Q43LTD Posted October 25, 2014 Author Share #3776 Posted October 25, 2014 Seems like bus routes should serve Queens Plaza or Court Square, but not both. How to restructure the Q39, 67 and 69 buses. I would consider extending the Q104 to Astoria PJ's but there may be lack of room since the 19 was extended there. Sending it to Roosevelt Island may be over serving the island. Plus the streets are too narrow. Then there's this 101/105 dilemma. I probably would move the 105 to 31 St and run it between Astoria and Hunters Point Ferry. For the baby mama express, I mean Q100 lol, maybe add some stops on 20 Av? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted October 25, 2014 Share #3777 Posted October 25, 2014 The Q67 should stay as it is (serve both), because that would serve as an alternative to Q39 riders. The Q39 can run to Court Square all times, with a possible rush hour extension to QBP. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 25, 2014 Share #3778 Posted October 25, 2014 Seems like bus routes should serve Queens Plaza or Court Square, but not both. How to restructure the Q39, 67 and 69 buses. I would consider extending the Q104 to Astoria PJ's but there may be lack of room since the 19 was extended there. Sending it to Roosevelt Island may be over serving the island. Plus the streets are too narrow. Then there's this 101/105 dilemma. I probably would move the 105 to 31 St and run it between Astoria and Hunters Point Ferry. For the baby mama express, I mean Q100 lol, maybe add some stops on 20 Av? As far as that opening statement is concerned, I'm simply going to say the B62 & the Q67 should remain serving both. As for restructuring those 3 routes in question.... Well the Q39 I would simply truncate to Court Sq.... The Q67 I wouldn't touch on the western end (eastern end, different story... the route overall needs more commuters/riders)... and the Q69, I mentioned how I would do so in my prior post.... The Q104 running to RI would come at the extinction of the Q102 (my fault, should have mentioned that yesterday)... I honestly would revoke service along 31st (and not for the fact that there's the subway above, either).... To me, the hardest part of totally getting rid of the 102 is the RI - QBP connection..... As for the 104 itself, I don't see overserving RI w/ an extension of sorts being an issue... Not to mention I think RI-ers would welcome a direct connection the commercial areas that it serves (along broadway, and the mall down on 48th/northern)..... The whole Q101 serving manhattan or not dilemma (if you wanna call it that).... Well again, if I were to not have the 101 serve manhattan, I would end it right there at QBP.... Never said what I would do with the Q101 in that last post, so here it is - Instead of ending at 19th/hazen, I would have it run in 2 sections: * upon reaching ditmars blvd, left on ditmars, right on 21st st, left on 21st av to stand (so basically, I would bring that part of Astoria to commercial Steinway st).... * upon reaching ditmars blvd, right on ditmars, to run to jackson hgts. (via the current Q69)... This eliminates a need for running Q19's down to QBP (saves a hell of a lot more mileage too) I like how people are using my coined term for the Q100 ... But seriously, I would really try to enhance the Q69... The Q100 as is, you can't do much more with (remember, before they added more stops to the route, it only had 4 stops: QBP, 21st , the parking lot just before the rikers island bridge, & on rikers island itself).... The MTA did the opposite (of enhancing the 69): Instead of leaving the old 101r as a special service (or however you wanna dub it as) & looking for ways to speed up 19a (Q69) riders' trips, they satisfied riders complaints by adding more LTD stops to the Q101r/Q100.... The problem was with the 69, not the 101r.... They used the 101r (well, now 100 of course) to quell concerns with the 69 route - Which goes back to NewFlyer's point regarding the MTA ridding itself of the 101r & branching out the 69.... Where we differ is branching the Q69 (I would have left the 101r as was, ran almost coverage headways on it, while having the Q69 as having a local/LTD counterpart)..... That left the Q69 with the same problems it always had... Which is a large reason why you have the masses bombarding Q100's (of which that are not going to rikers itself).... I've gotta say, This is one of the better discussions we've had in any of these borough bus proposal threads..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 26, 2014 Share #3779 Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) The Q66 used to terminate at 21st station which started the problem with bunching. The problem there was the turn around and that's probably the reason the thought it would be best to terminate it at Queens Plaza. I do not like the distance those routes travel just to turn around and if it's crowded forget about the Q66 or just about any route showing up on time. I've seen the Q66 show up in fours and fives in Flushing and even leaving Flushing like that. For a route that has good ridership and has low head ways there should be more buses terminating in Woodside 48th Street then Queens Plaza. I would actually move the short turn to that street that the Q66 uses to turn onto Northern from 35th. That little mall over there can have a whole lot of people over there. I remember back in the QSC and early MTA bus takeover it would have a little crowd of people and the bus would should up after a 20 minute wait with a few people on it. In my honest opinion I believe Astoria in general is overserved and that's why many routes like the Q19, Q101,Q102, Q103, Q104 have less than 3,500 people daily. The Q69 is the dominate route in the area and I believe the Q100 should have been eliminated in favor of a Q69 LTD. My original plan was to actually split Q69 service into two branches. One to East Elmhurst and one to Rikers. I later changed that to the Q101 to Rikers cause I know that branch of the Q69 might be renamed anyway. Now the Q101 to Rikers won't happen because people in the area didn't want their bus going to a jail. Those people on 21st don't mind, but now after giving it some thought I can see why they don't lol. That first paragraph better illustrates what I said earlier, regarding my issue w/ the Q66 route & it even running to western queens (LIC area)... 21st st on down from ravenswood already had the 19a; not too many folks on that end of Queens thought twice about some Q66 anyway.... The Q66 running to QBP is like, well.... running the Q19 down to hunterspoint [of all things] - which is what Gotham Bus Co. (the member here) thinks should happen.... Neither of the two is necessary AFAIC. I don't know if I'd go as far as to say astoria is overserved... The thing is, there's too great a percentage of riders that choose to take the subway, over the bus.... Nothing can be done about that, nor should it.... The common denominator is that the bus routes that serve astoria, serve QBP - which the subway also does.... To boot, consider the distance b/w Astoria & QBP.... That right there is a recipe for low ridership.... I mean, these are some short routes we're dealing with here... FWIW: - The Q18 flourishes because it is one hell of a gap filler in Queens' bus network (not just western Queens, but the borough overall)... - One might wonder how the Q104 would do if it ran to Hoffman drive (via Broadway).... - The Q19 doesn't garner all that much ridership because for starters, Jackson Hgts. patrons are too busy making their way to Roosevelt - either for the establishments along/around it, or for the .... Those patrons generally/en masse don't want the Astoria line.... It also doesn't help that you have the GCP dividing Astoria Blvd at a certain point (so where that happens, it's not as simple as crossing the street for someone that lives south of astoria blvd, to catch an Astoria bound 19, or vice versa (someone living north of astoria blvd, to catch a flushing bound 19)... Things like that are also a deterrent to ridership.... As much as I love the baby mama express, maybe Q100's could make local stops after Ditmars Boulevard? That limited gap is one of the only ones in the system, where there is only limited stop service and no local. People DO utilize the Q100, it gets crowded from the 1st stop from Riker's Island going southbound (getting on at 31st Street in the rush hour, it's already crowded, so I'm assuming this), so I don't think it should be replaced with a Q69 LTD. Also Q69 limiteds would probably bunch on Ditmars Blvd. 20th Avenue doesn't get as much traffic. I suppose NewFlyer can comment on this if he so chooses, because my rendition of a Q69/LTD wouldn't serve Ditmars.... Nor am I claiming the Q100 doesn't get used.... ----------- * My issue with the Q100 is that there is too much service given to that route, for only running b/w rikers & QBP with however many total stops the route now has (which isn't all that much; like 9 or 10 total.. not exactly sure).... Which came with the addition of stops (after the renaming of the route from the 101r), to try to get as many riders into not even putting up with the Q69..... Edited October 26, 2014 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted October 26, 2014 Author Share #3780 Posted October 26, 2014 As far as that opening statement is concerned, I'm simply going to say the B62 & the Q67 should remain serving both. As for restructuring those 3 routes in question.... Well the Q39 I would simply truncate to Court Sq.... The Q67 I wouldn't touch on the western end (eastern end, different story... the route overall needs more commuters/riders)... and the Q69, I mentioned how I would do so in my prior post.... The Q104 running to RI would come at the extinction of the Q102 (my fault, should have mentioned that yesterday)... I honestly would revoke service along 31st (and not for the fact that there's the subway above, either).... To me, the hardest part of totally getting rid of the 102 is the RI - QBP connection..... As for the 104 itself, I don't see overserving RI w/ an extension of sorts being an issue... Not to mention I think RI-ers would welcome a direct connection the commercial areas that it serves (along broadway, and the mall down on 48th/northern)..... The whole Q101 serving manhattan or not dilemma (if you wanna call it that).... Well again, if I were to not have the 101 serve manhattan, I would end it right there at QBP.... Never said what I would do with the Q101 in that last post, so here it is - Instead of ending at 19th/hazen, I would have it run in 2 sections: * upon reaching ditmars blvd, left on ditmars, right on 21st st, left on 21st av to stand (so basically, I would bring that part of Astoria to commercial Steinway st).... * upon reaching ditmars blvd, right on ditmars, to run to jackson hgts. (via the current Q69)... This eliminates a need for running Q19's down to QBP (saves a hell of a lot more mileage too) I like how people are using my coined term for the Q100 ... But seriously, I would really try to enhance the Q69... The Q100 as is, you can't do much more with (remember, before they added more stops to the route, it only had 4 stops: QBP, 21st , the parking lot just before the rikers island bridge, & on rikers island itself).... The MTA did the opposite (of enhancing the 69): Instead of leaving the old 101r as a special service (or however you wanna dub it as) & looking for ways to speed up 19a (Q69) riders' trips, they satisfied riders complaints by adding more LTD stops to the Q101r/Q100.... The problem was with the 69, not the 101r.... They used the 101r (well, now 100 of course) to quell concerns with the 69 route - Which goes back to NewFlyer's point regarding the MTA ridding itself of the 101r & branching out the 69.... Where we differ is branching the Q69 (I would have left the 101r as was, ran almost coverage headways on it, while having the Q69 as having a local/LTD counterpart)..... That left the Q69 with the same problems it always had... Which is a large reason why you have the masses bombarding Q100's (of which that are not going to rikers itself).... I've gotta say, This is one of the better discussions we've had in any of these borough bus proposal threads..... Same here. I remember back on RD asking should the Q101R (now 100) have more stops. Similar to how the added stops on the Q53...I would have made the stops like this: Queens Plaza Queensbridge 35 Av Broadway 30 Av Astoria Blvd Ditmars Blvd 20 Av on 20 Av 31 St Steinway St Hazen St/19 Av As for the Q39, take it off 55 Dr and Maurice Av. Like I said, have this "Q105" operate between Hunters Point Ferry and Astoria via 31 St (Last stop would be at 20 Av) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted October 26, 2014 Share #3781 Posted October 26, 2014 When 58th St. was made one way, that right there should have been the final cue to get the 39 off of it completely. So here's another idea. Q39 (skipping Ct Sq and picking up Van Dam straight from Queens Blvd). stays the same to 48th St. but then takes 48th all the way down to Rust. Q67 takes the LIE lower level to Maurice instead of going across 55th Av. Q18 stays on 58th St. all the way down, replacing the 39. Haven't decided where to terminate it. Perhaps at the little junction where the B57 terminates, or perhaps follow the 39 route, while the 39 takes a shortcut across 59th Dr. and 60th St. (and the other way, Andrews to 59th Pl. which was my old idea to keep it off of Fresh Pond). The current 18 route on 65th Pl. (which serves primarily all the people getting on at Woodside) would be replaced by something else. Perhaps too short to make it's own route, perhaps this is what could be done with the Juniper Valley half of the Q38 if that was split in half. (It would make the right on Grand, then Fresh Pond, and then pick up the route on Metropolitan). Or, maybe move Q58 to Gates and Forest, and this new route would pick up the Fresh Pond section (and thus it would still connect Fresh Pond with some of Grand). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted October 26, 2014 Share #3782 Posted October 26, 2014 When 58th St. was made one way, that right there should have been the final cue to get the 39 off of it completely. So here's another idea. Q39 (skipping Ct Sq and picking up Van Dam straight from Queens Blvd). stays the same to 48th St. but then takes 48th all the way down to Rust. Q67 takes the LIE lower level to Maurice instead of going across 55th Av. Q18 stays on 58th St. all the way down, replacing the 39. Haven't decided where to terminate it. Perhaps at the little junction where the B57 terminates, or perhaps follow the 39 route, while the 39 takes a shortcut across 59th Dr. and 60th St. (and the other way, Andrews to 59th Pl. which was my old idea to keep it off of Fresh Pond). The current 18 route on 65th Pl. (which serves primarily all the people getting on at Woodside) would be replaced by something else. Perhaps too short to make it's own route, perhaps this is what could be done with the Juniper Valley half of the Q38 if that was split in half. (It would make the right on Grand, then Fresh Pond, and then pick up the route on Metropolitan). Or, maybe move Q58 to Gates and Forest, and this new route would pick up the Fresh Pond section (and thus it would still connect Fresh Pond with some of Grand). I would just have the Q39 serve both 55 Avenue and Laurel Hill Blvd, every other bus, between 5 AM and 11 PM weekdays, and 6 AM-11 PM on weekends. Service would be slightly frequent on 55 Avenue now, but less on Laurel Hill Blvd. The Q67 would still run to the industry during the early morning hours (3 AM-5 AM), and those trips will still terminate at Fresh Pond Road. The rest will terminate in Glendale/ Ridgewood. The Q67 will still stop at 48 St/ LIE though to maintain connections there with the B24. The Q67 would terminate with the QM24/25 along at Cooper/73 Place, and run alongside the 24/25 (except it cutting along Cypress Hills Street). until Metropolitan, then it's current route Here's what I had in mind: The stop markers in LIC would signify the remaining stops on the Q67 left in LIC. The stops in Ridgewood/Glendale are the new stops. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 26, 2014 Share #3783 Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) - I would take the Q39 off Laurel Hill blvd completely & have it take over the part of industrial Maspeth that the Q67 currently serves.... Meaning, from 48th st/48th av (Sunnyside), have it run down 48th st... to 55th av... to 58th st, etc. - The Q67... Instead of extending the route eastward (which I have thought about in the past) & Instead of serving residential Maspeth up to 53rd dr, then dropping down to Maurice due westward.... I would have it serve more of residential Maspeth... So towards QBP, I would run buses up 69th st... to 51st av (which turns into maurice)... to 65th pl.. to THEN turn on 53rd dr & drop down to Maurice.... As I said multiple times before, my aim is to make the Q67 more of a commuter route (like how the B103 is structured).... Now I won't stupidly say (or implicate) that industrial Maspeth is "defunct" like in that NYPlanning proposal (smfh), but at the same time, you don't need two routes serving it either..... All in the meantime, the Q39 sitting stuck in traffic serving much of nothing along Laurel Hill & running nonstop on most trips b/w laurel hill & the LIE.... The problem for residential Maspeth however (as far as getting to the subway is concerned) is that, they have to ride up to roosevelt - since there's no subway stops on QB b/w Roosevelt & Broadway.... The Q18 is all they have (the Q47 is too far east & the Q67 doesn't cover enough of the area)... ...and there you go. Edited October 26, 2014 by B35 via Church 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted October 26, 2014 Share #3784 Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) 1. I would take the Q39 off Laurel Hill blvd completely & have it take over the part of industrial Maspeth that the Q67 currently serves.... Meaning, from 48th st/48th av (Sunnyside), have it run down 48th st... to 55th av... to 58th st, etc. 2. The Q67... Instead of extending the route eastward (which I have thought about in the past) & Instead of serving residential Maspeth up to 53rd dr, then dropping down to Maurice due westward.... I would have it serve more of residential Maspeth... So towards QBP, I would run buses up 69th st... to 51st av (which turns into maurice)... to 65th pl.. to THEN turn on 53rd dr & drop down to Maurice.... 3. As I said multiple times before, my aim is to make the Q67 more of a commuter route (like how the B103 is structured).... Now I won't stupidly say (or implicate) that industrial Maspeth is "defunct" like in that NYPlanning proposal (smfh), but at the same time, you don't need two routes serving it either..... All in the meantime, the Q39 sitting stuck in traffic serving much of nothing along Laurel Hill & running nonstop on most trips b/w laurel hill & the LIE.... The problem for residential Maspeth however (as far as getting to the subway is concerned) is that, they have to ride up to roosevelt - since there's no subway stops on QB b/w Roosevelt & Broadway.... The Q18 is all they have (the Q47 is too far east & the Q67 doesn't cover enough of the area)... ...and there you go. 1. Yeah, I guess that's plausible. Even if you need those stops, it's still within walking distance, except for the NY Dept of Sanitation stop. That's why I originally had it as a two branched route (while the Q67 skips all that). 2 & 3. If that were to happen, I would streamline the Q18 to just serve 65 Place between 50 and 53 Avenue, except during evening & weekends (since the Q67 is not as frequent). The Q67 to the would also be a faster option to Manhattan compared to the Q18 to the at Woodside. Now, those intermediate stops between 48 street and Greenpoint Avenue are very sporadic in ridership. However, you do see consistent ridership from the 43 and 47 street stops. The other stops in between see occasional ridership. The Q67 stop by Red Roof Inn (which is a big joke to me), sees almost no ridership, and is fairly close to Greenpoint Avenue (so I think that stop should be cut). I can't say for the others though. I do agree that the Q39 can handle that section by itself perfectly fine. MOST (not all) of the riders from industrial Maspeth come from the or , so rerouting the Q39 there should not be a problem, given how it's a faster ride to the subway. Those that do get off before the get of from about 59 Drive-Juniper Valley Road (they would need to transfer to the 58/59 or to the Q38). Off topic but kinda related, but in the event of a snow detour, the 67 would just run along Maurice instead 65 Place to then serve 53 Drive (at least I hope so), instead of just going on the LIE Service Road. That service change itself would actually benefit the people who utilize the 67 along 53 Drive, because instead of running down to the LIE, they would either go to Maurice or 65 Place (which reduces the walking time). Won't happen all the time, but it was a thought. Sure, the travel time would increase (by about 5-6 minutes), but the travel time would be offset by skipping industrial maspeth (4-5 minutes). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another thing is, I think the Q18 should operate on the LIE between Hamilton Place and Grand, instead of going down Hamilton then Grand. Maspeth riders did have a fit when the Q67 was diverted to it's current path, but the Q18 is different. I mean, I haven't seen many people utilize that stop. Edited October 26, 2014 by BM5 via Woodhaven 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted October 27, 2014 Share #3785 Posted October 27, 2014 By "Laurel Hill", I take it you mean the section under the BQE. Yeah, it should definitely come off of that, as it's takes so long to get up there, and in one direction was further diverted onto Maurice, since 58th St. was made one way. And on 55th Rd. there is no need to have to go DOWN the street. The stops are on the ends of that long stretch, and the corners would be covered on the cross streets (on the western end, they're on 50th St. instead of 48th, and if there's really enough demand for that corner, the 39 could go down 50th first and then swing over to 48th). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted October 27, 2014 Share #3786 Posted October 27, 2014 The Q60 should have a short turn at QCM Woodhaven Bl Station. The Q60 is just long and unreliable bunches up like crazy and it's ridership is strongest between Jamaica and Woodhaven Blvd. Why does the Q60 run below Jamaica Archer Ave? It gets used somewhat but I feel like that part slows down the whole route. Its that and JFK's poor time management. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted October 27, 2014 Share #3787 Posted October 27, 2014 The Q60 should have a short turn at QCM Woodhaven Bl Station. The Q60 is just long and unreliable bunches up like crazy and it's ridership is strongest between Jamaica and Woodhaven Blvd. Why does the Q60 run below Jamaica Archer Ave? It gets used somewhat but I feel like that part slows down the whole route. Its that and JFK's poor time management. It would be very difficult to turn the Q60 in the CBD...hence why it is sent a bit south. As for short-turns, I would add short-turns between Jamaica LIRR and Broadway, specifically. (Buses would turn around using Van Loon Street.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted October 28, 2014 Author Share #3788 Posted October 28, 2014 I would have the Q60 short turn between Queens Plaza and Jamaica Station. Should help with the bunching 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 28, 2014 Share #3789 Posted October 28, 2014 .....If that were to happen, I would streamline the Q18 to just serve 65 Place between 50 and 53 Avenue, except during evening & weekends (since the Q67 is not as frequent). The Q67 to the would also be a faster option to Manhattan compared to the Q18 to the at Woodside. Now, those intermediate stops between 48 street and Greenpoint Avenue are very sporadic in ridership. However, you do see consistent ridership from the 43 and 47 street stops. The other stops in between see occasional ridership. The Q67 stop by Red Roof Inn (which is a big joke to me), sees almost no ridership, and is fairly close to Greenpoint Avenue (so I think that stop should be cut). I can't say for the others though. I do agree that the Q39 can handle that section by itself perfectly fine. MOST (not all) of the riders from industrial Maspeth come from the or , so rerouting the Q39 there should not be a problem, given how it's a faster ride to the subway. Those that do get off before the get of from about 59 Drive-Juniper Valley Road (they would need to transfer to the 58/59 or to the Q38). Off topic but kinda related, but in the event of a snow detour, the 67 would just run along Maurice instead 65 Place to then serve 53 Drive (at least I hope so), instead of just going on the LIE Service Road. That service change itself would actually benefit the people who utilize the 67 along 53 Drive, because instead of running down to the LIE, they would either go to Maurice or 65 Place (which reduces the walking time). Won't happen all the time, but it was a thought. Sure, the travel time would increase (by about 5-6 minutes), but the travel time would be offset by skipping industrial maspeth (4-5 minutes). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another thing is, I think the Q18 should operate on the LIE between Hamilton Place and Grand, instead of going down Hamilton then Grand. Maspeth riders did have a fit when the Q67 was diverted to it's current path, but the Q18 is different. I mean, I haven't seen many people utilize that stop. As far as the Q18 goes, I'd have it stay on 69th st south of 50th (the SB buses still turn around via Jay, but the NB buses from Grand stay on 69th until 50th av).... Having buses run on 55 drive (instead of Hamilton > Grand) I haven't put any thought into, but I will admit that is a bit of a timewaste, since whoever's left on the bus is more or less seeking the last stop..... I would have the Q60 short turn between Queens Plaza and Jamaica Station. Should help with the bunching I don't mind the current Q60 short turns @ LIRR Jamaica, but I don't like the idea of short turning Q60's at QBP.... Never did.... Q60 garners a lot of pax. at that one stop in Manhattan (more than we can say for the Q101)... It was one of the main reasons why I wasn't fond of those Q60 ideas that involved splitting the route, back when they were floating around.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotham Bus Co. Posted October 28, 2014 Share #3790 Posted October 28, 2014 Why does the Q60 run below Jamaica Archer Ave? The Q60 still goes to 109th Avenue because it used to be a streetcar that ran out of a barn on 109th Avenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted October 29, 2014 Author Share #3791 Posted October 29, 2014 Does anyone know why the Q110 doesn't have PM runs to 212? Also, I'd like to extend the hours of the Q111 Farmers short turns and the Q113 LTD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FamousNYLover Posted October 29, 2014 Share #3792 Posted October 29, 2014 It's better than combing it with the B32 or 62 as some have suggested Tryna catch up here... They're suggesting extending these routes, not knowing (I'd go as far as to say, not caring) about the current riders of those routes.... As far as the Q102 being the only bus route (feasibly) being able to run to RI, IDK about that.... Two things: - One could always extend the Q104 to RI...... I've thought of that, and.. - ....Having the Q103 loop around RI before running up to the Astoria PJ's (although this would be part of a major reconfiguration of bus service in LIC).... I mentioned this in an older post, so it should be somewhere on here..... Your inquiry of (not) having the Q102 serve certain portions of Bird Coler, I have mixed opinions about.... However, having the Q102 end at the , I don't agree with at all.... For one, it picks up at Goldwater Hosp. (more than you might think)... Also, wait until Cornell finishes with construction out there - there'll be plenty of those students riding 102's to LIC (which I believe is the main reason NYC Planning are sending two routes to RI)..... Majority of Roosevelt Islanders that utilize the Q102 get on at Queensboro plaza.... Majority of Roosevelt Islanders that get on along 31st st, are usually off the bus by time it hits Queensbridge projects (which is also where some of those folks that get on the 102 at QBP get off at).... No way are the majority of Roosevelt Islanders (that utilize the Q102) ride from somewhere along 31st st, to Roosevelt Island.... Whatever outcries from riders along 31st st that ride out to Roosevelt Island, would be minimal.... A better argument would be, they (and by "they", I'm referring to the [notable] elderly ridership along 31st) would be furious if the Q102 were to be eliminated, because it would mean they'd either have to a] walk to get to, b] hike up steps to catch the astoria line at the station nearest to them, c] catch the Q66 or Q101 to QBP, or some combination of { a & b }, or { a & c }.... If the red bus ran over to Queensboro Plaza, the Q102 would cease to exist & the Q103 would gain that many more riders due to it.... The fact that it's the only MTA route that serves Roosevelt Island, is keeping that route alive IMO..... Yes, and I'll be more specific too.... Messing things up for the non-yuppie & non-hipster crowd that currently utilize the routes they'd f*ck up with their bright ideas to have more hipsters & yuppies utilize the affected routes in question.... I don't.... At all. This isn't something the MTA shouldn't be delving into.... Let NY Waterway run buses in Queens, looping around whatever areas of LIC & Hunterspoint they deem fit, to bring the maximal amount of patrons of those two areas, to/from the ferry..... NY Waterway doesn't have enough buses, that's why Q103 idea seems excellent idea. Is this Q105 really needed? Steinway is getting overserved IMO. Is the 101 that bad? A large part of the problem that plagues the Q101 is that, for the current amount of service the route gets, it gets handcuffed (so to speak) in Manhattan.... Putting it another way, it gives off the illusion that the Q101 needs more service than what it does (especially if you're riding within Queens).... I would argue that every trip doesn't even need to run to Manhattan... Having x amount of Q101's during the day running intra-boroughally, I believe, would instantly solve that problem.... It's not like the q60, for example, that has a myriad of trips throughout the day..... (of course we know that route bunches like crazy, but that's neither here nor there) If Q101's are arriving in Manhattan in bunches, something is sorely wrong... But yeah, Steinway (st) doesn't need a supplementary route... That implicates that ridership is bursting at the seams along it, which is hardly the case.....It has to be one or the other (a Q101 or a "Q105"), but it cannot be both... If there is a very high demand from patrons up around/along the 101 down towards court sq., hunters point, etc., then you revoke all Q101 service from Manhattan & have it ending at the hunterspoint ferry (via their proposed routing or w/e).... just to be clear.... My problem isn't so much the 105 routing - It's the fact that the 101 & the 105 would run along Steinway st.... As we already mentioned, that is overkill. I agree Q105 is overkilled. For a BK to LGA purposes I'd much rather restore the back to QB Full-time, send some s or s to 179th during the rush if 71st would be too overwhelmed.... Much more efficient and faster travel for any would be BK-LGA patrons to Q70 over any direct 'prone to delays' bus route would be. Only should stay at Forest Hill. If you sent to 179th St, it will be more longer wait. I remember during G.O, ride is very long local train ride to Bay Ridge. Whether or not there's enough demand for Bklyn-LGA for a bus is debatable, but what's definitely not debatable is that there isn't nearly enough demand to justify three locals on the QBL local, and that Hillside local riders will not stand for a QBL local stopping at their stops instead of an express . I agree, but Save folks are still fighting to get back on Queens Blvd. The Q101 has no business even going to Manhattan. The Q101 has no business running 24/7. Hardly see anyone on the bus late at night but I guess it only because of coverage reasons. I never really got around to it, but I've have felt for the longest that Western Queens (with the exception of maybe 1 or 2 routes, not including the M60) needs a bus network reconfiguration.... You just listed one of the main reasons why I say that's the case. Hell, FWIW. every single one of the "Q100's" routes I would alter.... I just smh @ the way the Q69 serves (gets back to) 21st st from QBP, towards jackson heights (I hate the way the old Q19a <--> current Q69 is routed from start to finish anyway, the way the Q39 gets to QBP from Court sq, Q66 service to QBP... I hate to say this, but the network in that part of Queens in general is antiquated (which stemmed from the old PBL's anyway).... It's time for a change, that's the one thing I will agree with in that proposed proposal (I just don't care for the way they'd do it, and to the extent they're doing it - seemingly catering only to the forming/growing hipster & yuppie population).... They're only part of the equation. My thing is, every trip does not need to go to Manhattan..... Matter fact, I would say most trips. But if push came to shove, I would have the Q101 in its entirety remain w/i Queens... However, IDK about running it to Hunterspoint (like as in the NYPlanning proposal & what not) Q101 is busy during rush hour. I think Q101 should share bus stop with Q60, so passenger can take either Q101 or Q60 when they want to go across bridge. On the Q100 to Rikers...perhaps it is time for the MTA to work with the Corrections Department to determine which trips need to serve Rikers? On Mondays and Tuesdays, there are no visits permitted. See here for more information: http://www.nyc.gov/html/doc/html/visit-an-inmate/visit-schedule.shtml On those days, I would have Q100 trips end at the Q101 terminus at 19 Avenue and Hazen Street. As for the Q100...what about adding a stop at 20 Avenue and Steinway Street full time? Q100 is needed in Rikers Island because workers need it. Also program organizer uses Q100 to access meeting at Rikers Island. My former NYPL Librarian friend had business in Rikers Island, properly bringing education for prisoners or maybe meeting with staff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted October 29, 2014 Share #3793 Posted October 29, 2014 NY Waterway doesn't have enough buses, that's why Q103 idea seems excellent idea. Saw you say this the first time..... One has nothing to do with the other.... The 103 should remain terminating at the subway station. Q101 is busy during rush hour. I think Q101 should share bus stop with Q60, so passenger can take either Q101 or Q60 when they want to go across bridge. The Q60 is more than enough service for riders for that particular purpose. Furthermore, the Q101 used to share a common terminal with the Q60... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted December 1, 2014 Share #3794 Posted December 1, 2014 (edited) Q58 Local: Weekdays: From Ridgewood From 4:54 AM to 10:55 AM, and from 2:46 PM to 8:04 PM, buses would originate at the Fresh Pond Road station, utilizing the B20 turn-around. From Flushing From 5:40 AM to 12:02 PM, and from 3:50 PM to 8:23 PM, buses would terminate at the Fresh Pond Road station. This is done to mainly improve and speed up trips from the . In addition, it will improve local running time and possibly reliability (running time would be increased where needed). Riders along the northern section of Fresh Pond Road and Flushing Avenue have the B57 to the as an alternative. Grand Avenue users have the option for the Q59 to the (which actually does save time over the Q58 to the at Ridgewood). Grand Avenue riders who do the reverse-peak trip (meaning to Canarsie), would be the group most affected, as they would need to take the to the , however, the amount of people who do that trip are not many. Edited December 1, 2014 by BM5 via Woodhaven 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 2, 2014 Share #3795 Posted December 2, 2014 (edited) Q58 Local: Weekdays: From Ridgewood From 4:54 AM to 10:55 AM, and from 2:46 PM to 8:04 PM, buses would originate at the Fresh Pond Road station, utilizing the B20 turn-around. From Flushing From 5:40 AM to 12:02 PM, and from 3:50 PM to 8:23 PM, buses would terminate at the Fresh Pond Road station. This is done to mainly improve and speed up trips from the . In addition, it will improve local running time and possibly reliability (running time would be increased where needed). Riders along the northern section of Fresh Pond Road and Flushing Avenue have the B57 to the as an alternative. Grand Avenue users have the option for the Q59 to the (which actually does save time over the Q58 to the at Ridgewood). Grand Avenue riders who do the reverse-peak trip (meaning to Canarsie), would be the group most affected, as they would need to take the to the , however, the amount of people who do that trip are not many. I wanted to give this one a proper response, so I held off from replying to this yesterday.... A couple ppl. have suggested short turning Q58's at Fresh Pond ... Main reason dealt with passenger distribution..... Although there are loads at the Fresh pond subway, I didn't like the idea all too much, due to the fact that there are simply too many riders emanating from Ridgewood Terminal needing the horse that is the Q58..... On the surface, I'm not sure I exactly get your whole spiel about the though.... How would running local service b/w Fresh Pond & Flushing speed up trips coming from Ridgewood terminal?? That's almost like implicating LTD's slow down the locals! It doesn't account for all the other traffic along Fresh Pond rd (particularly b/w Myrtle & Metropolitan).... Surely there are way more other vehicles on the road, compared to other physical buses along the Q58 route in the immediate area (including the B13, the B20, and anything else going in & out of FP depot there)...... As for that one alternative, you seem to be overlooking something mighty obvious: B57 service is absolute shit, compared to the Q58 local. So throw that option out the window, because you're not gonna get those patrons/riders to put up w/ the B57 - even if it does save mad time over the Q58 to the respective stations they serve.... The way I see this, all you'd accomplish is the forcing of (even more) riders onto Q58's LTD's (IDK if that's what you're trying to accomplish with this whole plan or what, but that part of it I most certainly do not agree with).... Don't overlook how many riders are riding b/w Ridgewood terminal and commercial Fresh Pond rd. alone.... If you'd have Q58 locals short turning at Fresh Pond subway for the sake of whoever's utilizing the that utilizes the Q58, you may as well not even bother with this whole thing..... I say that because I think you're overestimating how many people you think use the Q58 for the in-particular..... Lastly, Have the option for the Q59 to the ? That's funny - Solely because you state that like it's a secondary option..... I'm willing to put any amount of money up that (along grand) there are more riders that primarily take the Q59 to the ..... Await your response..... Edited December 2, 2014 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted December 2, 2014 Share #3796 Posted December 2, 2014 1)A couple ppl. have suggested short turning Q58's at Fresh Pond ... Main reason dealt with passenger distribution..... Although there are loads at the Fresh pond subway, I didn't like the idea, due to the fact that there are simply too many riders emanating from Ridgewood Terminal needing the horse that is the Q58..... On the surface, I'm not sure I exactly get your whole spiel about the though.... How would running local service b/w Fresh Pond & Flushing speed up trips coming from Ridgewood terminal?? That's almost like implicating LTD's slow down the locals! It doesn't account for all the other traffic along Fresh Pond rd (particularly b/w Myrtle & Metropolitan).... Surely there are way more other vehicles on the road, compared to other physical buses along the Q58 route in the immediate area (including the B13, the B20, and anything else going in & out of FP depot there)...... As for that one alternative, you seem to be overlooking something mighty obvious: B57 service is absolute shit, compared to the Q58 local. So throw that option out the window, because you're not gonna get those patrons/riders to put up w/ the B57.... 2)The way I see this, all you'd accomplish is the forcing of (even more) riders onto Q58's LTD's (IDK if that's what you're trying to accomplish with this whole plan or what, but that part of it I most certainly do not agree with).... Don't overlook how many riders are riding b/w Ridgewood terminal and commercial Fresh Pond rd. alone.... If you'd have Q58 locals short turning at Fresh Pond subway for the sake of whoever's utilizing the that utilizes the Q58, you may as well not even bother with this whole thing..... I say that because I think you're overestimating how many people you think use the Q58 for the in-particular..... Lastly, Have the option for the Q59 to the ? That's funny - Solely because you state that like it's a secondary option..... I'm willing to put any amount of money up that (along grand) there are more riders that primarily take the Q59 to the ..... Apparently, so do those riders - at 2.50 a pop.... Await your response..... 1. What I meant is, of those who take the , they would have a faster trip on the Q58 coming out of Ridgewood. 2. Well, the riders would be given the option of the Q58 LTD only from there, unless they go further up to Jefferson or Union. In the AM to Flushing, and PM to Ridgewood, I don't see the extra amount as such a problem (the other trips though, I can see as a problem). As for the riders within Ridgewood, the Q39 can be seen as alternative between only specific portions of the route, and the B13 (but it's less frequent than either or). The Q58 LTD would still be available during those timeframes, however the stops are further apart. So in this case, the options would be 1. Q39 (only between Eliot Avenue/ Metropolitan and area around Forest Avenue and near the Intermodal Terminal) 2. Q58 LTD 3. B13 (for the residents who aren't near a Q58 LTD stop; not recommended) 4. (Not recommended either) However, are that many people riding the local bus from commercial Fresh Pond to the area around Ridgewood (and the intermodal terminal at that time? I would think that most of that happens during midday and weekend hours (I know and have seen that before, but just never seen it during those time periods). If it's not much, then possibly the riders could seek the 58 LTD where possible. If it's too complicated, an alternative options would be to maintain Q58 Local service running to Ridgewood Terminal during the rush hour period, but every other bus at. And honestly, I somehow find the Q59 to the somewhat more inconvenient (the is full regardless though) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted December 2, 2014 Share #3797 Posted December 2, 2014 How many people ride between the segment of the Q58 south of Queens Blvd, and north of Queens Blvd, anyways? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted December 2, 2014 Share #3798 Posted December 2, 2014 (edited) 1. What I meant is, of those who take the , they would have a faster trip on the Q58 coming out of Ridgewood. 2. Well, the riders would be given the option of the Q58 LTD only from there, unless they go further up to Jefferson or Union. In the AM to Flushing, and PM to Ridgewood, I don't see the extra amount as such a problem (the other trips though, I can see as a problem). As for the riders within Ridgewood, the Q39 can be seen as alternative between only specific portions of the route, and the B13 (but it's less frequent than either or). The Q58 LTD would still be available during those timeframes, however the stops are further apart. So in this case, the options would be 1. Q39 (only between Eliot Avenue/ Metropolitan and area around Forest Avenue and near the Intermodal Terminal) 2. Q58 LTD 3. B13 (for the residents who aren't near a Q58 LTD stop; not recommended) 4. (Not recommended either) However, are that many people riding the local bus from commercial Fresh Pond to the area around Ridgewood (and the intermodal terminal at that time? I would think that most of that happens during midday and weekend hours (I know and have seen that before, but just never seen it during those time periods). If it's not much, then possibly the riders could seek the 58 LTD where possible. If it's too complicated, an alternative options would be to maintain Q58 Local service running to Ridgewood Terminal during the rush hour period, but every other bus at. And honestly, I somehow find the Q59 to the somewhat more inconvenient (the is full regardless though) 1) Ok, so that was in regards to forcing those riders to all embark on LTD's..... Gotcha. (Instead of this, I may as well say it... Hogwash, about the Q58 in regards to the , the MTA should be analyzing how many riders are riding longer distances on the Q58 LTD coming from Ridgewood Terminal & those embarking at Fresh Pond subway..... The irony with your suggestion is that a common complaint exists by riders of that there are too many 58 LTD's & not enough locals....) 2) The extra amount of what? As far as your question, yes (although these are mainly residents of the area).... It's odd that you're questioning the amt. of people riding from commercial Fresh Pond to around Ridgewood term around those times you post.... When with those times you post, those are of Q58 locals you would have heading towards Flushing.... Heh, the Q59 to Grand st is far more convenient for more folks than backtracking on the Q58/LTD to Myrtle-Wyckoff (unless someone is heading towards Canarsie, but that's the minority, compared to those heading towards Manhattan)..... But, how can you now say that you find it somewhat more inconvenient, when prior, you implicitly said: "Grand Avenue users have the option for the Q59 to the (which actually does save time over the Q58 to the at Ridgewood)." ----------- Lastly, it's not that your idea is complicated.... It's that it isn't warranted to just having LTD's running west of Fresh Pond subway..... How many people ride between the segment of the Q58 south of Queens Blvd, and north of Queens Blvd, anyways? Can't quantify it, but I'm just going to say this..... One thing I never understood about the Q58 is that turnover at QB seems to be MUCH higher towards Flushing, than towards Ridgewood..... Saying this another way, it seems as if there are more people still left on the bus (when it hits QB) that are riding southbound from the north on the Q58, compared to the opposite scenario.... I have seen much more buses tank out on the south side of QB heading towards Flushing, than buses that seldom tank out on the north side of QB heading towards Ridgewood..... Any particular reason you ask? Edited December 2, 2014 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxM4Woodlawn Posted December 2, 2014 Share #3799 Posted December 2, 2014 My proposals Q10: Extended to Forest Hills-71st Ave Station via Austin Rd. Q15A: Eliminated Q17: Extended to the Jamaica LIRR Station Q19: extend route further to replace the Q26 Q26: eliminated, replaced by Q19 Q32: extend route to East Elmhurst replacing the Q33 Q33: merge with the Q32 Q34: extend route further north into Whitestone via the former Q14 route Q64: extend route to Woodhaven Blvd via the Q23 route Q66: extend route to Midtown Manhattan terminating at 61st St & 2nd Ave. Q112: extend down to Howard Beach via Woodhaven Blvd QM3: make route a full time weekday service QM9: a new Wall Street variant of the QM2, runs rush hours only with one super express run each direction QM19: a new Wall Street variant of the QM20, runs rush hours only with one super express run each direction 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted December 2, 2014 Share #3800 Posted December 2, 2014 ^ I would tell you how I feel about your proposals but I know you know they won't work for obvious reasons. So I'm not going to stress it 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.