N6 Limited

Only if you're traveling through zones 1 & 3

Has using OMNY (so far) made much of a difference other than your use of the shuttle? (For example, have you had re-swiping issues with Metrocard and now that's been a non-issue? Has it been a somewhat negligible shift?)

Not sure how that will make a difference, when LIB was transferring to NICE, most of the buses failed inspection.

I think it would be helpful if the Cross-Hudson link stopped at White Plains.

Have they hinted on how OMNY will be used on the railroads?

Perhaps they should extend the Interboro RX across the bay and along the North Shore

https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/21250912/private-company-offers-laguardia-airtrain-alternative Interesting proposal, it's almost like the original AirTrain plan. I like the connection to Jamaica via Willets PT, they might have resistance with a connection to the Astoria Line. Wouldn't there be a funding issue sharing a service on the Broadway/Astoria line? (IIRC, that's why the JFK AirTrain had to be completely isolated), unless they're suggesting the create a new service on the express tracks and middle track through LIC/Astoria (with headway long enough to allow it).

The first draft would certainly help in this case. Numerous routes which connect to the which connect to other routes. New Routes which would be helpful in this scenario: QT7, QT67, QT18, QT68/QT39 swap. To a lesser extent: QT73

American Dream depends on NYC Tourism, so once that rebounds then the 355 ridership should pick up.

Ugh, I hate when those work trains pass by in the subway.

An interesting thing to note in the webinar, was that, budget constraints weren't an issue/hindrance during the redesign.

And here's the webinar:

So they still have to manually decide if the "Southbound" or goes into Continental first? Would CBTC help move trains along better though bottle necks if all trains had to merge on to the local/express track for whatever reason? Are they going to use CBTC to do relays when it's up and running?

I like how you ignore that Atlantic Terminal is a Brooklyn Station which connects to almost every Subway line in Brooklyn. The point is there is Brooklyn-Queens demand, the other perpendicular bus lines will connect to LIRR stations, the QT7 would be a southern alternative. Actually, virtually every LIRR stop in Queens (Except for Little Neck) now has more direct bus service with this proposal.

Linden Blvd is a Crosstown road. So the QT7 provides a crosstown route, connects to other north-south routes and the . And according to the following article, these Brooklyn-Queens trips are being generated from somewhere. Atlantic Ticket continues impressive ridership and revenue growth https://www.thelirrtoday.com/2020/09/atlantic-ticket-continues-impressive.html

The Remix Map has a QT44 and QT44 SBS for some reason, and the QT44 route uses the expressway. It can get really bad with the double parking, lack of left turning lanes, and then cars blocking the intersection at Pennsylvania Ave. They need to institute don't block the box at Pennsylvania and Atlantic.

I agree, especially when you have to deal with long blocks. True, though it seems like they didn't want to overserve the section east of Springfield. That would be interesting routing. There's probably a blue route at Gateway they want to connect the QT7 to, possibly the B82 (via extension). Pretty much, it's basically the current service pattern during rush hours represented as a separate route. It would be interesting if we could see the current network with the ridership information at each stop. I didn't mention the because the vast majority are going to the QB express. The MTA has O/D information via Metrocard, Bus GPS information, perhaps they see that those using the / are actually coming from the proposed purple route stops anyway? Making service faster for riders shouldn't have to come with a corridor ONLY having some skip-stop service run along it.... Nested skip-stop services with no local variant to speak of along a corridor complicates matters... So yeah, it's how they're going about instantiating that particular intricacy of bus travel.... Furthermore, I'm not acting like there's no other options for the current local riders that would have matters exacerbated, my argument the whole time is riders' commutes are intentionally being made worse by increased walking... Taking issue with a systematic thinning out of stops isn't the same argument as specifically arguing that riders having no other options.... I see what the plan entails, so please stop acting like you're the only person here with eyeballs & some deeper understanding of what's been presented with this redesign that those of us that are critical of the redesign doesn't somehow understand.... It appears to me that you have zero interest in the network design aspect of the redesign & you're solely going all in on *as long as the buses are fast(er)* - no matter what... Your disposition when it comes to having local riders engage in an increased amount of walking to (whatever) bus route, is that it's some negligible factor - since the ultimate result is to have (whatever) bus route end up being faster... You can't claim that you have no issues with local stops, yet take issue with people (because it's not just me in this discussion regarding that particular aspect) that's defending maintaining local stops in general.... You can't claim you have no issues with local stops, when you sarcastically state "Maybe you and @B35 via Church can enlighten me, which of these local stops are so busy and have this dire need for Jamaica Center as if there would be no alternatives?"... I don't have an issue with local stops. All I'm saying is that if those riders are going to Jamaica Ave to shop, and the QB express anyway, then what difference does it make? I can understand that, as I am also looking at how these services would affect my use of buses in the borough. Being on any bus sitting in traffic is annoying, but yeah I can imagine it being worse on an Express Bus. I was looking at the QT44 routing and it uses the Whitestone Expressway to get to the bridge "faster", but that section is usually backed up during rush hours, the service road might be faster. I've been on the Q24 and it was horribly slow, Atlantic Ave is generally slow in the first place, TSP would probably get more riders to use it. I think they put 2 stops on the QT5 to see how riders would react. They could easily add stops as necessary. Not only is it irritating to be on a crawling express train, but it's even worse when a local train zooms by, especially right after an express stop where a transfer could have been made with advance warning. . I know the MTA is looking at its bottom line ,they want to reduce overlap, probably simplify operations from their end, the faster the buses run the less buses they need to provide a certain level of service, etc etc. The elephant in the room is that bus speeds started decreasing with the introduction of Vision Zero, THAT is why bus speeds started decreasing which lead to ridership declines. In any case, they've indicated they're going to introduce a new draft based on the feedback received, but it will still be "ambitious". We shall see..

Has the MTA reported on how fare box recovery (has or hasn't) shifted on routes that were converted to SBS?

Nassau County issues RFP for local bus franchise https://www.thelirrtoday.com/2022/01/nassau-county-issues-rfp-for-local-bus.html

The point was that many riders are actually closer to Atlantic and Liberty than the full 2 or so blocks from 101 Ave. I've been on crush loaded Q8s, many of them get on from the Train station at Sutphin and Archer, and from shopping along Jamaica Ave, which the QT67 will take care of. Yes they should add stops to the QT5. As for the Q24 it has to deal with traffic especially near Pennsylvania Ave, but they've been working with NYCDOT on helping to mitigate these issues, so maybe they'll add bus lanes and jump queues. I went to one of the meetings, It was interesting and entertaining, transit talk with fellow transit riders. I understand there are elderly folks that commute along the corridor. But what I'm also seeing is virtue signaling on behalf of others. I want to hear from the actual commuters affected in a negative way, not people who are protesting on behalf of riders who *may* be affected in a negative way when they may not even care or actually like/love the changes. And, from those who are making legit informed complaints about the draft, not "You got rid of the Q2! How am I going to get to the subway!" Also, many of the elderly along the corridor take the dollar vans anyway. I like Checkmatechamp's idea as well, It would provide crosstown bus connections, a connection to the LIRR and open up easier use of City Ticket/Atlantic Ticket, etc. At the same time, that route would serve one local stop on Merrick ,which was your main issue about the purple routes vs QT18. Perhaps [Most likely], local riders on Merrick Blvd are just trying to get to Jamaica Ave for shopping, or just trying to get to the QB Express, which the QT18 addresses. A lot of ridership are those transferring to/from the at Sutphin Blvd. Well, if they don't know about bustime then they probably don't know about the redesign, they're going to be in for a surprise. I prefer to use Transit App as it shows you all the near by routes when you open it, and it works for transit networks around the globe. This is the thing, many of the local stops are being removed due to "stop spacing", so the new local stops are going to be "consolidated" and they will be mid-way between the express stops. From what I see, the all stops are going to be 3 blocks apart, and the only section with consecutive local stops and no Limited stop is between Liberty Ave and Linden Blvd, at that point, Guy R Blvd is a 5 min walk. The QT18 is a cost cutting measure and efficient utilization of resources, which may promote ridership as it connects two disjointed corridors with through trips. The cost savings allow them to create new routes and service plans. They essentially got feedback from riders that they want a faster ride to the subway, and they said "we have all these overlapping routes on Merrick Blvd and Hillside, how can we address this concern?" and the QT18 was born. I'm not saying ridership is so low that it doesn't matter, what I'm saying is that the local stops are flanked by express stops in the southern portion of the route and the northern portion has the Guy R Brewer corridor that's a 5 min walk away with service to Jamaica Center. It's not that I have issues with the local stops, it's that you are acting like they have NO other options to get to Jamaica Center, if they really needed it. Many are just trying to get to Jamaica Ave or the QB Express. As for the n6x, they reinstated one stop at the edge of the county, midway (1 mile) between two existing express stops where the bus would be waiting for a traffic signal anyway, it will not slow down the route, but will speed up travel for commuters in the area who need to go in either direction to work, not just the subway. NYC is different, because many of the traffic signals are timed to about 25 seconds of green, and each stop gets the bus caught at a red signal. I realize there are some connections that are lost or "moved", it's evident when comparing the current map to the proposal. It would be nice if they put the current network on remix as well. By "Terminal" ,I just meant the Jamaica area in general since that's where the majority terminate. The issue with the current feeder network is that "Oh, if you don't want to go the subway, then too bad". There's a reason why cities have loop/circle line train lines, semi-circle (or outer grid-like connecting) bus lines and even interstates (beltways/loops). I agree, every routing does not have to have a routing change, but improvements should be made where possible. Yes, riders have posed legitimate concerns to the MTA , I know the Jackson Heights area had voiced their concerns, the proposal straightened out routes and because of that they would connect to non-ADA accessible stations. I haven't actually addressed any particular rider's direct critiques, just talking points on this forum on behalf of riders. That would be interesting, it's clear they're using Remix for the Brooklyn redesign as well, and they're doing those joint blue routes between the two boroughs. Come to think of it, with this Queens draft, they split the limited and local routes into distinct numbers/routes all together. I wonder if they'll do purple routes along Utica Ave or something. With the QT5 maybe they're relying on the bus not having to pull in and out of traffic to maintain time. I don't have an issue with a route that runs along most of Merrick. My issue is that SE queens riders asked for a quicker ride to the subway, they offered a proposal and the only complaints I've heard about the QT18 and the QT42 routing has been on this forum, not at the community meeting. "because the local route doesn't go to Jamaica Center" meanwhile it also serves Jamaica Ave and the QB Express which is where most riders are going, and provides choices to the corridor. Also, of course if all buses on Merrick Blvd go to Jamaica Center, than it's riders are going to go to Jamaica Center to get on the train. Ok, because it seemed like you were intimating that the proposed network discards implied "harmony" in the current network. Haha, yes we are able to disagree on the proposals at hand and discuss why. The ability to compare the current network to the proposals within Remix would be a nice addition. They're probably doing it on their planning side though. Fair enough, they do have the reasoning/excuse of lower fare collection. 1) Yeah, if the bus is directly behind the bus you're on, then a transfer is more feasible. If it's 10 mins away, might as well walk, unless you have heavy bags or something. 2) They need a solution, they're making people take inefficient routes to avoid using a transfer. They think they may "lose" fares with round trips but they're adding demand to routes unnecessarily which may actually cost them more money trying to provide enough enough service. 3) Oh that's just because they're just trying to make sure most of the borough is within .25 miles of a bus stop. Turn on the layer under the Favorite Stats section. 4) It seems that the QT42 is almost on par with the Q5 on weekdays because alternate trips on the Q5 serve the mall on 15 min headway most of the day. On weekends the QT42 is slightly increased headway from 10 mins to 12, and then after 7pm or so it increases more, especially on Sunday. However, it's proposed to stop running at 10PM. 5) Yeah, that would be interesting, slightly difficult because certain routes have been merged, etc. 6) I believe they also wanted to give Francis Lewis Blvd a through route and eliminate redundant mileage on Hillside to Jamaica between the Q76 and Q77, Also, Francis Blvd Lewis would provide a quick trip to Flushing. I agree, Riders with unlimited cards may perform bus to bus, bus-subway-bus, etc, but since unlimited card purchases have declined a bit they should allow unlimited timed transfers or something to promote ridership. I agree , it would be a more annoying trip, I've taken the walk between the Jamaica Bus Terminal and Jamaica Center many times, because it's quicker than taking any bus that's beginning its trip on Jamaica Ave with the excessive dwell times. Although, I have also walked to Archer Ave and jumped on a bus turning from 168th St. I've also tried taking the Q43 to the from 179th St, it was a bit slow. The QT67 addresses that, no? Yes the spans may have to be addressed. Seem that after 10 they want riders to use the Green and red routes to get around. See, Although the buses were bunched, it helped prevent you from standing at the bus stop for 30 mins . Have the Q66 trips improved since the stop reductions?

I think it depends on how many stops they add. Connecting the subway lines would be helpful of course, but it would have to stop at major avenues with bus routes to make it more useful. The summer may see increased usage as it would improve access to Coney Island.

I caught Brooklyn in one of Remix's videos about new features. Basically, they can show ridership details on the stop level in the platform. (The rest of the video is interesting as well). Timepoint 37:07

The homeowners interviewed in the article live near the Montauk Line, not the proposed route of the Triboro RX. Though, I suppose they could study the feasibility of a branch to use the Montauk Line.

Could a combined Cross Harbor freight tunnel and Triboro RX Study provide joint funding to plan and upgrade the corridor jointly? Many of the overpasses have 4 track beds, so they can add sidings for the freight side and use 2 tracks for the transit side.

That's good, it would be useful to compare drafts. Yes, there are slight differences. A local train is typically across the platform and trains would make the trip to the next local stop in one min. If they were to walk they'd have to exit the station and begin their walk. On the bus, depending on the headway, it may be quicker to walk, also they may want to be strategic about using a transfer. Speaking of which, the MTA should consider a new model for OMNY transfers, such as adding a 3rd transfer, or unlimited transfers in certain time frame. Unlimited metrocard use has decreased recently for obvious reasons. I think they wanted to use the existing stop while keeping most of the area under the "coverage" overlay. The route you propose from Sutphin would give them easy access to the LIRR as well. They're certainly trying to be economic by more strategic use of their existing resources. What 's preposterous is the prevention of modifications to routes due to a low percentage of riders who use the route compared to the majority of passengers it may benefit. It's funny that you say that when you were perturbed that NICE added a stop to the N6X. Routes that have increased connection opportunities along the the entire route connect to new routes that have even more connection opportunities along the entire route. The difference is that they all don't share the same connection point at one terminal and hardly anywhere else. Bustime enhances bus ridership for me at least, I can see where the bus is, and I know if I have time to go to the store beforehand, I can see from the train where my connecting bus is, etc. Subway time as well, I can see if I need to speed up my entry into the subway station, etc. The bus network was developed as Queens grew and consisted if independent bus companies competing with each other, so the routes are all over the place right now. If some people are screaming about this redesign now, how would a "clean slate approach" make people react? I think some people were angry because their bus number changed. The red routes are simply high use corridors with stop spacing. Subway dash routes gets people to the subway quicker because that's where the majority of ridership is going, most of them close to the city line, the subway goes half way into Queens. They may do the same with the Brooklyn Redesign for South East Brooklyn. The QT5 is flanked on both sides by local routes, there's logic behind the proposal. The vast majority of riders do not live on 101 Ave, that alone puts them closer to the green routes that would provide local service. I agree, everybody doesn't want the subway, that's why it's important to have connecting routes that don't require going to the subway to transfer to another bus going away from the subway. I haven't specifically indicated in this discussion that the Q5 in itself is "problematic", however the QT18 and QT42 proposal is an interesting upgrade in service along the corridor. It appears that the QT18 would allow all trips on the QT42 to go to Green Acres. Which brings up another point, the Q5 has a couple of short turn points as it is, the QT18 is modifying/splitting the service pattern to provide the outer portion to have a speedier journey down the bus lanes, which would allow all trips to go to the Mall, and all riders to have a faster ride. You were saying that the routes don't run in harmony with connecting routes, how would that be instituted? No, he would say random unrelated statements. I know that every route isn't going to transfer to one another, but have any of you looked at the remix map , selected the different lines and see their routings and connections?, and the routes the connections have? There is no way that 100% of riders will be content with what the redesign offers, that is one of my points. The MTA is a large agency with a budget in the billions, that is always crying for more and more funding from Albany. So yes, they're going to "try" to keep their costs under control. As they have said, they're trying to improve the network while being as close to "cost neutral" as possible, they have to provide service where it makes sense and pull where it doesn't. For example, the Q84 gets light ridership east of Francis Lewis Blvd, they have threatened to "delete" the route all together a few times. In this proposal, instead of removing service from that section, they replace it with the QT73 which runs at a lower frequency. They have only so many buses, and so many Bus Operators, etc.