Q43LTD

19 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Rather than multi-quote, I'll do it like this....

Considering this most recent topic of conversation, this is more or less how I would handle matters (outside of leaving the Q36 as-is):

• Leave the Q2 as proposed, routing-wise
• Have the proposed Q82 take 212th pl. southbound, instead of taking Hollis Ct. Blvd.... Rest of the routing to be left as proposed
• Breakup the Q57 into:
  • a Liberty av route running between Rockaway Blvd & Sutphin , via Liberty & Sutphin
  • a Jamaica av route running between [Myrtle/Hillside] & [Jamaica/257th]
    • to have the current Q55 maintained
    • a "rush"/purple route variant of this, would run b/w Jamaica-257th & 165th st terminal, via Jamaica > 170th (NB) > Hillside > Merrick > en route to the terminal

Basically, I'm against extending the current Q55 to Jamaica proper and/or having a third route terminate at Jamaica/170th - when nothing should really be ending there (proposed Q55), running a Jamaica av. route up to Hillside/LNP (proposed Q57), basically combining the current Q110 & current 112 (proposed Q57), turning the Q2 into a rush only route (proposed Q2), having the Q82 be a rush only route (proposed Q82)....

What I don't necessarily take issue with, is having a route running out of 165th terminal doing Hillside > 212th > Hempstead av, en route to Belmont park/UBS (proposed Q82) & doing away with the current Q112's "backdooring" to Jamaica proper (proposed Q57)....

For the n24 stealing ridership along Jamaica av. concerns, well I'd like to see how many intra-Queens riders would still bother embarking on n24's during peak times, over utilizing a route that would run clear along Jamaica av. from the county line to 170th, en route to 165th terminal (via 169th )....

Would the proposed Q109 still exist in your plan?

2 hours ago, Ex696 said:

What makes you say that one is the worser one? I originally thought the B48/B69 swap was worse because the swap would have a larger change on both routes compared to the B49/B68 change.

What did you think of the B1/64 swap back in 2010?

I like how the Bx28 and 38 are combined as one route, but not the 25 and 26

9 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Lol.... so the 2023 stats will show the Q70 as having Zero riders.... The B60 will also see a noticeable ridership "decline" in the 2023 stats, as that route's set to be fare free come this fall....

And don't forget the M116, Q4, Bx18 and some Staten Island route will be free as well

Top 10 by borough:

Bronx

Bx12

Bx1/2

Bx9

Bx19

Bx36

Bx6

Bx40/42

Bx7

Bx41

Bx28/38

Brooklyn

B6

B46

B82

B44

B35

B41

B1

B8

B38

B15

Manhattan

M15

M101

M14

M86

M4

M96

M34

M3

M102

M11

Queens

Q58

Q27

Q65

Q44

Q10

Q25

Q52/53

Q46

Q23

Q17

Staten Island

S79

S53

S48/98

S44/94

S46/96

S78

S93

S74/84

S61/91

S40/90

Express

SIM1

X27/37

X28/38

SIM4

BxM7

SIM10

BxM9

SIM3

SIM8

SIM33

30 minutes ago, Mpn4179 said:

Already taken care of. I created it this morning.

I see it. Thanks

10 hours ago, Ex696 said:

https://new.mta.info/agency/new-york-city-transit/subway-bus-ridership-2022

Opinions on the  reroute to Euclid Avenue ?

That ridership link should be its own thread

Which of these swaps are worse, the 49/68 or 48/69 or equal?

I only used the  once. It's only from 179 to 212. Maybe I should have took the  instead 

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Keep in mind that the eastbound section of Jericho Turnpike also has the n24 available. (Westbound unfortunately it is drop-off only)

Actually, the N24 is open door as far west as 239, or that changed? 

It will still go to Jamaica, just in the form of the 57

My only nitpick with this 82 is that it should Hollis Court in both directions. Maybe the 77 could have remained at 145.

6 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Amazing from a passenger standpoint, sure... From an operations standpoint however, having all B38 service end at Catalpa (regardless of the fact that it's an artic route) will be unsustainable.... There's simply no room for all these buses at a time to layover there... (The streets of) Ridgewood in & of itself are as narrow as anything & growing more congested as we speak, on top of it....

Something is going to have to give.

I suppose make it a "rush" or "limited " or revert it back to standard 40'

On 7/23/2023 at 2:47 PM, B35 via Church said:

I used to say that Gantry Plaza is like a poor man's/pseudo BPC.... I can't even say that anymore, thanks to how exponentially lively BPC has gotten in the past couple of years or so, thanks to Brookfield Place & the passageway that connects it to Westfield World Trade.... Now that immediate part of LIC (Center Blvd, etc) is more reminiscent to me of that Freedom Pl. area, where the M72 ends at....

Anyway, there's an interesting coincidence & irony to what you're referencing, in regards to this redesigned network..... Coincidence being that they have a "Q69" running there & irony being that the Q103 would be eliminated with this redesign..... While I'd miss the Q103, I think it may be time to bid it adieu... The way they did it though, *shrugs*.... They turned the Q69 into a rush route that would make few stops along 21st until it hits 44th dr, to eventually turn off to serve the southern portion of Vernon Blvd.... The northern portion of Vernon Blvd, they have a heavily altered Q39 doing..... Speaking of which, I just realized that they'd have the B62 make more stops along 21st than the Q69 would... Something is very very wrong with that picture.... Also, rather than have their proposed Q67 basically be the new Q39, I would've kept the current Q39 intact & have their proposed Q67 be a branch of the current Q39... Much rather have that, than their proposed Q39 (which, coincidentally, would share both end terminals with the Q18)....

Regardless of the running of the Q69 to Hunters Point ferry, I would be interested to see what percentage or ratio of Ravenswood & Queensbridge PJ's patrons would gravitate to which route more - the proposed Q63 or the proposed Q69....

Yeah it was definitely overkill with the 39/67 swap. Routing and service spans. Similar with the 26/27 swap (Even though the 26 regains off peak and weekend service for the first time since forever). As far as the proposed 63/69 usage. I think it would be 50/50. Weekends the 63 may get more patronage if there's no local service between Jackson Hts and Queens Plaza

1 hour ago, Ex696 said:

Didn't the B47 used to be two separate routes and got combined?

 

Yes. The B40 and 78

Who's ok with the B60 proposed to be split into 2, but routes like the B6, 43, 47 and 82 aren't 

11 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

IDK who the hell these people are; I'm not on social media.... Does the name "Daniel Christian" ring a bell to any of you? That is the person on that FB group in question that @mikecintel is referencing, that's alluding to the Brooklyn redesign being implemented in 2026...

Thar name does not ring a bell. I'm not on any transit groups on Facebook 

2026 sounds too far out. Wouldn't it be shortly after Queens is implemented? 

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

You mean Prospect Park West (as in, the pre-2010 routing that had it running along 8th & 9th [aka Prospect Park W]) ?

Prospect Park SW is where the B68 runs along, to eventually end along.....

Yes, that's what I meant. I wonder is Coney Island being overserved in this redesign

Nice shots!

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

If the newfound purpose of this proposed Q66 is to connect riders to the ferry, then yes, truncating it to Northern Blvd would defeat that purpose.... One of the main problems I have with this proposed Q66 is the extension to the ferry.... For all that, I'd rather it be left at QBP...

I guess they're trying to make Hunters Point like a "mini hub" like it was back in the day with the free 69 and an extended 103 during the PBL days

Then there's the B10/12 situation. I feel the 10 should have went to City Line Cypress Hills

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Wait, who said the proposed Q63 should be cut back to Woodside? That would just have it running back & forth along Broadway b/w Northern & QB all day..... I get that there's that gap on that part of Broadway, but that would still be wasteful to have the whole route doing that....

I was referring to the Q66, not the 63. I should have been more clear

I still feel the 69 could have went back to Prospect Park SW. It's similar to the 49/68 swap to the south.

23 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

...and I'm of the belief that the continued running of it to QBP has quite a bit to do with that underserving.

Should've just kept those stops along Northern & truncated the thing to run b/w Northern Blvd & Flushing.... Something else should be covering 35th.... The connection to 21st st. subway from points east, simply doesn't have near the same importance nowadays, as it did back when they extended the Q66 to QBP in the late 80's (or whenever that subway station opened).... Nowadays, for the most part, the Q66 is just another bus along 21st.... Those Jackson Hgts. patrons bombard the shit out of the route & the way I see it, they're being penalized because they continue to have trips running to QBP....

Fall of 89 to be exact when the Queensbridge station (then ) opened. I guess the felt it was a stub and sent the 66 to Queens Plaza in 2007. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of this proposed 63 if it were cut back to Woodside?

According to the stats, this is how each route ranked in their respective borough:

Bx18 ranked 34th out of 37 routes. This was pre redesign of course. 

The B60 ranked 28th out of 54

The M116 ranked 18th out of 38

The Q4 ranked 27th out of 78

The S46/96 ranked 4th out of 22