Queens Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[JeremiahC99]

Just now, Mtatransit said:

My experience for the Q53 aleast N/B is that most passengers got off at 74 St- Bwy. There is a sizable amount of people going to 61st but does not warrant an articulated bus going every few min down there. I stand corrected about Rockaway Bound trips. 

The Q70 however is completely empty btwn 61 St and 74 St. I can say that based on the amount of buses I see going and coming back at 74th. 

The Q70 was created to quickly get airport passengers to and from the LIRR. Are we saying that Airport riders don’t ride the LIRR?

[Mtatransit]

11 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

The Q70 was created to quickly get airport passengers to and from the LIRR. Are we saying that Airport riders don’t ride the LIRR?

Most of them, nope they do not. Tourist usually get on/off at 74th St or take the M60 to Harlem. Never seen more than 10 passenger on a bus to 61 St. Most runs in my observation the bus has no passengers until 74th

Edited August 18, 2018 by Mtatransit

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, Mtatransit said:

My experience for the Q53 aleast N/B is that most passengers got off at 74 St- Bwy. There is a sizable amount of people going to 61st but does not warrant an articulated bus going every few min down there. I stand corrected about Rockaway Bound trips. 

The Q70 however is completely empty btwn 61 St and 74 St. I can say that based on the amount of buses I see going and coming back at 74th. 

There are significantly more people that board SB Q53's at 61st than there are people riding NB Q53's up to 61st... It is what it is.

As for the Q70, yeah, usage on either front (arriving at or leaving 61st) is rather lacking....

1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said:

The Q70 was created to quickly get airport passengers to and from the LIRR. Are we saying that Airport riders don’t ride the LIRR?

Nice straw man fallacy you got there.....

Now tell us about these LIRR riders that are specifically taking the Q70 to/from LGA.

 

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, Mtatransit said:

Most of them, nope they do not. Tourist usually get on/off at 74th St or take the M60 to Harlem. Never seen more than 10 passenger on a bus to 61 St. Most runs in my observation the bus has no passengers until 74th

So the way I see it, everyone and their luggage will cram the already-overcrowded subway trains, while no one will take their luggage on virtually empty LIRR Trains that also take you into the heart of Midtown? What is deterring these airport passengers from taking the LIRR? The fare?

[JeremiahC99]

3 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Now tell us about these LIRR riders that are specifically taking the Q70 to/from LGA

I wish there were some, but other members have said that there is almost no one riding to Woodside to catch the LIRR. Is it me, or is the LIRR unappealing to anyone who lives in the city limits?

[B35 via Church]

14 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I wish there were some, but other members have said that there is almost no one riding to Woodside to catch the LIRR. Is it me, or is the LIRR unappealing to anyone who lives in the city limits?

Put it to you this way - The city ticket program has gotten much more popular now than it was in years past....

It isn't so much that the LIRR is unappealing to city residents, as much as it is that suburbanites don't want city slickers on "their" trains.....

18 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

So the way I see it, everyone and their luggage will cram the already-overcrowded subway trains, while no one will take their luggage on virtually empty LIRR Trains that also take you into the heart of Midtown?

What virtually empty LIRR trains are these?

18 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

What is deterring these airport passengers from taking the LIRR? The fare?

...to the Q70?

Their pride.

Edited August 19, 2018 by B35 via Church

[JeremiahC99]

Just now, B35 via Church said:

Put it to you this way - The city ticket program has gotten much more popular now than it was in years past....

It isn't so much that the LIRR is unappealing to city residents, as much as it is that suburbanites don't want city slickers on "their" trains.....

Why are those suburbanites so selfish? Do they even realize that city people get to ride their trains as well? If suburbanites say that anyone living within the city is not allowed to ride LIRR within the city, then every station in Zones 1 and 3 (except for the terminals) would've had closed-door service (drop-off only westbound, pick-up only eastbound).

 

2 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Their pride.

I agree. Airport passengers love flocking to the subway with their big luggage, giving little regards to those who live in the outer boroughs and take the trains each and every day. What can make them switch to the LIRR instead?

I'l wait to see what happens to the Q70 in the Queens Bus network redesign.

[B35 via Church]

2 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Why are those suburbanites so selfish? Do they even realize that city people get to ride their trains as well? If suburbanites say that anyone living within the city is not allowed to ride LIRR within the city, then every station in Zones 1 and 3 (except for the terminals) would've had closed-door service (drop-off only westbound, pick-up only eastbound).

Good old fashioned elitism.... They don't care about whatever commuting woes city residents have to put up with.... Public transportation is not their (desired) primary option; if the lot of these people could all drive to "the city", they would.....

[MysteriousBtrain]

1 hour ago, JeremiahC99 said:

What is deterring these airport passengers from taking the LIRR? The fare?

Yes. Also Q70 not only connects to LIRR for coverage purposes it has nowhere to terminate in the Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Av terminal. 

You also realize the subway has a lot more ridership than a railroad line correct? Not every inch of every route needs maximum riders crammed into a route so don't push others to use something when you don't know the full story.

[Mtatransit]

5 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Yes. Also Q70 not only connects to LIRR for coverage purposes it has nowhere to terminate in the Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Av terminal. 

You also realize the subway has a lot more ridership than a railroad line correct? Not every inch of every route needs maximum riders crammed into a route so don't push others to use something when you don't know the full story.

Q70 actually does have a place to terminate at 74th Street. I think it was extended to 61 St for political reasons

[MysteriousBtrain]

5 minutes ago, Mtatransit said:

Q70 actually does have a place to terminate at 74th Street. I think it was extended to 61 St for political reasons

Actually no. It was always planned to go to Woodside. There was a proposal to extend the Q33 to Woodside as part of the merge to MTA bus, but never went through.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Okay, so I have made a second version of my version of the Queens express bus restructuring:

Weekday Peak Service

Weekday Reverse Peak & Off-Peak Service

Saturday Service

Sunday Service

 

Service Guide

 

Notable changes:

BM5: For Queens purposes only, the BM5 will not provide any service in Queens during peak hours. This is in conjunction with a Brooklyn Express bus proposal. The QM15, QM20, and QM29 will provide alternative service.

QM3 & QM13: A split of the proposed QM3 during the peak direction into two routes: the QM3X and the QM13. The QM3X would more or less be the current QM3. The QM13 would be the former portions of the QM3 I proposed which would not be served by the QM3X. The stop at Kissena Boulevard & Memorial Avenue has been removed at all times. The QM3 off-peak service would be labeled QM3C

QM4: Frequency changes to the QM4S bus during the PM peak. 

QM6: The 260 Street & Little Neck Parkway stop has moved to Little Neck Parkway & 252 Street

QM8: Service would terminate at 260 Street & Little Neck Parkway

QM12: Service extended via 111 Street to South Ozone Park to replace the current QM18. Some corresponding stops from Leffets Boulevard are consolidated (Peak Only)

QM15: Service will run up 6th Avenue in Manhattan. Bus service will continue to serve Lindenwood. Service is still non-stop north of 81 Road.

QM16: Buses will not deviate into Lindenwood in the peak direction.

QM17: Buses will not deviate into Lindenwood.

QM18: Service truncated to Metropolitan Avenue in Kew Gardens. Service replaces the Yellowstone Boulevard portion of the QM12.

QM42: Buses will run up Yellowstone Boulevard north of Queens Boulevard and on 62 Drive

 

Here are some other parts which would also help improve reliability which would also be implemented either before or with the network (on top of the PM lane I mentioned):

1. AM Bus Lane from 188 Street to Calvary Cemetery

A Bus Lane would help reduce delays and help buses move before they get stuck in the LIE traffic that plagues the area in the morning from around Utopia in many cases. The QM4X and the QM37, which would enter east of 188 Street, would be the first ones to use it (10 BPH). Later on, past Flushing Meadows, the QM1, QM2, QM3X, QM4S, QM9, QM14, QM31, and QM32 would all join in the lane (37 BPH). This would also facilitate all those express bus in getting through the LeFrak City area. Currently, QM2 and QM32 sometimes get off at Queens Boulevard and re-enter because of the traffic. Close to 50 BPH will be going through the LeFrak City area on the proposed bus lane. The reason the bus lane ends at the Calvary Cemetery is because the HOV lane into the Queens-Midtown Tunnel starts from there.

2. Two bus lanes on 6th Avenue

I would opt for having a similar pattern on 6th Avenue as 5th and Madison Avenues have. 6th Avenue not having dedicated (or enforced dedicated) bus lanes is somewhat surreal, given how many local and express bus pass through the area. I would probably look to have the bus lanes in effect from 7 AM to 7 PM weekdays, and from 12 PM to 7 PM on weekends. This would help cut down on travel times, especially for those QM buses from deep out in Queens. The bus lane would travel from 23 Street to 57 Street.

 

It might sound ambitious to suggest both, but they are quite frankly needed. Travel times for some areas in Queens already resemble commute times similar to SI buses. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To address some previous comments and suggestions made:

QM6 in Glen Oaks:

@Q43 Floral Park

The 260 Street stop at Little Neck Parkway was moved to Little Neck Parkway at 252 Street. I would also suggest moving the local bus stop down as well, in order to ensure that there are no losses in parking. Now, the GCP stop I deemed was close enough to the 252 Street (it is about 2 minutes from that stop). Even with the walking distance, I still anticipate the ride to be faster for those riders, because the QM6 would go straight down Union Turnpike, instead of going through and about Fresh Meadows and then finally getting onto Union Turnpike. 

As for LIJ, I'm trying to retain service to as many current stops possible. Even if I terminate buses at Langdale Street, the bus is going to have to turn-around somewhere. You could turn around using Langdale > 78th Avenue > Union Turnpike, but I'm not sure if those residents would deal with buses running through their streets (especially city buses at that). 

The 75 Avenue stop would be close to the Union Turnpike stop. Additionally, the 74th Avenue stop is within walking distance as well. 

@B35 via Church @Q43 Floral Park

I was thinking of branching, but ultimately decided against it in order to make the route pattern consistent. Such a pattern would cause peak buses operate on the opposite side of the street of the off-peak buses. Additionally, given the frequencies on the QM6 on Saturday evening and on Sunday, branching would just not be ideal. I could branch the peak buses, but the issue is that the frequencies on each branch would be poor, especially in the PM. Since the peak buses are not making stops west of 193 Street in Queens anyway, I thought that the routing as it is would be similar to the current QM6 runtime between those two points. During the off-peak hours, the number of people on the QM6 past Little Neck Parkway is minimal. 

I currently have the QM4 serving NST and the areas south of Little Neck Plaza in order to preserve off-peak service in that general area. However, I'm not entire sure about the ridership between Little Neck Plaza and Glen Oaks on Little Neck Parkway on the current QM5 during off-peak periods. I've only been on the QM5 at certain time (the later aftenoon/early evening inbound buses on weekdays) through there, but otherwise, I don't know how ridership is during all other off-peak periods. If it's not necessary to serve those stops, maybe I can shorten the QM4 to Little Neck Plaza in order to somehow branch the QM6 there, but I'd still look into that. Given the frequencies the QM6 will have (which is basically 30 minutes during off-peak hours on weekdays and daytime on Saturdays), I preferably want only the QM6 to serve that entire area between GCP and Union Turnpike if it's possible.

 

[NewFlyer 230]

7 hours ago, JeremiahC99 said:

I agree. Airport passengers love flocking to the subway with their big luggage, giving little regards to those who live in the outer boroughs and take the trains each and every day. What can make them switch to the LIRR instead?

I'l wait to see what happens to the Q70 in the Queens Bus network redesign.

I’m confused. Are you saying that people who need the airport should just take the LIRR? You won’t get too many city folks who would consider doing that. I certainly wouldn’t go out my way to pay premium price and then another $2.75 to get to the airport. 

 

As far as this bus redesign I doubt the Q70 would be touched. They might have it run  via the Marine Air Terminal and bump the Q47 out of there, which it has no business being there in the first place. 

[Eric B]

6 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Okay, so I have made a second version of my version of the Queens express bus restructuring:

Weekday Peak Service

 

This part right here Eliot. https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1_VEcJK0O4smmJKIK-guOV0hYkR2wpW1w&ll=40.72270545520368%2C-73.88799194080809&z=15 should make it clear how far out of the way the Ridgewood/Glendale buses go. They go right PAST the area (and with all the traffic on the highway and the streets), and then come back. They should just get out right by 61st St. and use that to access Fresh Pond, extend it further along Myrtle to at least the Woodhaven corridor to serve more riders, and then swing one of the other routes off of the expressway to cover Eliot.

 

 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

7 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I’m confused. Are you saying that people who need the airport should just take the LIRR? You won’t get too many city folks who would consider doing that. I certainly wouldn’t go out my way to pay premium price and then another $2.75 to get to the airport. 

 

As far as this bus redesign I doubt the Q70 would be touched. They might have it run  via the Marine Air Terminal and bump the Q47 out of there, which it has no business being there in the first place. 

Q47 ridership has increased from Terminal A, actually. The most ridership from there is actually when you least expect it (the later morning and the evening buses). Don't know how morning buses do, but I wouldn't cut it back without having a replacement. One time I caught a bus around 10 PM at night at Astoria Boulevard that was almost SRO, so it's not as empty as it used to be. Airport workers have always used the bus (and they typically go to the Roosevelt Avenue subway station). IDK though, I think I would just leave it as it is tbh.

 

3 hours ago, Eric B said:

This part right here Eliot. https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1_VEcJK0O4smmJKIK-guOV0hYkR2wpW1w&ll=40.72270545520368%2C-73.88799194080809&z=15 should make it clear how far out of the way the Ridgewood/Glendale buses go. They go right PAST the area (and with all the traffic on the highway and the streets), and then come back. They should just get out right by 61st St. and use that to access Fresh Pond, extend it further along Myrtle to at least the Woodhaven corridor to serve more riders, and then swing one of the other routes off of the expressway to cover Eliot.

 

 

The problem isn't so much the AM, but the PM. The QM24 is just much longer in the PM, that the travel times to Glendale appear to be ridiculous. It has to deal with Midtown traffic, LIC traffic, Maspeth traffic, and then in traffic down Fresh Pond Road. Since the QM10 would cover Maspeth, it would just make better since to cover more of Glendale and Middle Village, which I think should be done.

The QM20/QM29 would make less stops overall than the current QM24. You'll still retain QM24 riders in the AM plus whatever people bother to use it in the PM. However, you also do have the BM5 and QM15 riders north of Metropolitan as well, which is a guranteed ridership base (since non of those buses will actually be making in that section when those buses run. Perhaps it'll entice more PM ridership from Glendale that way. 

[Mtatransit]

3 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q47 ridership has increased from Terminal A, actually. The most ridership from there is actually when you least expect it (the later morning and the evening buses). Don't know how morning buses do, but I wouldn't cut it back without having a replacement. One time I caught a bus around 10 PM at night at Astoria Boulevard that was almost SRO, so it's not as empty as it used to be. Airport workers have always used the bus (and they typically go to the Roosevelt Avenue subway station). IDK though, I think I would just leave it as it is tbh.

I think that has a lot to do with the rearrangement of airlines at LGA.  I think Spirit  and Jetblue is flying out of there now. That is probably the reason the M60 was rerouted back in there

[B35 via Church]

12 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I’m confused. Are you saying that people who need the airport should just take the LIRR? You won’t get too many city folks who would consider doing that. I certainly wouldn’t go out my way to pay premium price and then another $2.75 to get to the airport.

As far as this bus redesign I doubt the Q70 would be touched. They might have it run  via the Marine Air Terminal and bump the Q47 out of there, which it has no business being there in the first place. 

While implicative, his original premise was that people take the Q70 (from 61st) because airport riders (in general) ride the LIRR... That got shut down pretty easily.

What he's ultimately saying is that people who need the airport, should be taking the Q70 (via LIRR Woodside).... While he's right that the Q70 runs out of 61st for that connection to the RR, the fact is, is that LIRR riders are not taking Q70's like that; not even close..... This notion that city residents should be patronizing the LIRR for that reason (as opposed to the people making their way to the M60 (via the subway) for LGA access) is flat out preposterous....

The Q70 itself is going nowhere for now (whenever they prop up that LGA airtrain out of Willets point, that'll be another story for another time) & I'd be surprised if they sent it to MAT.... A Queens bus redesign from these out-of-touch people, ehh - we're just going to see a bunch of straighter routes with fewer stops, which'll be the setup for future route consolidations (making those routes longer), to then setup for a bunch of SBS lines when we're all dead & gone (well, gen X-ers & older anyway)..... This is all about cost cutting under the guise of cutting down commuting times...

I also agree with you about the Q47 (see below reply)....

4 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q47 ridership has increased from Terminal A, actually. The most ridership from there is actually when you least expect it (the later morning and the evening buses). Don't know how morning buses do, but I wouldn't cut it back without having a replacement. One time I caught a bus around 10 PM at night at Astoria Boulevard that was almost SRO, so it's not as empty as it used to be. Airport workers have always used the bus (and they typically go to the Roosevelt Avenue subway station). IDK though, I think I would just leave it as it is tbh.

If this increase at MAT was occurring when the Q47 ran b/w 74th st terminal & MAT, I wouldn't have a problem keeping it there....

Since the route's been combined/elongated to running to Atlas though, man, forget it.... It would have to be a pretty significant increase (I'm talking similar to the EB B15 to Lefferts AIRtrain level usage) for me to want to maintain keeping Q47's running in/out of MAT....

If a replacement is necessary, then have the Q33 run there & call it a day...

[LGA Link N Train]

Geez, this thread hasn't been touched in a while. 

I'm making a small proposal to reroute the Q23 straight down Continental Avenue. The reason for this is because Austin Street is congested during most hours of the day and it is hard for the Q23 to make that 90 degree curve between Austin Street and Continental Avenue, let alone operate thought Austin Street. 

Stops:

Queens Blvd/71st Av - Transfer to the Q60 and Q64. 

Austin Street/71st Avenue - Connection to the LIRR

Exter St/71 Av 

Ingram St/71 Av

Loubet St/71 Av

Metropolitan Av/71 Av - Transfer to the Q54. 

A new bus route would takeover the Yellowstone portion of the Q23. The 69th Avenue portion would be in between Continental and Yellowstone, thus passengers in need of this area could walk to either the Q23 or this new bus route (which I haven't put much thought into yet) with the QM12 and QM42. 

An alternative idea would be to rebuild Citibank between Austin Street and Continental Avenue. 

Any thoughts? 

 

[Union Tpke]

An alternative idea would be to rebuild Citibank between Austin Street and Continental Avenue. ????????????

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

28 minutes ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Geez, this thread hasn't been touched in a while. 

I'm making a small proposal to reroute the Q23 straight down Continental Avenue. The reason for this is because Austin Street is congested during most hours of the day and it is hard for the Q23 to make that 90 degree curve between Austin Street and Continental Avenue, let alone operate thought Austin Street. 

Stops:

Queens Blvd/71st Av - Transfer to the Q60 and Q64. 

Austin Street/71st Avenue - Connection to the LIRR

Exter St/71 Av 

Ingram St/71 Av

Loubet St/71 Av

Metropolitan Av/71 Av - Transfer to the Q54. 

A new bus route would takeover the Yellowstone portion of the Q23. The 69th Avenue portion would be in between Continental and Yellowstone, thus passengers in need of this area could walk to either the Q23 or this new bus route (which I haven't put much thought into yet) with the QM12 and QM42. 

An alternative idea would be to rebuild Citibank between Austin Street and Continental Avenue. 

Any thoughts? 

 

I disagree with this. This has been proposed several times, but what people fail to consider is the ridership. That area of Continental, specifically south of Burn Street and up to around Groton Street is very affluent, with folks likely considering the LIRR over other options. The ridership in that area comes from everything west of 71 Avenue. The Q23 does what it can for the most part, being that it's the only route in that general area, but it covers pretty good in the areas it serves. Overall though, it still misses a lot. 

I feel that a local route should go down Yellowstone Boulevard. I find it odd how the QM12 only runs during the peak hours, and how no local route exists. Off-Peak QM12 service and a local could coexist and do well, if the MTA bothered to market the service and such (but we all know how that usually goes). However, I don't think it should be its own route, not an extension or realignment of any other route. I'll have more details on this later.

 

[LGA Link N Train]

1 hour ago, Union Tpke said:

An alternative idea would be to rebuild Citibank between Austin Street and Continental Avenue. ????????????

Yes, just so that buses could have an easier time turning to Austin Street. I said for this to be an alternative incase the first idea (aka routing the 23 straight down Continental) didn't work. 

This part was based more on Infrastructure changes rather than the actual route itself. 

[Union Tpke]

1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

Yes, just so that buses could have an easier time turning to Austin Street. I said for this to be an alternative incase the first idea (aka routing the 23 straight down Continental) didn't work. 

This part was based more on Infrastructure changes rather than the actual route itself. 

That makes absolutely no sense.

[LGA Link N Train]

7 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

That makes absolutely no sense.

Seems like you still didn't understand what I was trying to get at here. You know, how Austin Street is quite narrow (2 road lanes and 2 parking lanes), right? There is a CitiBank located on the NorthWest corner of Continental and Austin. What I'm saying is to rebuild that bank along with the NorthWest Corner of Austin and Continental so that buses on the Q23 can move more flexibly on that curve so that they can be at least sped up. If that's no good, then you can add curb lanes on Austin Street. 

[Union Tpke]

I am well aware. I go through the area every week. Why on earth would you waste money using eminent domain to tear down a building just to "speed" up traffic. You would be tearing up other business as well. All of this just for a bus, when there are many much easier fixes for the Q23, such as fixing bunching. Seriously, think through what you post.

[LGA Link N Train]

22 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

I am well aware. I go through the area every week. Why on earth would you waste money using eminent domain to tear down a building just to "speed" up traffic. You would be tearing up other business as well. All of this just for a bus, when there are many much easier fixes for the Q23, such as fixing bunching. Seriously, think through what you post.

Well, thanks for reminding me about the businesses that were around there and how inconsiderate of me it was to propose that. I have no intentions of taking away business since I also go through that area 3-4 times every week.

Anyways, how does bunching form again, I forgot? And would a redesign of 108th Street help the Q23 in any way possible?

Edited November 23, 2018 by LaGuardia Link N Tra