checkmatechamp13
-
Posts
12,023 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by checkmatechamp13
-
-
@BM5 via Woodhaven Do the A & B currently run on Sunday? (I think they do, but just double-checking). The new schedule has 4 round-trips on Sunday.
It looks like the D will be the only Dutchess route left that actually connects to the Harlem Line, with all of 3 trips per day...ugh...
0 -
On 1/27/2024 at 11:30 AM, JAzumah said:
NJT interstate buses incur tolls and platform fees to operate between NY and NJ. That cost has to be allocated.
A flat surcharge is regressive. It spikes our friends along the NJ waterfront with inflated fares. Spreading out the impact across zones is much better.
That's the whole point of his idea to have one fare scale with a surcharge to cross the river, rather than two separate scales.
Under his idea, an intra-Newark trip would be $2. (Currently $1.60 and proposed to be $1.80). A Newark- Bloomfield trip becomes $2.75 (currently $2.55, proposed to be $2.90). A Newark - West Caldwell trip becomes $3.50 (currently $3.15, proposed to be $3.60).
Going out from the Hudson River, a trip to Union City becomes $4.75 (currently $3.50, proposed to be $4), a trip to Jersey City or Hackensack becomes $5.50 (currently $4.50, proposed to be $5.20 IIRC), a trip to Newark, Clifton/Passaic, or Bayonne becomes $6.25 (currently $6, proposed to be $6.90).
The initial charge and increments can be adjusted (e.g. $1.75 instead of $2) and the zone charges can fluctuate (e.g. $0.50 instead of $0.75). Special fares can be calculated for 1 zone interstate if necessary
0 -
@Gotham Bus Co. I would tend to agree with your structure....just charge the intrastate fare and then a surcharge to cross the river.
An extreme example is the 317 from Asbury Park to Phiadelphia...I think it's $9.75 to Camden, but $21+ to Philly, even though getting off and reboarding would only cost you $1.95 for the Camden - Philly leg. (Some routes have their boundary at Bridge Plaza while others have it at WRTC...though the 317 itself might be the only one that has it at WRTC, I forget offhand)
0 -
@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)
0 -
One of the things I realized is that the QM63/64/68 don't stop at 2nd Avenue & 34th Street, despite passing by there (anybody who needs that area needs to make their way to the Downtown routes stopping at 34th & 1st).
I also realized that the QM63 (but not the QM64/68) is adding a stop at Queens Blvd & Woodhaven Blvd.
0 -
I guess he was looking for the park-and-ride
1 -
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said:
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.
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...
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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)...
I agree, layover would've been better off on Lawrence Parkway if serving that shopping center was their goal.
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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....
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...
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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)....
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...
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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....
Agreed.
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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....)
Good point...might be there be a chance they could get some layover space by the Amazon warehouse?
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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....
I think the Q14 proposed in the New Draft Plan would've gone a long way towards providing a reasonable alternative to the Q58 (in addition to the Q98 of course). For discussion sake, what would you have serving Eliot Avenue in your plan?
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said:Q24: Interesting.... So what would have you concurring with that truncated Q24?
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.
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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.
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.
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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?
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).
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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.
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.
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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.....
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...
On 1/6/2024 at 9:57 PM, B35 via Church said: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.
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.
19 hours ago, B35 via Church said: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....
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)?
19 hours ago, B35 via Church said: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....
On 4/15/2022 at 1:02 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:@BM5 via Woodhaven I think part of it is just that they aren't super familiar with those areas and figure that if the current QM12 stops at 98th Street (when the pedestrian bridge is at 99th Street) and the current QM8X doesn't stop west of 188th Street, then they might as well have the new routes do the same.
In any case, they probably figure that the QM8 will take virtually all of the Fresh Meadows riders from the QM7, thus leaving space for the riders along Queens Blvd. Plus with the impacts of work from home on ridership, I don't find that assumption to be too outlandish. If they need a couple of extra trips at the height of rush hour to handle the combined ridership, it's still more efficient than running it as two separate routes. (Plus it's simpler for the passengers to understand, rather than having remember that they take the QM7 if they leave work at 2pm but the QM11 if they leave at 4pm). The other thing of course is that some of the people getting on the QM11 along Queens Blvd may actually live closer to Yellowstone Blvd (either side of QB) or 108th Street, but they walk down to Queens Blvd because that's where the bus happens to stop.
For the HHE corridor, I think they're better off having the QM5/8/35 make a few extra stops as far west as Main Street (or College Point Blvd, but I think Main Street would be better). Leave the QM11/12/42 covering the areas west of Flushing Meadows Park, and the QM5/8/35 covering areas east of there. Off-peak, you can have the QM5C covering the whole corridor.
To add onto my comments from this thread, after some thought and discussion, I'd like to modify my earlier comments (from almost 2 years ago...how time flies...or more likely...how long this whole thing has dragged on for...)
Anyway, for the QM11 reroute to Kew Gardens, I agree with you, since it's the only Downtown express route in that area (so people coming off the Queens Village expresses have the option to transfer to this or the QM65). Like you said, with the Atlantic Ticket being so popular (before they foolishly killed it), it probably would've been faster for most passengers to take the LIRR from that section of Queens to Atlantic Terminal for the subway, but I guess now that Atlantic Ticket isn't an option, I guess that makes the QM65 a bit stronger of a route. At the height of rush hour, the QM7 should continue running straight to Union Turnpike & Main Street.
For LeFrak, one idea I'd try my hand at is seeing if the LeFrak section of the QM10/11/40 could be extended out to College Point. Probably the simplest way would be to have it start at the Q25 terminal, and follow the Q25 route down to the Whitestone Expressway, Then go down through the Whitestone/GCP and get off at HHE/108th Street, serve LeFrak City, and continue down the route...outbound would be a bit more difficult, since buses would have to go through the Junction Blvd/HHE intersection, but it would still technically directly serve part of the complex (and if riders really need to get to 57th Avenue specifically and can't walk it out, there's the Q14 available to transfer to). I definitely agree with separating the 63rd Drive services from the LeFrak services.
On the Manhattan side, I generally think buses should be using the Queens-Midtown Tunnel wherever possible...ideally most Queens buses would be using the BM5 route, but having all those buses on layover by 57th & 1st or 57th & 3rd/Lexington, and then having all those buses turning from 57th onto 5th would probably prove problematic.
I'd try to at least give some more options via the Queens-Midtown Tunnel, though. I think having the 3rd Avenue routes run down Lexington would be manageable, since there aren't as many 3rd Avenue variants as there are 6th Avenue variants. I'd also have some more trips running across 34th Street towards Hudson Yards (I think the MTA had the right idea with that...basically take the super-express trips and run them across to Hudson Yards to provide more coverage...but they picked random routes).
For Hudson Yards service, I'd have a few QM2, QM5, and QM20 trips operate to Hudson Yards (say, every 20 minutes or so from 6am - 8am and 4:30pm - 6:30pm peak direction). Those routes already have the super-express trips in the evening, and don't run near the LIRR, so their riders don't have easy access to the Penn Station area. Then adjustments could be made from there.
0 -
Service will be provided as a shuttle to Hialeah originally: https://www.axios.com/local/miami/2024/01/05/tri-rail-train-downtown-when-jan-2024
0 -
1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:
I’m confused as well. I thought the 67 was the 62 which is why I thought the 62 ran down to Toms River.
For the 319, split it between Cap Ray and Atlantic City. There’s no reason for a bus to be that long.
For a person leaving Newark Airport heading towards Newark Penn, if you see either bus, just hop on.
For a person heading south...yeah there's a big difference between heading to Elizabeth vs. heading to Old Bridge and points south.
And those Wildwood trips are just two round-trips per day (there'salso a 15 minute layover programmed at Atlantic City). The vast majority of trips run PABT - Atlantic City.
0 -
4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:
Right. I thought the 67 was the Newark Airport local bus but instead it's some bus from Toms River that's the local counterpart to the 139?
They really need to redesign this bus system starting with the local routes.
And for the love of MCI's, split that 319 already!!
I'm confused. The 67 does serve Newark Airport (and can be used if it comes before the 62 between Newark Airport and Newark Penn Station). It is the intrastate version of the 139 and a segment of the 319.
What are you referring to regarding splitting the 319?
0 -
5 hours ago, biGC323232 said:
That was really never used as a 1 supplement more of a supplement to the 67 ....Once it left JSQ it hit 440/1&9 straight into nwk...Most if not all ppl at the JS wanting Nwk will op for path downstairs...That service had good ridership mainly in the warm months with only 2 a day leaving jsq
Fair enough...I didn't realize it went nonstop (I thought it took the 1 route down Communipaw)
On a side note, for the 24 short-turns, the northbound short-turns to Harriet Tubman Square will be 24T, and the southbound short-turns to Broad & Jersey will be 24B (hopefully nobody gets on expecting it to go down East Jersey Street to Jersey Gardens like the old 24B)
0 -
Continuing from this post:
Q68: The B57 already provides a general link from Williamsburg to Jackson Heights...this definitely seems like a rush job (and again, they forgot about the Sunnyside - Astoria connection via 39th Street that was requested in the original draft).
Q69: I would've preferred it run down to Hunters Point as originally proposed.
Q70: Not much to say here...they left it as-is
Q72: There's definitely latent demand for increased frequency along Junction Blvd if the MTA were willing to tap into it.
Q75: Yeah, no way should this be ending in Briarwood...it would've been much better taking over the southern section of 188th Street from the Q17
Q76: I agree with running it down 20th Avenue instead of 14th Avenue, and running it a bit deeper into College Point.
Q77: Definitely not an adequate substitute for the Q78 down Springfield Blvd. I definitely preferred how they had service divided up along Springfield/Bell under the New Draft Plan as opposed to the Proposed Final Plan.
Q78: See above
Q82: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q83: The "rush service" along Liberty isn't going to work. It would be better to route the Q42 out of that area and leave the Q83 as-is along Liberty.
Q84: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q85: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q86: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q87: As mentioned before, I think this could be good as a Merrick Blvd local route.
Q88: I'm alright with leaving it as-is, but it definitely needs a longer service span on the weekends.
Q98: The route itself is great, but the Q58 needs to complement it better by going up Roosevelt Avenue
Q101: I'd prefer the Steinway route to head into Sunnyside
Q103: I'm alright with how it's proposed
Q104: I would've preferred a through-Broadway route as previously proposed
Q105: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q110: I would've actually liked to see it run through Jamaica to Ozone Park, but I'm good with how it's proposed
Q111: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q112: Definitely shouldn't be backdooring its way into Jamaica
Q114: See Q7/22 comments
Q115: Not much to say here...just a Q111 short-turn
0 -
On 12/24/2023 at 8:04 AM, Gotham Bus Co. said:
Bx7: Keep as a Local route, but restructure to absorb Bx20. Add a few trips on weekdays, then alternate between Bx7 (direct) and Bx7A (via Kappock Street).
I think the general Bx7/10/20 structure works well. The Bx10 can handle any Spuyten Duyvil riders heading north of 246th Street, and the Bx7 acts as the direct link from the northern section of Riverdale down to the subway. Adding the "A" branch would cause imbalanced spacing on either one end or the other (the Manhattan end or the Riverdale end).
0 -
3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:
Are the 319 trips to Newark/Journal Sq even used? It takes longer to get there then to get to PABT.
If nothing else, Newark/Jersey City riders can use it as a supplement to the 1 between Newark & Jersey City.
That being said, service at least to Newark is definitely used and needed.
0 -
I'd be curious to see if the short-turns between Elizabeth and Newark end up having some sort of suffix. In any case, it's good that they're adding some extra service on the 24. (I wish they'd adjust the spacing in the morning and evening on Saturdays heading northbound so that headways are even north of Broad & Jersey)
0 -
6 hours ago, Lex said:
I'm guessing that's supposed to say College Point...
Yeah I mixed Ulmer Street with College Point and ended up saying Ulmer Park
4 minutes ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:If they did, the 44 would of had to turn onto Webster and Fordham Rd a la Bx55 to go back down. Or the routing would of had to be adjusted to go via Bathgate so they can take over the layover spot of the bee-line buses.
Side note, it would of been better if the proposal opinion bit was made a separate post instead of cramming it with the reply to my post.
Yeah those two would be options if there wasn't enough layover space at Fordham Plaza itself. And good point...I just wanted to get my thoughts out without double-posting.
0 -
6 hours ago, IAlam said:
There is demand it's just that it shouldn't be the job of the Q44. Had it been a Flushing to Fordham route that would be one thing but Jamaica to Fordham, is just too much. Jamaica to Fordham would honestly benefit from a regional express bus, but we don't do that here in MTA land.
What stops would you have such a route make, how often would you run it, and would you charge the full $7, or something lower (say, $5)?
One of my friends recommended a Sunset Park - Elmhurst - Flushing route (there's vans that run that route that charge $5 and seem to get decent ridership).
3 hours ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:I personally didn’t see how they were going to cram in the Q44 buses with the Bx15 and 17 occupying the limited space at Fordham Plaza.
I'm sure some could've taken their layover on East 189th Street if necessary.
In any case, continuing from my previous post
Q7: To add on, I do agree with the routing west of Cross Bay Blvd
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.
Q16: I would've had it ending by College Point Blvd & 59th Avenue, to supplement the Q98 as a local in that area. On the northern end, I'm alright with them consolidating all of the service to Utopia Parkway (but I do think the Q61 needs to run full-time for those along Willets Point Blvd, including the stretch east of Francis Lewis Blvd).
Q17: I would've preferred it running up to College Point, and being truncated on the southern end as originally planned. The Q76 already provides the connection to Jamaica (albeit not to the LIRR station)
Q18: I agree with this change.
Q19: I don't mind them leaving the route as-is, but they really need to run that route later than 9pm.
Q20: As mentioned, at this point, I'd just leave the Q15/15A and Q20A/20B setups instead of the setup they have planned for the College Point Shopping Center.
Q21: As mentioned, I'd leave this as the Howard Beach route instead of the Q41.
Q22: We all saw the truncation on the western end coming from a mile away...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
Q25: As mentioned, I would've preferred the Q17 be the one to serve the residential section of College Point as proposed in the New Draft Plan...actually for that matter, instead of ending it by the Ulmer Park Depot, maybe this could be the route to connect the College Point Shopping Center to Flushing...the Q76 covers anybody needing to head east (including for transfers to the Q44/50 heading northbound) and the Q25 brings people to Flushing and points south...
Q26/Q27: Honestly, I preferred the New Draft Plan setup...Q26 from Flushing to Cambria Heights, and Q27 from College Point to Oakland Gardens...the only issue I had with that plan is that Oakland Gardens ends up getting overserved...honestly, it might not be the worst idea to have branch it, and have half the buses run down the HHE to Little Neck, and half the buses end in Oakland Gardens...
Q28: I agree with basically leaving it as is
Q29: I would've liked it if they had the Q80 from the New Draft Plan combined with the Q63 (rather than having it backtrack to the Queens Center Mall and leave those riders in Glendale/Middle Village without a connection to Jackson Heights). That was really the main issue with that segment of the plan...
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
Q31: As mentioned, the frequency/span is completely inadequate for that corridor. The reroute on the northern end is good, though (although I'd also be open to sending it to College Point as proposed in the New Draft Plan).
Q32: Not much to say here...I guess good that they're tweaking the route in the QBP area
Q33: Not really sure what to say regarding the Q33/47 terminal swap
Q35: No comment...the whole Newport vs. Rockaway Beach Blvd vs. covering both thing has been going back and forth since the beginning of the redesign process.
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).
Q37: Wasn't really expecting an extension on the southern end to JFK, but whatever...
Q38: Looking at the previous draft, I think they might've been able to get away with running along Juniper Valley Road if they actually added stops in that area (after 69th Lane, the next stop was all the way over by 80th Street).
Q39: I guess I could agree with leaving it as-is
Q40: I think it should've taken 143rd Street - Linden Blvd - Sutphin Blvd and left 109th Avenue/Lakewood Avenue covered with the Q41
Q41: I think Howard Beach should've been covered by a Woodhaven Blvd route, but in any case, if the Q41 is covering it, it should serve 84th Street in both directions.
Q42: This route should just run across 110th Avenue/Brinkerhoff Avenue to either Brewer Blvd or Sutphin Blvd (depending on if it is desired to serve Jamaica Center vs. Jamaica LIRR station).
Q43: They should've went through with the extension to LIJ
Q44: They should've kept the Fordham Plaza extension. The Belmont area having limited east-west connections was brought up during the Bronx redesign, and they figured they'd address it with a Queens route...now at the last minute they throw up their hands and decide not to address it at all...not cool (and even for those heading to Fordham Plaza itself, it would've been quicker than the Bx9 even before the transfer is factored in)
Q45/46/48: I suppose the setup is alright during daytime hours, but definitely all routes should be running local during overnight hours. Also, the Glen Oaks route
should be a full-time route.
Q47: I definitely would've liked the idea of a through-69th Street route as proposed in the New Draft Plan. If they're doing all these studies to potentially build a light rail line (or whatever the Triboro RX/Interborough Express is supposed to be), they could at least start off with a simple bus route for some of these connections.
Q49: Not much to say, basically being left 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...as for the combination going to LaGaurdia....yeah that's definitely not what most people had in mind when they referred to a Bronx-LaGuardia route.
Q51: Well definitely better than not having anything along the western segment of Linden Blvd....I personally would've left the extension to Gateway (allows better connectivity to the Woodhaven Blvd routes and anything terminating at Rockaway Blvd
station).
Q52: I'd try my hand at extending it to Far Rockaway via Bayswater...
Q53: Not much to say here
Q54: Not much to say here
Q55: I would've preferred the Jamaica extension
Q56: Not much to say here
Q58: Definitely should be traveling via Roosevelt Avenue into Flushing, and not backtracking when there's already the Q98
Q59: I would've tried my hand at an extension to the Q38 terminal in Rego Park
Q60: I'm surprised they left it as-is, with the extension to South Jamaica and all....
Q61: This should be a full-time route
Q62: See Q15/15A and Q20A/20B comments
Q63/66: I guess this is one way of splitting the ridership between 35th Avenue and those heading straight to LIC
Q64: I'd give it a shot extending some trips along Jewel Avenue - Utopia Parkway - 73rd Avenue (To my understanding, most of the NIMBYs were west of Utopia Parkway...there's a chance it might be able to go through along Jewel).
Q65: I think this route is good as planned
Q67: Definitely happy to see more frequent weekend service. I would prefer to run it down Hunterspoint Avenue, Greenpoint Avenue, 48th Avenue, and 48th Street, to avoid the traffic down by the LIE (especially around Van Dam Street). I'd probably have the B53 run from WBP to Astoria via Greenpoint Avenue and 39th Street/Steinway Street (there definitely needs to be something connecting Sunnyside to Astoria using 39th Street). I'll think of the exact details sometime soon.
To be continued....
0 -
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)
Q1: I think it would've been better to have it combined with the Merrick Blvd local route (thus providing a connection from Merrick Blvd to the 169th Street subway station without having to go through Downtown Jamaica.
Q2: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q3: I'm good with how it's proposed (It's a long, circuitous route, but there's not much that can be done, especially with the construction around the passenger terminals)
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
Q5: As mentioned, I'd probably have the Q1 be the Merrick local (I'd end it around Merrick & Springfield), and leave the Q5 as the Merrick local running to Jamaica Center. (With the Q86 covering the eastern end of Rosedale, and the Q85 covering Green Acres, the only segment that would have local-only service would be Hook Creek Blvd)
Q6: I think they could've had one branch running down 150th Street to the cargo area, and the other branch going to the Post Office.
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).
Q8: I'm good with how it's proposed
Q9: It should definitely take 130th Street up at least as far north as 109th Avenue (It's not like 130th runs straight to Lincoln Street anyway). I'd probably just run it across 109th/Lakewood to Sutphin, and move the Q40 to run across Linden to Sutphin. (Another alternative would be to have the Q9 run across 109th Street to 127th/128th Street, and then take the Q41 route into Jamaica).
Q10: Good to see they detached it from the Jewel Avenue route.
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.
I'd also have a third branch running to Howard Beach via 84th Street (It can be called Q21 if necessary). It would basically just run along 84th Street south of 157th Avenue, and provide service in both directions...I think there's more demand from that area heading up Woodhaven Blvd instead of towards Jamaica. (In any case, if they insist on leaving the Q41 in that area, I'd still have it run up 84th Street bidirectionally)
Q12: I get that they want a route running the full length of Northern Blvd east of Flushing, but it's just simpler to have it run along Sanford out to Northern Blvd.
Q13: I'd have this route run like the QT51 in the original plan (Northern Blvd - Crocheron Avenue/35th Avenue - Bell Blvd)
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.
To be continued.....
4 hours ago, Metro CSW said:Damn.... And I was rooting for the Q44 to Fordham. Oh well, guess it wasn't much of a demand anyways.
This is the problem...with all the time they spent putting these reports together, you would think they would actually show the calculations that justified any given change. I'm sure they could've taken some Bx9/Bx22 origin-destination data, some census travel data, some factor for any new ridership that would've been encouraged as a result of this extension, and put together a solid case for this extension...instead, they basically just said "It looked good on a map" and then decided "Eh, it might make the route longer and more unreliable" (again, without quantifying it) and dropped it.
Every single change should have justification behind it...point blank, period. I cringe at the thought that there might be some planners who have said those those exact words after months of all these studies..."It looked good on a map....eh, it's a shame, there probably wasn't too much demand anyway"
@B35 via Church Do you happen to have the Remix maps saved for the second draft? (The one from March 2022 or so)
0 -
I'd take your proposed 80 and modify it slightly like so.
Basically, I'd have a 52A/52B setup. Buses would alternate between William Floyd Parkway and Titmus Drive, and then come back north on the opposite route. I'd run it hourly with a 90 minute cycle time and interline it with the 62. (I guess the only issue with that is that the 62 and 80 are contracted out to different companies, but I'm sure there could be a workaround with that).
0 -
They now have a plushie on their website for sale of Ricardo the bull: https://njtransit.mybigcommerce.com/6-brave-bullricardo-the-bull/
3 -
https://new.mta.info/article/lirr-service-changes-starting-january-22-2024
We'll be making some targeted changes to rush-hour LIRR schedules starting on January 22, 2024. These changes respond to your requests for additional through trains from Brooklyn in the afternoon and align service to better match our data on when people are riding. There are no changes to midday, evening, or weekend schedules.
Key changes are outlined below. Detailed schedules will be available on the TrainTime app and our schedules page in early January. We recommend that all rush-hour riders check for possible minor changes that may affect their departure and/or transfer times.
Babylon Branch
The 5:05 a.m. and 5:25 a.m. trains from Jamaica to Atlantic Terminal will run 3 minutes later to provide a better transfer for riders from Babylon.
The 5:49 a.m. train from Babylon to Grand Central will run 3 minutes earlier.
The 7:41 a.m. train from Penn Station to Massapequa will no longer run.
The 9:06 a.m. train from Wantagh to Grand Central will no longer run. The 8:42 a.m. train from Babylon to Penn Station will make the stops of both trains east of Jamaica and accept off-peak tickets.
The 7:02 p.m. train from Penn Station to Wantagh will no longer run. The 6:57 p.m. train from Penn Station will make all stops between Rockville Centre and Babylon.
Far Rockaway Branch
The 4:49 p.m. train from Penn Station to Far Rockaway will leave from Atlantic Terminal.
Hempstead Branch
The 3:35 p.m. train from Grand Central to Hempstead will leave from Atlantic Terminal.
The 6:39 p.m. train from Penn Station to Hempstead will leave from Atlantic Terminal.
Note: These two trains will arrive and leave from Tracks 11 or 12 in Jamaica.
Oyster Bay Branch
The 4:42 p.m. train from Oyster Bay to Jamaica will run 7 minutes earlier.
Port Jefferson Branch
The 6:57 a.m. train from Huntington to Grand Central will be split into two trains. Departure times at stations east of Jamaica will not change.
The train from Huntington will run nonstop from Syosset to Jamaica before continuing to Woodside and Grand Central.
A new train will start at Hicksville for local service to Grand Central, making the same stops as the current train.
West Hempstead Branch
The 6:11 p.m. train from Penn Station to West Hempstead will leave from Atlantic Terminal.
The 6:39 p.m. train from Atlantic Terminal to West Hempstead will leave from Penn Station.
0 -
16 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:
The B57 is still in the plan.
I bolded the Q78...
11 hours ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:Question for Queens users here, was there really demand to have the Q44 go to Fordham on the Queens side? I can see why riders in The Bronx would be happy to have a faster alternative to Fordham compared to the Bx9, but was there demand for Queens riders to have a one-seat ride to Fordham?
The Q44 has a lot of riders traveling relatively long distances on the route (On both ends), so I would say that yes, there is a reasonable amount of demand from Queens into Fordham (especially since it's providing extra coverage in Belmont along the way, serving the hospital).
3 hours ago, Fire Mountain said:So as I was looking back, I’m glad the MTA added my idea of a northern Blvd west rush route (the 66 is a rush now), but it’s only rush portion is between queens plaza and 49th street? If the 63 local is already via northern with the 66, wouldn’t it be better for the 66 to have a rush portion between there and Main Street? I personally feel that would make more sense tbh
Agreed.
0 -
-
is hectic, ending a bus at Corona Plaza will be worse....
.... 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.....
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.
from Middle Village 
in general, would supplement a significant amount of folks that currently use the Q54 to/from Brooklyn (
, but would (IMO) be more of a viable area to terminate a bus route, over, say, having it terminate at Graham 
should be a full-time route.
Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread
in New York City Bus
Posted
1) I have to check the Trip Planner (which seems to give a preview of what the proposed schedule they would run on the route), but from what it sounds like, pretty much all of the current Q11/21 service would end up running down through Lindenwood, and then splitting between Old Howard Beach/Hamilton Beach. I don't think the planners calculated that they would be overserving the southern end of the route.
2) Hmm....essentially trading the B47 for the B46 SBS at Woodhull...I wonder how that would look from a budget perspective and if they'd be looking to consolidate like that (it's a longer distance from where the B47 turns onto Broadway, but the B46 SBS is more frequent).
3) In the original draft, they had the Q12 (numbered QT17) running down Marathon Parkway and ending at the present-day Q30 terminal. Would you have it use Marathon, or run down Little Neck Parkway? (Not sure how the turnaround scenario would look in that case)
4) The idea behind my revision of their QT34 would be to connect Little Neck Parkway to Jamaica via a more direct route (rather than having it backtrack all the way to Jamaica Avenue and head back up, or having a Q79-type shuttle).
5) In the original proposal, the QT77 ran like that, but the issue is the people in the vicinity of Laurel Hill Blvd & 58th Street complained about the lack of a connection to LIC...to have the Q39 bypass that area and have nothing (rather than at least the 58th Street route they had in that proposal...I think it was called QT80 IIRC) might generate enough opposition to scare them off from doing so.
6) The Q22A seemed to be more focused on getting Far Rockaway residents (and those connecting at Far Rockaway) over to Bayswater during school hours, rather than being focused on getting Bayswater residents to other areas. Other than maybe a straight out Q22 extension (or having the Q22 run through there while the Q52 serves the southern end of Far Rockaway), I'm not sure how else to feasibly serve it.
7) Got it.
To clarify, the first draft had the QT17 via Northern Blvd (the QT12 was the present-day Q88 truncated to QCC)