Fordham route, like what's been proposed in the past {"Q94"}.....

Not only do a lot of these kids in these later generations not respect authority figures nor their elders, a lot of them simply don't value life....  And it's apparently getting worse with each passing generation.... Blank thousand yard stares; empty looks of soullessness... Nothing much that they feel like they have to look forward to (other than instant gratification & validation anyway).... I'll ease up on the psycho-analytical stuff for now & will simply say that I honestly don't know whether to feel despondent or flat out angry in reading/hearing about all these train surfing incidents as of late.... Scary/coincidental part is, I JUST got through watching a video on youtube titled "Teachers Are SICK Of Dumb Gen Alpha Kids" before I checked to see if there are any new posts made on the forum here in the past hour or so....

There's PLENTY of finger pointing at the MTA to go around, regarding other unrelated matters.... To me, this simply isn't one of them.... You can only do but so much saving people from themselves.

Utter chaos over at Queensboro Plaza with all these shuttle buses roaming about.... Saw Q93's, Q94's, Q95's, Q107's, and Q108's....

Got screwed waiting for a Brooklyn bound B62 at the temporary stop 1 block down from the normal 1st pickup stop (which is where they have some of the shuttle buses picking up & dropping off at)... So I went back to the normal 1st pickup stop, hoping that the next B62 out will pickup there.... A dispatcher asked me & this other dude what buses we were waiting for... He needed the Q100 & I wanted the B62.... Dispatcher told us we gotta walk down that way (pointing towards the temporary stops)... I then told him (the dispatcher) that I was just over there about 15 minutes ago & the last B62 out just blew by the stop... In a reassuring tone, he told me don't worry about it, I'll make sure it stops over there for ya... Nice guy.... Kind of reminded me of Norm from that old show Cheers, but that's neither here nor there...

So about 3 or 4 mins. after that, the B62 I eventually got on reached the stop... But he was ALSO about to blow past the temporary stop.... I honestly believe if there weren't those 4 White ladies (1 of which was pregnant) waiting along with me, that b/o would not have slammed on the brakes & just kept on going... One of the other 3 ladies flailed her arms at the same time I was waving my metrocard in an attempt to get dude to stop....

I was going to ride it full to Downtown, but I got so disgusted, I just took it to WBP & caught the B46 & took that home (which I'm glad I did, b/c out of nowhere, I caught a migraine about 5 mins. into that B46 ride - which I'm still afflicted by as I'm typing this).....

So yeah, utter chaos & a terrible job out there with all those shuttle buses.... From the looks of things, nobody really knew what stopped & picked up where - and on top of it, just wtf was doing what,.... I mean, it's good that they've numerated the different shuttle buses (although some buses still had the "SUBWAY SHUTTLE" signage up), but it's like, it doesn't really mean too much of anything if hardly anyone knows what's doing what.... They really need to incorporate the subway bullet/colors on the destination signages for those subway shuttles - very much akin to that of what's done for the Q70.

16 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q31: The area around Westchester Square isn't exactly that close to ether the Q44 or Q50 (it's not insanely far, but it can be a hassle to get to either). Plus there's a bunch of route that hit he location going to other parts of the Bronx, so I don't see it necessarily being a waste. Plus if it serves HMC, it can replace the Bx24 (and then that could so something else past Westchester Square). 

Q36: I don't think I would have everything going up to Little Neck LIRR, so it would be a split between that and LIRR Floral Park. How the split depends on the frequencies provided for such a route, but I'm okay with the existing headways along Little Neck Parkway. 

Q38: Yeah I don't think anything should be terminating at Graham Ave  either. I personally don't have too many problems with such an extension. Have you considered potentially sending it out to the Waterfront to replace the Q59? Perhaps ending it by North 6th Street near the ferry stop & parks or something. It would provide it with a more unique purpose and serve a little more of commercial Williamsburg in the process.

With such a proposal though, I would trim the Q38 to end at Junction & Queens Boulevards with the Q72 (first stop would be the existing stop on 63rd Drive south of Queens Boulevard) it were to be extended that far, I think I would cut the Q38 on the eastern end and have it terminate at the Q72 stop at Junction & Queens Boulevards. The Q59 can take over the Q38s section out to 108th Street since it would be streamlined in Brooklyn. I think trading that whole tour it does through the waterfront and along Grand St/Metropolitan Ave in Williamsburg for 62nd Drive/63rd Road would still make the proposed Q59 a shorter and more reliable route than the existing one. 

Q67: I guess my one concern is that it doesn't hit the  directly in that area. It comes close but it is a bit of a walk, and with the industrial ridership on weekdays + the schoolkids going to Christ The King and any subway commuters, it is used. However on weekends not as much because those three groups are very little (or non-existent). Not to say I don't disagree with an extension as Fresh Pond Road/Metropolitan is basically done due to available space in the area. IDK how the Q67 would get to Cooper/Myrtle under your proposal, but that one may hit the  in some way or another I suppose. 

Q82: Regarding UBS Arena in particular, while I see your point regarding post-event ridership, the EB n1 and n6 UBS Arena stop on Hempstead Turnpike is walkable to the arena itself. Plus the fewer stops overall because of it being closed-door in Queens, and I think you could see some event goers gravitate towards that route in particular. Especially since the n6 local alone would be more frequent (add the n1 and n6X in the mix on weekdays, and it's no contest). Other than that, yeah I guess we'll just have to see how everything else turns out if the Q82 ends up being part of the final plan. I would think that it would since it was there since the very beginning, but you never know.

Q31: Westchester Sq. makes for a convenient xfer point, but the problem is that it & Bronx State Hospital are in opposite directions... That's why the Bx21 backdoors to terminate at Westchester Sq. after serving Bronx State Hospital... As long as I have the route connecting to the elsewhere, I don't see not serving Westchester Sq as detrimental... Maybe I should've drawn a map, but the only connection that would be missed out on is the Bx4/4a....

• it would run along the Bx21 b/w Westchester/Waters & Eastchester/Morris Park
• it would run along the Bx31 b/w Waters & Pelham Pkwy
• it would connect with the Bx8 along Westchester av, as well as at Middletown/Crosby
• it would run along the Bx24 along Marconi (I wouldn't have the route u-turn at the Call Center though)
• it would connect with the Bx40/42 at E. Tremont/Bruckner Blvd like the Q50 already does

Speaking of which, the other thing I want to avoid is running the thing on E. Tremont av.... The main point of the route is to serve the bevy of medical facilities in the general area of the Bronx... Anything else is secondary... That's why I'm not overly concerned with not having it serve Westchester Sq.... Something replacing the Bx24 is a Bronx issue & quite frankly, it shouldn't take a route coming from Flushing to accomplish that

Q38: I thought about ending it around Domino Park (and I do see it getting decent usage around there too), but with every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Sally trying the be the next Spielberg with all these dam indie film shoots around & about the general area (leading to all these street closures), I'm rather leery about it.... Regardless, to your point, I don't have a problem with terminating such a route at QB... I mean, I get wanting to run the Q54 & the Q59 together in Brooklyn, but not at the expense/mercy of a B62 that'd skip WBP & with the best proposed Brooklyn route thus far - The B53 </sarcasm>  - Neither of which serves Williamsburg in an easterly-westerly fashion.

Q67: If it's anything that I'd have terminating where they have the impending Q14 doing so, it's the Q18.... I would've liked to have seen the Q18 b/w Woodside av & the LIE branched between running along 65th pl. & 69th st, to then run down the rest of 69th st to shoot across Met. av to Fresh Pond rd.... I have always despised where/how the current Q18 terminates on the southern end of the route....

As for that proposal I had to try to make the Q67 more of a commuter route (the one I had ending on Cooper/Myrtle), I don't think I'm going to revisit it (large in part, because I would like such a route to at least connect to Woodhaven Blvd).... To sum it up, it started on Cooper/71st, then did Cooper-73rd-Cooper-80th-Metropolitan-69th-Borden.... Long story short, I didn't have it serving the .

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Ugh...they're so "creative" when it comes to some of these other routes, and all of a sudden the creative juices stop when it comes time to figure out a layover space...SMH...

Layover & turnaround scenarios is something I strongly believe planners flat out ignore.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

My issue with the setup is that they're basically giving both of those neighborhoods the same levels of service that "mainline" Woodhaven Blvd/Cross Bay Blvd gets. I think that's overkill. For example, weekend service is every 15 minutes, whereas right now it's hourly on each of the two branches. I think doubling the frequencies would be fair...quadrupling...not so much...

Lol... I wouldn't preserve ending buses in Hamilton Beach because they're overserving both Hamilton Beach & Old Howard Beach.... Quite frankly, I don't see that level of service to either branch being upheld anyway - regardless of which branch(es) trips are terminating in...

If they don't leave things as they are with the current Q11 down there, I can easily see a scenario where they have alternating trips [not serving Old Howard Beach and Hamilton Beach (whether they'd have such trips ending at Pitkin, or ending somewhere in Lindenwood, or something another)] & [serving both Old Howard Beach & Hamilton Beach (with these trips ending in Old Howard Beach, as per the final plan)], if they're going to keep those proposed service levels....

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I mean to a certain extent, I can understand attempting to avoid congested areas, but not when you avoid major hubs and transfer points because of it...especially the sole subway connection on that end of the route...

I don't disagree... Just stupid all the way around to stub the thing like that.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I guess I got a bit ahead of myself when making that statement...I definitely can't stand the B53 (and especially the fact that they combined the Broadway route with the Williamsburg/Greenpoint route)...as for that segment of the Q24 west of Broadway Junction, I can't think of something better to replace it than leaving it as is, and I don't think that segment of Broadway should be left without bus service, so I'd just leave the Q24/B46 as-is.

This isn't to say I necessarily support it, but I do understand why they'd want to cut the B46 back to Woodhull (even moreso than them wanting to cut the Q24 back to B'way Junction.... again).... However, no parts of that reason should ever be to justify a route like that B53.... I'm of the firm belief that they really/ultimately want all B46 service (local & SBS) ending at Woodhull.... While they still got the B47 at Woodhull for now anyway, I still can't get over their proposing to end the B15 at Montrose , of all places...

For the sake of discussion I guess, regarding your last statement there, while I'm not all that wild about a Broadway route, I wouldn't so much mind something running b/w Woodhull Hospital & B'way Junction.... The primary purpose would of course be for mere coverage, with the secondary purpose being for taking the Q24 & B47 off Broadway - over taking the B46 away from WBP & the B15 from Woodhull as the MTA proposed in that Brooklyn network revamp...

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Ah...got it...the Q30 is basically the existing Q30 QCC short-turns, while the Q75 is the Little Neck portion of the Q30 rerouted via Union Turnpike to end at Briarwood.

Yep... Very strange way to break up the current Q30... Not in favor of that impending Q75 in the slightest; not sure which I despise more - it, or the Q88 proposed in the previous draft... If it's anything I'd propose changing when it comes to HHE/LNP, it's to have the Q12 & the Q30 both end there somehow - I've always thought there was value in connecting those 2 routes.... The hell with extending the Q12 to LIRR Great Neck; that would significantly compromise the route for the sake of an exponential increase in ridership (similar to my sentiment regarding extending the Q44 to Fordham)... But yeah, if it came down to these 3 ways of serving the eastern portion of HHE, I'm 100% a proponent of doing so by way of the current Q30....

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

To clarify, I would have Q36 buses via Hillside Avenue-Little Neck Parkway-LIE Service Road-Community Drive.

Q43 buses would run via Hillside Avenue and Langdale Street to LIJ

Q110 buses would run via Jamaica Avenue all the way to the 257th Street (as much as I agree with LIRR Floral Park from a connectivity point of view, I think NIMBYs are too much of an issue in that area).

Q82 would also run to 257th Street and provide a connection to Hillside Avenue from that end of Jamaica Avenue (I don't see a need for the Q2, Q82, and the n1/n6 to all run towards Belmont Racetrack and provide service to Hillside Avenue).

So I see.

When it comes to serving Queens patrons, I'm not considering the n1/n6 because they're not open door services in Queens... Queens patrons proximate to the county line aren't remotely taking n1's & n6's to circumnavigate taking Q2's.... The reason I don't take issue with the impending Q82, is because I see it as more of (but not completely) a complement to the Q2 - as opposed to a supplement of it (which I'm of the belief is the basis of the point of contention/disapproval)... With the Q110 ending up being stripped from Hempstead av, the Q2 would be overburdened a bit (if it were to be the only route serving Hempstead av)... Considering all the stops being removed from Hollis av, dwell times at the remaining stops are going to significantly increase; the Q2 carries heavy along Hollis av.... Even being that the Q2 would be more frequent, I think riders (Hempstead av) will increasingly grow to be fed up with what could potentially happen along Hollis av... This is where the Q82 comes in..... The real question is, how many/what percent of Hempstead av. area patrons are seeking 179th , in comparison to Jamaica Center.... I wouldn't know if the latter comes all that close to the former, given the amount of folks typically gunning for Q2's over Q110's out there...

Gun to my head decision, for the sake of running an MTA route to North Shore Hospital, I'd just extend the Q30 the 1 stop & call it a day.... I would not run a service like the QT34 all day, for fear of a severe lack of total ridership..... Lastly, while running the Q110 to 257th is a great contingency plan to avoid dealing with NIMBY's, I don't think they're nearly as much a problem/as potent like they were when it came down to the suggestion of running the Q79 to LIRR Floral Park back then..... I know its taboo to talk about on these forums, but while it's still predominantly old money Whites out there, new money Asians have been & still are snatching up property in that central western part of Nassau County; that whole Floral Park - New Hyde Park - North New Hyde Park - Garden City Park region.... Unlike those old money Whites of yesteryear, the Indian population are making their presence known on public transit too - whether it's on the n22, n24, or on the LIRR Main Line at Merillon, New Hyde Park, and Floral Park itself....

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Yes, I agree...the Q67 already provides the quicker/more direct route to the  anyway, so it's better to let the Q39 focus on serving QBP directly.

I just wish they had the Q39 run with the Q67 between 55th av/58th st & 48th/Laurel Hill.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Hmm...definitely an interesting concept...I wonder how many Section 5 residents take the Bx23 down to PBP for the Q50 rather than getting a grand tour of their own neighborhood...

If they can catch a 1-2-3-4-5 trip (meaning, the trips from PBP that serve section 1 first & section 5 last, before running back down to PBP), that would be pretty damn savvy.... I never paid attention if anyone's actually doing that.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

No, as odd as it might seem, I'm thinking of the old Q22A route...I'd have it go up Norton-Bayswater-Mott...I know that the area isn't super high-density, but I definitely didn't like the way the MTA made it seem as if it's Todt Hill or the far northern section of Douglaston or some other area with mansions that doesn't warrant bus service...I mean there's apartment buildings along those blocks of Mott west of the  station...I don't think a standalone shuttle would really serve that area properly, and an extension of the Q22 down to the old Q22A terminal would be somewhat more of a backtrack...I think Far Rockaway could use a connection up to Cross Bay anyway (meaning, a counterpart to the Q53 out in Rockaway Park), and I think this accomplishes it without duplicating the Q22 too much.

So you don't think it deserved the old S60 treatment huh .... Jokes aside, to be perfectly honest, IDK what those patrons want when it comes to public bus service... I never got the sense they were all that fond of the Q22a back when that existed... IDK if it's a case of not wanting buses running through their area full time, or at all (like out in Breezy Point)..... Running Q52's in particular through there though just seems wildly excessive - even given the general idea of wanting to extend that route to Far Rockaway.... I'm not even talking about anything relating to turning radii.. To give an example of what I mean, I couldn't imagine running the Bx5 through an area like Country Club... IDK if there was ever any truth to it, but supposedly at one point, they had artics running on the Bx13... I would've liked to have seen that - better yet, rode on it.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

To clarify, you're referring to the proposed Q38 only (meaning the Furmanville Road, 63rd Drive, etc segment), correct? Or would this also include the Eliot Avenue segment (current Q38, proposed Q14)?

The impending Q38 (via Penelope, 63rd dr, etc.).

1 hour ago, ABOGbrooklyn said:

Why cant they put spikes on top of the train cars to determine kids from train surfing?

Because they don't want to piss off the pigeons anymore than they already have.

(as an aside, Newkirk on the Brighton line used to be a haven for those SOB's)

18 minutes ago, Lex said:

This is a joke, right?

The scary part is, he's not the first person I've seen suggest that.

If one of those things were to fall off a moving train while I'm waiting on the platform & gets me right in the eye, best believe I'm suing the piss out of them.... You don't try to deter stupidity by also doing something stupid.... Two wrongs is said to not make something called a right.

Those n15's at Mineola are doing nothing more than taking up space (from the n40).... Just like that n22x experiment with having it go nonstop b/w RFM & Hicksville, these n15's to Mineola aren't working.... People are still gunning for the n40 for Mineola service at HTC & the n15's that aren't going to RFM are tanking at HTC... I'd go as far as to say if they're not going to have some n40 trips serve County Seat Dr, then they should get rid of service to those county office bldg's altogether.... Virtually nobody takes buses to/from there like they used to, back in the 90's or so.... The n15 trips they got running to Mineola may as well be Long Beach - HTC short trips.....

On 1/9/2024 at 9:03 PM, EastFlatbushLarry said:

...just because a bus arrives at a terminal, doesn't necessarily mean it's truly assigned to be the next bus to depart from said terminal.

Hell, I actually assume the opposite.... E/g - if a EB B35 does the turnaround to layover alongside the daycare center along New Lots, I assume it's going to go OOS afterwards.... It's not until that bus powers on & displays Sunset Park 1 av or "MCDONALD" (like it's a neighborhood or something... I always get tripped out by that) that I start motioning towards the bus.... I SMH when people start motioning towards the bus when the bus powers on, when the signage says not in service & the thing speeds off past the stop.... The acceleration of a previously idle bus at a terminal moving towards a bus stop & that of speeding past one, are stark.....

13 hours ago, Ex696 said:

Doesn't the B9 get a lot of ridership at Kings Plaza alongside the B3, since they are much more reliable Kings Plaza-Brighton Line connectors than the B2?

11 hours ago, Ex696 said:

12 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

Don’t know why you would say the B3 and B9 would. Be more reliable than the B2. Since it is so much shorter, I would say the reverse is true. 

  Well, frequency-wise, they are more reliable.

Yeah, the B9 gets more ridership at Kings Plaza than is being given credit for.... However, you're conflating frequency & reliability here - While the B3 & the B9 have higher frequencies than the B2, the B2 is more reliable than the B3 & B9.... The B9 bunches like shit (which is obviously not how service is scheduled to run like) & the B3 slogs along Av. U with as much passenger activity per stop that route gets - which reliability is being negatively affected with both of those situations.... OTOH, you can almost set your clock to when the B2 will arrive.

It is interesting though that commuters in general tend to use the term reliability in regards to when buses/trains arrive when THEY want them to (or think they should arrive), instead of when they're supposed to show up (as per the paddle<>schedule)...  

3 minutes ago, Ex696 said:

So you think it should end in Downtown Brooklyn, which I think is fine, not that I have a problem with it, but I think I have another theory on why they truncated it to Prospect Park.

If they extended it to Cadman Plaza, then the Kings Plaza route would have XT/SBS service whereas the Bergen Beach branch would have normal limited service, and Bergen Beach branch riders would likely complain about it, so rather than keep the routing intact and receive backlash from the Bergen Beach branch riders for not making their branch an SBS as well, they truncated it to Prospect Park.

The theory would be a little more plausible if the proposed B40 was a local (as if to say, we have no skip-stop service whatsoever, while the Kings Plaza branch has the B41XT)...

Regardless, I wouldn't reduce the truncating of the Bergen Beach branch to Empire to a case of mere envy - especially when we're talking about coverage losses.

15 hours ago, Ex696 said:

Is there low ridership between Prospect Park and Downtown Brooklyn, or is it more about pushing people onto the subway to cut costs wherever necessary?

Due NB, over the years, boardings have gotten significantly lower north of Empire... Due SB from Cadman Plaza, buses are generally close to a seated load before buses hit Empire.... So the issue isn't that folks aren't taking buses to/from Downtown... I mean, if it were more about pushing people onto the subway, they a] wouldn't have proposed that B41XT or whatever, b] wouldn't (still) propose as much service going to/from Downtown with the proposed B41 local & B41XT combined (despite doing away with directly connecting Bergen Beach & Downtown Brooklyn), and quite frankly c] would've proposed much more service for that B40.....

My thing is though, even given that B2/B100 combination, that lane where the current B2 & B41 terminates at at Kings Plaza still isn't going to be enough space for the amt. of service they propose for the B41 local & the B41XT....

Furthermore, while of course they use that station, current B41 riders aren't "rush"-ing to get to Prospect Park subway.... The rush concept best fits for patrons south of the Junction, trying to get to the Junction for the .... But of course, they're not going to run dinkies b/w [Kings Plaza and/or Bergen Beach] & the Junction throughout the day.... To sum it up, no Flatbush av. service should be ending at Prospect Park on any regularized basis....

On 1/4/2024 at 1:20 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q31:  I'd much rather increase Q50 service (the current rendition, not this impending Q50 to LGA BS) & send some Q50's over to Bronx State, HMC, and Jacobi (well, Eastchester/Pelham Pkwy South) via Jarvis-Middletown-Waters, etc....

I'm not necessarily opposed to that either, although at that point I think it can be it's own standalone route (with a slight variation to operate via Zerega Ave & Westchester Square) enroute to/from the medical centers. 

Q36: The question I have is, why bother continuing to cover all of LNP with one route at this point? I honestly don't think LNP area patrons would even wince if they have kept the previously proposed Q45 (the Hillside-LNP route)... I have less of an issue with the Springfield-Jamaica-LNP aspect of this impending Q36, and more of an issue with this having the Q36 continuing to uphold the entire serving of LNP like the old Q79 did.... I don't think there should be any type of route (rush, or whatever) running along Jamaica av, for the sake of retaining service along all of LNP..... I see it as nothing short of odd to be more decisive about having a Jamaica av - LNP route, than having a Hillside route turn down Springfield.... That's how that part of this take of yours comes off to me.

As long as *something* covers the 212's (which the Q82 does, which I get you don't care for), I'm straight.... The impending Q36 going Hillside - Springfield - Jamaica, I have zero issue with whatsoever (as I see it garnering more patronage, compared to the current Q36)..... I just don't see this need to cover all of LNP... I would even question having buses run north of Northern at this point also....

My gripe here isn't with Little Neck Parkway at all, it's about the setup with the Q2/Q36/Q82/Q110 in that area. The Q36 could have been that route to cover the far east end of Jamaica Avenue in Queens to the at Jamaica Center for those who asked/needed it, while also connecting to the at Parsons Boulevard. The overlap between the Q36 and the Q110 would have then been a local/limited setup (the Q110 local, Q36 limited hence why I mentioned that it could have remained being a rush route).  

Q38: I simply find this attempt at breaking up the current Q38 to be very underwhelming.... There's been better proposals for doing so on this forum alone, over the years.... Even with that truncation from the  with the impending Q14, you're still higher on it than I am.... In any case, funny that the same sentiment you convey regarding the existing Q38 in the first half of that first paragraph, is the exact same sentiment I have for this impending Q14.... As much as IDC for anything ending at either of the current Q38 terminals (being that they're keeping the impending Q38 ending at the Apex apartments), I'd do more with the route on the western end - sending it to terminate at/around Lorimer/Metropolitan 

For me with the Q14 more favorably for two reasons:

1. It goes to Corona Plaza which I frequent [no more walking to the Q58 to get home and walking even more after getting off, or doing the stupid ass backtrack to Willets Point when the Manhattan-bound skips 103rd (which lately has been almost every f**king weekend) to just miss the Q47 and wait 30 minutes  ].
2. Its frequencies and service span (off peak in particular) not only rivals the existing Q38, but the current Q47.

Overall I agree they didn't give it too much thought with the Q38 split, the proposed Q14 managed come out better than the proposed Q38 section. As far as the Q38 portion goes, what would it do to get to Metropolitan/Lorimer, just straight across Metropolitan or what? I have no idea personally what to do with that segment, so anything that will juice ridership up I'm on with. I'm with you on the sentiment regarding it's Rego Park/Forest Hills terminal (feels a bit north to be called Forest Hills, but on the Q38 timetable they has flipped notations between the two in the past).  I still think that if the Q38 isn't going anywhere east of Flushing Meadows Park, that it should end at Queens Blvd/63rd Drive. Has no business running north/east of it.

Q67: So would virtually everyone else... The industrial Maspeth workers mostly disembark at Hunters Point & essentially everyone else on the bus is off the bus at Court Square.... This truncation is a no-brainer to me.... As for the sentiment regarding the impending route being closer to LTD service, I can't complain, because that's exactly what I think the route should be.... Kind of like a Queens version of the B103.... I've always thought it should serve a little more of Queens, due east...

What would you have done with the Q67 on it's eastern end? That former QT77 in the first draft would have been interesting to see in reality. While it would have provided some benefit, it screwed by too many people by having nothing serving the from residential portions of Middle Village unless you were close to the Q54 (which cut off a vast majority of the neighborhood).

Q82: They're underserving this route IMO because the Q2 will still serve Hempstead av.... I see the Q82 slowly taking pax. away from the Q2 along Hempstead av.... While the Q2 will be busy picking up pax along Hollis av (dwell times at stops increasing), this thing'll be flying along Hillside...

The Q82 would be faster than the Q2 without a doubt, although given that the Q2 will be up to twice as frequent as the Q82 I don't know whether there will be any consistent gains. 

Your last statement is a part of the issue I have with this route: aside from the Q2 being more frequent, the Q43 (and Q1) along Hillside would operate much more frequently, and the n1/n6 stops by UBS Arena which already likely attracts some of those people plus those in Queens very close to the city line. They're even adding n6 trips between Jamaica and UBS Arena. Put them altogether, and I see a route that outside of the 212s, would largely get its ridership on the basis that it was the first one to show up. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens. For all we know they'll water it down or throw some new curveball when the final plan actually comes out.

=======================================

 

Replies in dark blue.

Q31: Yeah, it can be given another number or whatever, but the one thing I wouldn't have a route of sorts do, is serve Westchester Square... Waste of time, for the intended purpose of the route AFAIC.

Q36: When you started the comment by saying "Quite honestly, if that's the proposed routing why bother serving Hillside Avenue.", I'm taking that to mean you're referencing the whole route - as if to say, why is it going Hillside-Springfield-Jamaica-LNP, instead of staying on Jamaica av all the way to LNP; like you were trying to preserve it serving the length of LNP (hence my previous reply)..... In any case, given that you're talking about a local/LTD setup along Jamaica av, the only question I really have here is, where would you have the Q36 ending on the eastern end of the route? 257th/Jericho Tpke, LIRR LNP, LIRR Floral Park, or something else?

Q38: An extension to the from Middle Village in general, would supplement a significant amount of folks that currently use the Q54 to/from Brooklyn (which, given how unreliable the thing is, could use some consistent help).... Ending it at Lorimer subway specifically would not also connect it to the , but would (IMO) be more of a viable area to terminate a bus route, over, say, having it terminate at Graham like the old B18 or like an older rendition of the B13 used to.... Instead, buses could layover on either side of the triangle (Meeker/Metropolitan)... So to answer your question, buses (from Fresh Pond/Metropolitan) would continue on Metropolitan - to Grand - to Union - back to Metropolitan, to terminate.... I wouldn't subject buses to the more eastern portion of the Brooklyn portion of Metropolitan.... Too much truck traffic over there around Morgan, specifically....

Q67: Could've sworn I had a map for it, but I had one rendition/idea of it running to the Forest View Crescent apts. (this was before they barred buses terminating on the same side of the apartments along Union Tpke), and another rendition/idea of it running to that area where Cooper runs into Myrtle... I'll redraw the latter when I get home later.... But as for that QT77, that shit screamed potential & utter failure on multiple levels....

Q82: I don't entirely disagree with the sentiment, but I just want to touch on the n6 point right quick (are they really running n6 short turns to UBS?  wow, what a waste of resources).... The n6 won't factor into anything in this regard.... It obviously doesn't run inside that terminal (where the Q2/Q110 currently ends) to pick up those folks.... It'll also be no different than the phenomenon with the Q43/n22 by the county line... Virtually nobody in Queens walks back to catch a Jamaica bound n22 at Cherry lane... Everybody & their mammas all pile up at that first stop of the WB Q43 - even though there's only a short block difference or so between that last WB stop in Nassau on the n22 & the first Q43 pickup stop.... The difference in distance between Hempstead/225th (which is technically the 2nd WB pickup stop of the current Q2/Q110) & the last n6 WB stop in Nassau is greater/longer....

9 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

I'm actually surprised the 23 to LGA was not considered in these redesigns

They were too preoccupied with combining parts of the Q23 with parts of the Q46... Some of those QT proposals featured some very very strange combinations....

Not that I ever wanted the Q23 running inside there, but it looks like we're gonna end up getting the Q50 running in there instead

5 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

A vax card wasn’t require to use the B98v or the Q98v. The sole purpose of those two routes was to provide a shuttle to the vaccination site from various NYCHA housing projects. If I recall correctly the projects the v-buses served had more residents who were at risk of getting very ill and dying so they provided these shuttle routes with the hope that it would encourage more people to get their shot.

Yeah, I know what the purpose of the routes were; that was never in question..... Like I said, once I read that you needed those cards in able to board the thing, I immediately got disinterested.... Looking at the routings, they both looked like they'd be pretty good rides from a fanning perspective too....  I can agree with @Kingsbridgeviewer382's point though; whatever amount of b/o's that were "enforcing" that disinformation, were doing so to perhaps keep people off of the buses... No different than some of these express bus b/o's that were putting up the not in service signs (especially around that same time; 2021) riding around empty & what not....

35 minutes ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:

Being required to have a card made no sense as you only got them once you entered the vaccination centers. That could of been a case of a driver going into buisiness for themselves or legitimatley getting bad intel and enforcing said intel.

Sounds like that could be (another) reason why I always saw those B98v's literally empty.

1 minute ago, MHV9218 said:

That can't be real, they required that? I never heard about that. Thought it was just that was providing access to those sites. I don't even see how that would be legal or enforceable.

Don't know if it actually was or wasn't (real/true)..... I would question the legality of that as well; being denied a public service because you didn't have that card.... Crazy...

What I will say is that, if it was infact the case, I'm surprised some opportunist actively seeking to come up off lawsuits didn't take advantage of that.... Then again, you gotta wonder how many people in this city even know about the B98v & Q98v to begin with.

15 minutes ago, Q43LTD said:

There's those 23 to LaGuardia discussions that will come up. Take the 48 out

Send the Q72 inside LGA.... Send the Q23 inside LGA.... Combine the Q32 & Q33 (back when that ran inside LGA, serving terminal B & C)... Don't miss those age-old discussions at all.

The Q72 was never the most reliable route per se, but it ran way more smoother when it didn't run inside LGA.... Being perfectly honest, I miss when it stopped short there at Ditmars... That route is insufferable to fan, so I can only imagine how daily commuters feel about having to take/rely on that route.

5 hours ago, Ex696 said:

Interesting...but what made you decide to streamline the Q23 on 108th Street as opposed to the current routing?

3 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

It's to have a bus route serving all of 108 St between Forest Hills and East Elmhurst. 

For me, it's wanting to detach the 102nd/103rd/104th portion of the route with the 108th st. portion of the route.... In terms of filling gaps, the one on 99th always bothered me far more than the one along 108th.... if there was a subway station at 108th/Roosevelt, I'd end the Q23 right there... But realizing how much of a dud the Q23 is in East Elmhurst IMO, I started thinking of ways the thing could be more useful in/for that neighborhood (hence, the shooting across Astoria from 108th to 94th, and up 94th to eventually end at 95th/Ditmars)...

The only segment of the impending Q14 that I concur with, is the stint b/w Astoria Blvd & QB.

2 hours ago, Ex696 said:

But are there large consequences from cutting the area around 103rd Street-Corona Plaza from direct access to Forest Hills?

If you're trying to implicate that there's a large amt. of people from North Corona seeking Forest Hills, it's simply not the case.... The thing about the Q23's ridership is that it's well spread out along 108th, before ever turning off for Corona Plaza.... Healthy mix of short distance riding & intermediate distance riding... It isn't like contemplating detaching the area around Corona Plaza from Forest Hills being a make or break decision....

2 hours ago, Ex696 said:

There is too much through ridership at Flushing for the Q44 to broken up.

Exactly.

19 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

The route only existed for a little more than a month. Always thought the route was a waste.

 

This is the schedule for it.
https://new.mta.info/document/31481

Here is the Queens Bus map from April 2021
https://web.archive.org/web/20210416222211/https://new.mta.info/map/5371

On the drive home, I would constantly see the vaccine route for Brooklyn along ENY av; the B98v or whatever.... It went to Medgar Evers College.... Once I read that you had to have a vaccination card to board the thing, I immediately withdrew any interest in wanting to fan the thing.... Matter fact, I would scowl every time I saw it.

On 1/3/2024 at 2:26 AM, Ex696 said:

Then what happens to the B20?

7+ year old post that I haven't wavered from, not one bit.

7 hours ago, Ex696 said:

But then there wouldn't be any westbound service on 23rd Avenue between 82nd and 94th Streets.

I would alter the Q48 where it would serve the length of 23rd av.

What I wouldn't have happen is the running of the Q48 inside the airport..... Was never fond of a Flushing - LGA route; the thing performs infinitely better as the Flushing - North Corona link anyway... Airport usage is too inconsistent on the thing..... The East Elmhurst portion of the route would actually be enhanced, compared to the current Q48.... I posted a google map link in the same part of the post you extracted the snippet you're replying to from... Albeit in an inactive layer (because I wanted to portray how I would handle a Q23 split of sorts, in comparison to what the MTA has planned for the Q23 & the impending Q14), I also drew up what I would do with the Q48....

6 hours ago, Ex696 said:

And it would also cut off their access to 74th Street/Roosevelt Avenue. Is this a worthy exchange for having the Q23 take over Ditmars/95th?

Lol.... For whatever the reason, those riders up there take Q48's to 111th more than they do the Q33 to 74th... I don't see them exactly missing having the Q33 run up there (nor do I see them valuing the Q47 any more or less, when that change to the network ends up happening)....

As far as that question goes, having the Q23 (and my version of their impending Q14, which I dubbed the "Q73" on the google map I referenced in the above part of the post) terminate at Ditmars/95th really has nothing to do with a worthy exchange (considering the impending Q33 running to LGA Terminal A & my suggesting of having the Q47 terminate with the Q69 at Astoria/82nd) or whatever... It has everything to do with how useless I see the current Q23 north of Astoria Blvd.... Ever since they took the Q33 out of the airport, the thing's been rather dead in East Elmhurst.

On 1/2/2024 at 1:36 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Comments by route (On a side note, did they take out the stops from Remix when you try to enter from the main map? It seems like you can only see the stops when you go there from the route profile)

Q4: I don't see why they dropped the Elmont extension...looking at the old plan, it seems like they would've had it run down Linden and Stuart, and there's some layover space available towards the end of Linden

Q7: I think this should've gone down towards the Rockaways as proposed in the first two drafts. I'd probably have it do Rockaway Blvd - South/North Conduit Avenue, Guy R Brewer Blvd - Rockaway Blvd (that way, it connects to the Springfield Blvd route, and the 147th Avenue route...arguably, it's also walking distance of the Q85 if anybody wants to transfer to reach Green Acres).

Q11: I like the way the route operates north of 157th Avenue. The issue is I would still have it as two separate branches on Old Howard Beach/Hamilton Beach (I wouldn't have it start/terminate in Old Howard Beach, and then run every trip via Hamilton Beach...especially when ridership is relatively low on both sides, and you have a footbridge connecting the two.....

Q14: I'd definitely keep this route ending at the Fresh Pond Road  station...it seems like they realized that route would be "too successful for its own good", and instead of adding the proper amount of service to it (perhaps even shifting a bit of service from the Q58/98), they just cut it back and left it at roughly current Q38 headways.

Q4: They had buses terminating at the NE corner of Linden & Elmont Rd.... That layover space along Linden you're referencing is across the street from where they had it terminating... I'm of the belief that they second guessed having buses terminate on that side of Linden - which unfortunately put the kibosh on the whole extension.

Q7: As long as they kept it covering the rest of Rockaway Blvd east of Cross Bay, I'm straight..... The flaw I saw with the Cedarhurst extension was the terminal itself... They had it terminating on Burnside b/w Rockaway Tpke & Lawrence Pkwy.... That would've been unmanageable.... The current Far Rockaway bound Q114 stop at Buena Vista/Rockaway Tpke. (which is one block north) should've been the last dropoff stop instead, with it going on layover along Lawrence Pkwy (if anything), to then having the first NB/WB pickup stop on Lawrence Pkwy/Buena Vista (before the turn)...

Q11: What I don't quite get about this take is that you bring up the footbridge as an argument to not solely have buses terminating in Old Howard Beach (operating via Hamilton Beach), yet you want to preserve the current branching of the route.... Ridership on both branches being low would be an argument for having every trip serve both Old Howard Beach & Hamilton Beach.... The footbridge argument would actually be an argument for eliminating service to Hamilton Beach....

Be there as it may, I have no issue with trips terminating on the Old Howard Beach side only, nor running via Hamilton Beach (doing away with having anything terminate on that end).... With the having of it running via Hamilton Beach though, I'd say the stops they should've gotten rid of (unlike a lot of the stops being slated for discontinuation borough-wide), are those NB stops along 104th, along the railing....

The only real concern I have with the southern portion of the impending route is the serving of Lindenwood after serving Old Howard Beach & Hamilton Beach....

Q14: I simply think they got hesitant; not wanting to risk running another route along that part of Fresh Pond (if they think those Q98's are gonna be breezing along that part of Fresh Pond (south of Metropolitan), they got another thing coming)....

On 1/3/2024 at 2:47 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Q15: At this point, I'd rather just have the current Q15/15A setup, and the current Q20A/B setup than what they have proposed for the area. The Q62 isn't even going to be running that frequently for the extra diversion they're subjecting Beechurst riders to.

Q22: ....on the eastern end, I think the Lawrence extension might've actually worked out...I think part of the issue was that the Q113 itself wouldn't have stopped at that shopping plaza (instead running straight up Nassau Expressway). Maybe if all three routes (Q7, Q22, and Q113) actually stopped there, it would've been a more convenient transfer point.

Q23: At first glance, I thought it was absolute nonsense that they truncated it to Roosevelt from the south, but on second glance, it might not be the worst idea in the world(still don't agree with it, though)...riders from points north still have the Q14 which connects to the Queens Blvd Line at Woodhaven Blvd...still think it would be better off going to East Elmhurst via 108th Street as originally planned.

Q24: I'd agree with the truncation if it weren't for what they're replacing it with on Broadway

Q30: Agree with everybody that it has no business ending at Briarwood of all places...I think a boost in service on the Q31 for Utopia Parkway riders (who are now completely screwed frequency/span-wise) and having the Q75 run along 188th Street/HHE would've been a good way to serve the area

Q36: Definitely doesn't need to run down to Jamaica Avenue and back up...I'd also consider if something else can cover the northern end of Little Neck Parkway, and if the Q36 could run to North Shore University Hospital as was proposed in the original draft plan (QT34).

Q39: I guess I could agree with leaving it as-is

Q50: The Co-Op City segment needs to run similar to the BxM7 and not make a full loop around the whole neighborhood...

Q52: I'd try my hand at extending it to Far Rockaway via Bayswater...

Q15: Yeah, the current Q15/a setup is as good as you're gonna get... Glad to see that couplet doing as well as it has been, despite (some) Whitestone patrons' bitching regarding the routing up there over the years... Breaking that up to have [this impending Q15 terminate at Clintonville/7th like the former Q14 did] & [a ridiculously forced ass rush route like this impending Q62] comes off as tone deaf to me....

Q22: Rockaway/Burnside as a terminal for that QT22 would've worked out - To be a stub.... The ideal move is to send it up to 5 Towns (which is what they had the Q22 in the previous draft doing)... The problem with that though, is there's no place to end a bus route over there... Forget about having buses on layover on Rockaway Tpke, and with 5 Towns apparently gaining back popularity, there's literally no space inside the parking lot to accommodate public buses (like, with suburban area malls & what not....)

Q23: It's not that it's a problem conceptually, it's that it's going to loom problematic logistically... Folks think the Q29 situation at 82nd is hectic, ending a bus at Corona Plaza will be worse....

With that said, I agree with having the Q23 be the 108th st route.... However, I would run it to Ditmars/94th (well, 95th) at the current Q33 terminal (they have the impending Q47 replacing the Q33 over there, but I would truncate the Q47 to where it would terminate with the Q69 at Astoria Blvd/82nd)... Regarding the current Q23 north of Astoria Blvd, I'd continue to have (a modified version of)  the current Q48 serve that part of East Elmhurst.... The current Q48 tends to do better than the current Q23 up there.... In any event, if I were to formulate a new route from the 102nd/103rd/104th st portion of the current Q23, I'd agree with having it serve National & 99th to/from Lefrak like this impending Q14 would - but I wouldn't bother running such a route past QB - especially along Eliot of all things.... The way I would handle this whole Q14/Q23 bit, is more or less this....

Q24: Interesting.... So what would have you concurring with that truncated Q24?

Q30: The impending Q30 will still end at LIRR Jamaica (the issue with the Q30 is on the opposite end of the route, the having of all trips end at QCC).... It's that Q75 they got ending at Briarwood subway.

Q36: That QT34 would've made for a nice little peak direction route, but that thing would've carried a shit ton of air during middays... They actually had this thing running overnight hourly hawks also.... Anyway, So I take it that you'd have buses ending at Jamaica/257th? Or would you run them down to LIRR Floral Park with the impending Q110?

Q39: The impending Q39 is being slightly altered on the northern/western end..... After hitting Jackson, buses would parallel/take on the current B62 terminal & layover scenario.... The current routing, if you need QBP, is a PITA.... Fully agree with the change.

Q50: I agree with the general sentiment.... I've never stated this publicly up until now, but I sincerely believe that the Q50 should end right there at the Peartree shopping Plaza -  and (lol) use the very depot it runs out of, as a layover & to turnaround .... Compared to the other Co-op routes, it's very *meh* in section 5.... Almost every single time I've taken it from section 5, passenger activity significantly increases once it hits that shopping plaza - even moreso than at Bartow/Co-op City blvd.....

Q52: If you're talking about running buses along Beach Channel Drive north of Seagirt, that's Wavecrest.... Bayswater is the area the old Q22a used to serve, north of that aforementioned part of Beach Channel Drive.