Queens Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[Q90]

The DOT wanted to get rid of the Q34 which I wished they did. I wonder when the Q23 will enter LGA.

I agree with taking the Q34 off of Kissena/Parsons Boulevard. Let the Q25 handle that. But I wouldn't agree with completely eliminating it. Like I said before, just make it a Flushing-Bay Terrace route via Willets Point Boulevard. The Q34 has no business supplementing the Q25 with shitty 20 minute headways. I would just boost the Q25 instead, especially LTD service. And the Q23 to LGA I agree with that too and the Q48 could get kicked out since no one uses it there. I would just send it to 82 Street/Astoria Boulevard where the Q69 ends.

[B35 via Church]

It's not even about the length - an overwhelming majority of the people on those routes using it around Flushing want to head to the subway, and Northern is too far to be a reasonable transfer walk to the subway. It's a surefire way to shift all the Q12 riders to the Q13.

No, not (not even), You should've said it's not only about the length.....

 

By stating this the way you did, it's like you're trying to minimize (or downright exclude) length being a problem..... No way a local route from Queensboro plz. to Little Neck along Northern Blvd wouldn't be about the length.......

 

Your synopsis of the merger is of the vantage point of Q12 riders....

[which is very valid... however, it's not considering the full ridiculousness of such a merge (Q12/Q66)].....

 

EDIT: Disregard what I said above, actually that problem could be fixed by making buses detour down Main Street to Roosevelt Avenue then it turns around to continue on Northern Boulevard. However If the Q66 does get sent (almost certainly with a Q12 combo) to Little Neck, again I would add SBS and Artics.

Well it would do Main Street -> 39 Avenue -> Prince Street-> Roosevelt Avenue-> Main Street just like most buses that terminate in Flushing use to turn around (although I really think they should build an underground bus terminal for all those buses).

Consider this man....

 

The notion behind these mergers ([Q12/66], [Q56/110], [linden blvd route from SE Queens to the ], [liberty av route from broadway junction to rufus king park (jamaica/150th... which I think is stupid for a few reasons)], etc. is for the purpose of straightening routes.... Which I think is very short-sighted, as straighter doesn't always mean better....

 

With the Q12/Q66 combo, detouring combined buses down into the heart of Flushing defeats their purpose.... You wouldn't be fixing anything in that regard....

 

Again, I didn't propose this, the DOT proposed Q66 to Little Neck via Q12 combination. The only thing I suggested was having a detour on Main Street to retain the train transfer. Since length doesn't turn out to be a problem, the Benefit is that it would give Northern Boulevard a through route that serves it. But again, the first thing that should be done is add SBS and articulated buses to improve service. And at Main Street, the buses would layover for 2 minutes before continuing to either Little Neck or Long Island City.

can't stand when people do this..... Don't retreat by reiterating what the DOT proposed; that's a coward's way out of a debate/discussion...

If you're gonna argue something, either stick to your guns or concur with the person's point(s)......

 

He (bobtehpanda) asked a very valid question, which you never answered.

There's no point of merging the Q12/Q66 if you're gonna have the merged route serve the heart of flushing... That was the point.

 

Having the merged route serve the heart of flushing was YOUR idea (remember, main > 39th > prince > roosevelt > main, back to northern).... You can't (logically) revert back to implicating that the DOT's original proposal was a poor one - When you're the one suggesting changes on top of the original proposal

 

A disadvantage is that you would make the route severely unrelaible.

The 66's are slow and crowded, the Q12 has it's on problems in Little Neck and Bayside, and that would create more problems then fix.

Of course....

 

Well that's why I'd put artics and SBS on the Q66. The Q12 gets crowded too yes I know.

 

The disadvantages could be nullified with SBS and articulated buses.

Wait... What?

 

You're saying that you'd put artics & SBS on the Q66.... Then you go on to say the disadvantages could be nullified w/ SBS & artics.....

The entire premise of Q23's post there was how much of a disadvantage combining the Q12/Q66 is....

 

In other words, if you consider the premise of what Q23 is saying in his post, what would throwing artics & SBS' on the Q66 by itself have to do w/ anything?

[B35 via Church]

Same can be said for the 36 and the 110. DOT proposed a merger of those routes too.

You mean the Q56. Q36 and Q110 can't be merged.

 

- Yeah, Q43LTD, Q90 is right...

 

The DOT proposed a merge of the Q56 & the Q110 - which would terminate where the (well, short turn) Q36's do; over around 257th.... In other words, a route running clear along Jamaica av in Brooklyn & in Queens.....

 

- For the Q36, the DOT proposed that the Q36 & the Q110 eastern terminals be swapped...

(meaning, again, the Q56/110 combo would end where the floral park Q36's do... and the Q36 would end with the Q2 [on both ends of their routes])....

 

That's what the deal with those two routes (Q36, Q110) were.....

[bobtehpanda]

Little Neck doesn't need SBS, NICE got it covered well enough.

 

 

right and manginmo would cry that the t/a is infringing on their territory 

 

Well, to clear things up, Little Neck is in Queens (and NICE has closed-door service), so the Q12 and Q36 are the only things actually serving Little Neck.

[Q90]

 

 

 

can't stand when people do this..... Don't retreat by reiterating what the DOT proposed; that's a coward's way out of a debate/discussion...

If you're gonna argue something, either stick to your guns or concur with the person's point(s)......

I'm not trying to be a coward and I don't think that just because DOT proposes things doesn't mean they are good. Again it's ricidulous to send local buses from LIC to Little Neck. It would only work as an SBS if anything. But before that should even be considered, there are other improvements that should be made to both routes. Also a Q56/110 combination is a retarded idea. It just makes that route unreliable and it's pointless.

- Yeah, Q43LTD, Q90 is right...

 

The DOT proposed a merge of the Q56 & the Q110 - which would terminate where the (well, short turn) Q36's do; over around 257th.... In other words, a route running clear along Jamaica av in Brooklyn & in Queens.....

 

- For the Q36, the DOT proposed that the Q36 & the Q110 eastern terminals be swapped...

(meaning, again, the Q56/110 combo would end where the floral park Q36's do... and the Q36 would end with the Q2 [on both ends of their routes])....

 

That's what the deal with those two routes (Q36, Q110) were.....

It's a stupid thing to do to swap the Q36 and Q110 terminals. That just makes it redundant to the Q2 since both start at 165 Street.

[B35 via Church]

I'm not trying to be a coward and I don't think that just because DOT proposes things doesn't mean they are good. Again it's ricidulous to send local buses from LIC to Little Neck. It would only work as an SBS if anything. But before that should even be considered, there are other improvements that should be made to both routes......

I didn't ask what you were or weren't trying to be, and I said nothing about you siding with whatever the DOT proposes....

What you were doing is playing both sides of the fence in that particular discussion; that much is evident.

 

I'm reading that back & forth about the Q12/Q66 combo, and my issue with your replies is that they're very flip-floppy....

This latest reply of yours, is no different.....

 

How can you claim it's ridiculous to send locals from QBP to Little Neck  - When you are the very same person in this thread suggesting that combined buses divert down into the heart of Flushing, and have SBS & artics ran on em..... Someone that really thinks the suggestion is SO ridiculous doesn't even entertain the thought of "It would only work as an SBS if anything".....

[Q90]

I didn't ask what you were or weren't trying to be, and I said nothing about you siding with whatever the DOT proposes....

What you were doing is playing both sides of the fence in that particular discussion; that much is evident.

 

I'm reading that back & forth about the Q12/Q66 combo, and my issue with your replies is that they're very flip-floppy....

This latest reply of yours, is no different.....

 

How can you claim it's ridiculous to send locals from QBP to Little Neck  - When you are the very same person in this thread suggesting that combined buses divert down into the heart of Flushing, and have SBS & artics ran on em..... Someone that really thinks the suggestion is SO ridiculous doesn't even entertain the thought of "It would only work as an SBS if anything".....

I tend to contradict myself occasionally. Anyways about that Linden Boulevard route, that's one of the stupidest ideas ever. I assume this would be taking the Q4 off Merrick if I'm right. Well for one reason it bypasses Jamaica which is where people want to go and who would use an Ozone Park-Cambria Heights bus route? It's better off to just restore the Q89 however with better headways, extension to New Lots Avenue station, and serving the Rockaway Boulevard station (I already made a proposal about that).

[B35 via Church]

I tend to contradict myself occasionally. 

Just one question.

 

Are you against a Q12/Q66 merge or are you for a Q12/Q66 merge?

 

 

Anyways about that Linden Boulevard route, that's one of the stupidest ideas ever. I assume this would be taking the Q4 off Merrick if I'm right.

 

Well for one reason it bypasses Jamaica which is where people want to go and who would use an Ozone Park-Cambria Heights bus route?

Yeah, that's what's not all too clear (from the DOT proposal)....

 

Would the restructured Q89 (which they dubbed "Q96's") have involved eradicating the Q4 in order to create it....

Or would it have involved layering (meaning, keeping the Q4 intact & having these "Q96's" run along Linden blvd. east of Merrick as well).....

[Q90]

Just one question.

 

Are you against a Q12/Q66 merge or are you for a Q12/Q66 merge?

 

 

Yeah, that's what's not all too clear (from the DOT proposal)....

 

Would the restructured Q89 (which they dubbed "Q96's") have involved eradicating the Q4 in order to create it....

Or would it have involved layering (meaning, keeping the Q4 intact & having these "Q96's" run along Linden blvd. east of Merrick as well).....

1. I guess I'm neutral about that. It sounds like a good idea but at the same time it isn't

 

2. I'm not sure about that but all I know is that it's a bad idea and no one would use it smh. Again, it's better to just restore the former Q89 but extend it to New Lots and have better frequency.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Q90

[B35 via Church]

I'm not sure about that but all I know is that it's a bad idea and no one would use it smh.

 

Again, it's better to just restore the former Q89 but extend it to New Lots and have better frequency.

It wasn't a question I was asking you.

 

Secondly, I'm not commenting on any Q89 revival & extension because I don't think the Q89 should be revived in any capacity.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

The weekend Q67's need weekend schedule adjustments. It allots too much time. Some Q67 buses leave late and arrive as much as 10 minutes early to the terminal. I just rode the 3:04 Q67 to Queens Plaza, late two minutes at the train station, and arrived QBP three minutes early. It happens in almost every trip.

[Q90]

It wasn't a question I was asking you.

 

Secondly, I'm not commenting on any Q89 revival & extension because I don't think the Q89 should be revived in any capacity.

You must have really hated that route ! Yeah but my Q89 doesn't have the same mistakes as the former. It has better frequency and it connects to subway stations. The former failed because of those two factors. But yeah the former Q89's schedule was horrific. Weekdays only with only 7 buses a day between 10:30am and 5:30pm with hourly headways, no wonder nobody used it and you can't blame them. Also because it didn't connect to a subway station it lacked feeder riders. I would run my revived Q89 at 10 minutes weekdays and 15 minutes on weekends.

The weekend Q67's need weekend schedule adjustments. It allots too much time. Some Q67 buses leave late and arrive as much as 10 minutes early to the terminal. I just rode the 3:04 Q67 to Queens Plaza, late two minutes at the train station, and arrived QBP three minutes early. It happens in almost every trip.

Oh and speaking of the Q67, I've decided to change the extension to Forest Hills. Instead of bypassing Fresh Pond Road, It would turn off 69 Street at Eliot Avenue, then make a left on Fresh Pond Road, then continue on Metropolitan Avenue to Forest Hills. How's that?

[Q43LTD]

Just one question.

 

Are you against a Q12/Q66 merge or are you for a Q12/Q66 merge?

 

 

Yeah, that's what's not all too clear (from the DOT proposal)....

 

Would the restructured Q89 (which they dubbed "Q96's") have involved eradicating the Q4 in order to create it....

Or would it have involved layering (meaning, keeping the Q4 intact & having these "Q96's" run along Linden blvd. east of Merrick as well).....

I'll give Q90 this one...

Anyway, this extended 89 to 235th wouldn't have eliminated the Q4. Similar to an extended Q7 (and 111) killing off the Green Acres branch of the Q85.

[B35 via Church]

You must have really hated that route ! Yeah but my Q89 doesn't have the same mistakes as the former. It has better frequency and it connects to subway stations. The former failed because of those two factors. But yeah the former Q89's schedule was horrific. Weekdays only with only 7 buses a day between 10:30am and 5:30pm with hourly headways, no wonder nobody used it and you can't blame them. Also because it didn't connect to a subway station it lacked feeder riders. I would run my revived Q89 at 10 minutes weekdays and 15 minutes on weekends.

It wasn't that I hated the route, I thought it was a grossly useless route, as was.

I know why the route as was, was a fail..... Made quite a few posts on here in the past detailing/opinionating as such.

 

Anyway, this extended 89 to 235th wouldn't have eliminated the Q4. Similar to an extended Q7 (and 111) killing off the Green Acres branch of the Q85.

gotcha....  so, simple layering then.....

 

Thanks.

[Q90]

I'll give Q90 this one...

Anyway, this extended 89 to 235th wouldn't have eliminated the Q4. Similar to an extended Q7 (and 111) killing off the Green Acres branch of the Q85.

Okay why would they need to kill off the Q85 Green Acres branch? And I have always opposed extending the Q7 to Green Acres. It's just makes the route unnecessarily long and I doubt there's demand. Also the cross Linden route would fail as there's no demand for Ozone Park-Cambria Heights. And the only thing I'd do with the Q85 is make the Green Acres branch the limited and the Rosedale the local.

[Q90]

It wasn't that I hated the route, I thought it was a grossly useless route, as was.

I know why the route as was, was a fail..... Made quite a few posts on here in the past detailing/opinionating as such.

 

 

gotcha....  so, simple layering then.....

 

Thanks.

Yes it was useless because of the horrible scheduling. It started when AM rush hour ends and ends during the middle of PM rush hour. The Q89 also had only about 22,000 riders each year which is like the worst ridership of any route. And a route with less than a million people using it yearly I usually consider bad. If a route was doing that bad, of course it would be cut and I'm surprised MTA did not at least try to improve the Q89 before cutting it.

[Q43LTD]

Okay why would they need to kill off the Q85 Green Acres branch? And I have always opposed extending the Q7 to Green Acres. It's just makes the route unnecessarily long and I doubt there's demand. Also the cross Linden route would fail as there's no demand for Ozone Park-Cambria Heights. And the only thing I'd do with the Q85 is make the Green Acres branch the limited and the Rosedale the local.

These weren't my ideas, these were DOT's. I don't think there's any demand for a Q5/85 LTD to Green Acres.

[Q90]

These weren't my ideas, these were DOT's. I don't think there's any demand for a Q5/85 LTD to Green Acres.

Wait what? I know it was DOT's proposal. I was commenting about DOT, NOT YOU. And the limited is only between Jamaica and Baisley Boulevard/Bedell Street. Under my proposal all buses that run limited on that section go to Green Acres. The locals that make all stops go to Rosedale. This is so people don't accidentally catch the wrong bus.

[B35 via Church]

Yes it was useless because of the horrible scheduling. It started when AM rush hour ends and ends during the middle of PM rush hour. The Q89 also had only about 22,000 riders each year which is like the worst ridership of any route. And a route with less than a million people using it yearly I usually consider bad. If a route was doing that bad, of course it would be cut and I'm surprised MTA did not at least try to improve the Q89 before cutting it.

Yes, of course.... But it was more than just the scheduling....

 

I don't think there's any demand for a Q5/85 LTD to Green Acres.

Usually, the locals get short-turned & the LTD's run the full distance (like here w/ the B35, for example), but I can see where deviating from that norm makes sense w/ the Q5/Q85 - As the local riders/residents w/i SE Queens would be more prone to riding out to that (overrated, IMO) shopping area...... You really, don't, need the LTD's running there..... I'll give the MTA credit with that one....

 

....However, where they recently deviated from the same local/LTD norm regarding the B6, makes no sense to me at all....

(locals running the full distance & the LTD's running from bensonhurst to the ... those local trips are easily 90 mins long during the rush)

[Q90]

1. Yes it also did not connect to a subway station and the routing was indirect to South Ozone Park which was why people chose the Q9 over it.

 

2. Well The LTDs make local stops east of Bedell Street/Baisley Boulevard. I was having have those buses go to Green Acres and the locals go to Rosedale via 243 Street.

Yes, of course.... But it was more than just the scheduling....

 

 

Usually, the locals get short-turned & the LTD's run the full distance (like here w/ the B35, for example), but I can see where deviating from that norm makes sense w/ the Q5/Q85 - As the local riders/residents w/i SE Queens would be more prone to riding out to that (overrated, IMO) shopping area...... You really, don't, need the LTD's running there..... I'll give the MTA credit with that one....

 

....However, where they recently deviated from the same local/LTD norm regarding the B6, makes no sense to me at all....

(locals running the full distance & the LTD's running from bensonhurst to the ... those local trips are easily 90 mins long during the rush)

1. Yes it also did not connect to a subway station and the routing was indirect to South Ozone Park which was why people chose the Q9 over it.

 

2. Well The LTDs make local stops east of Bedell Street/Baisley Boulevard. I was saying have those buses go to Green Acres and the locals go to Rosedale via 243 Street.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Q90

[B35 via Church]

Well The LTDs make local stops east of Bedell Street/Baisley Boulevard. I was saying have those buses go to Green Acres and the locals go to Rosedale via 243 Street.

That's true too, you do have the LTD variants of a route that run local after a certain point.....

 

As far as addressing the rest of this reply, I was commenting on how MTA handles LTD/local service (of the routes that have LTD service, of course).....

[Q90]

That's true too, you do have the LTD variants of a route that run local after a certain point.....

 

As far as addressing the rest of this reply, I was commenting on how MTA handles LTD/local service (of the routes that have LTD service, of course).....

Exactly.....

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Oh and speaking of the Q67, I've decided to change the extension to Forest Hills. Instead of bypassing Fresh Pond Road, It would turn off 69 Street at Eliot Avenue, then make a left on Fresh Pond Road, then continue on Metropolitan Avenue to Forest Hills. How's that?

The thing is, that's gonna bring the cost per rider up. Te current Q67 is 30 minutes from end to end on the weekend. Extending it to Forest Hills Would put it at the 60+ mark just on the weekend. Furthermore, the Q67's are less frequent then the Q54, and those that would take the 67 would be few, and you would need an extra bus, as well as the drier would have a pretty long layover at one end. The Weekday Q67 have riders on the 69 street section, a chunk ones from it South of Eliot, so I wouldn't mess it up. Besides if the Q54 is behind or in front the Q67, everyone is gonna take the Q54, because from Rentar Plaza and such you have folks coming from around Ridgewood, of those who take it there, or come from Forest Park (or Brooklyn). School kids get in from around 71 Avenue to Selfridge Street in Forest Hills to Ridgewood and beyond, some getting off in the 70's

 

The Q54 also doesn't get too bombarded really, its just an issue of scheduling, lateness, and the school kids of Metro High School (on Selfrdge and Metro). The people getting on at Woodhaven that get off before Fresh Pond Road are always transferring to ether the Q29 or the Q47 at Atlas Park Mall (that wouldn't be too bad a location for a transfer spot/ bus terminal although the only routes near the area are the Q29, Q47, Q54, Q55, QM24, and QM25).

[Fresh Pond]

Okay why would they need to kill off the Q85 Green Acres branch? And I have always opposed extending the Q7 to Green Acres. It's just makes the route unnecessarily long and I doubt there's demand. Also the cross Linden route would fail as there's no demand for Ozone Park-Cambria Heights. And the only thing I'd do with the Q85 is make the Green Acres branch the limited and the Rosedale the local.

Buy there's sooooo much demand for your Northern Blvd super route and wont be that long of a route...

[Q90]

Buy there's sooooo much demand for your Northern Blvd super route and wont be that long of a route...

DOT proposed it so shut the f**k up Fresh Pond! I don't need your bullshit.