Queens Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I'm not disagreeing with your points, I'm disagreeing with your end solution to rectify said points/matters.....

 

You don't need to break up the route then, if that's your focus.... You're basically implicating that the Q38 physical routing is fine, but the problem you have with it, is purely operational....

 

Either to Atlas, to Myrtle/Cooper, Myrtle/80th, or to the ForestView Crescent co-ops.... Yes, those are all in the opposite direction from the at 69th/Metropolitan & I would be perfectly fine with that.... The Q67 should be one of the few commuter locals (M98, B103) in the entire bus system.... It isn't like the footprint hasn't already been created - the MTA simply needs to build on it.... IMO, it isn't all too difficult to do, as I believe the latent ridership is there for an extension to any one of those 4 locations [for atlas, not so much to the mall in-particular, but the residences around the mall]....

 

I feel that it is a lost cause attempting to solve the reliability with its current route. It would be extremely hard to do so. Splitting the routes would make it much easier to deal with, since the delay is only at one point instead of 2,3, or even 4 points along the line. As for the Ridgewood plan, I would be in support of the plan too. I feel that if the Eliot Avenue split would go down to Ridgewood, it would provide an easier connection to QCM, on which many people from all over Queens go to for shopping, and would allow for easier connections to routes such as the Q88, which go to eastern Queens, eliminating a two fare ride to get to those areas. Furthermore, the people on the route at Fresh Pond Road/Metropolitan Ave are coming from the . They would instead get to/from the at Fresh Pond Road rather than Metropolitan Avenue (most of the time I'm on the bus at that point is because I'm taking the bus the "long way", or in other words, riding around the Penelope Avenue segment first and then passing the Eliot Avenue segment, the few times I don't feel like walking to LeFrak City to catch the bus). 

[B35 via Church]

I feel that it is a lost cause attempting to solve the reliability with its current route. It would be extremely hard to do so. Splitting the routes would make it much easier to deal with, since the delay is only at one point instead of 2,3, or even 4 points along the line. As for the Ridgewood plan, I would be in support of the plan too. I feel that if the Eliot Avenue split would go down to Ridgewood, it would provide an easier connection to QCM, on which many people from all over Queens go to for shopping, and would allow for easier connections to routes such as the Q88, which go to eastern Queens, eliminating a two fare ride to get to those areas. Furthermore, the people on the route at Fresh Pond Road/Metropolitan Ave are coming from the . They would instead get to/from the at Fresh Pond Road rather than Metropolitan Avenue (most of the time I'm on the bus at that point is because I'm taking the bus the "long way", or in other words, riding around the Penelope Avenue segment first and then passing the Eliot Avenue segment, the few times I don't feel like walking to LeFrak City to catch the bus). 

Yes, easier to avert the reliability issues, but not necessarily best for overall usage...

 

See, according to the stats, the route draws in about 8400 riders/weekday & 6400 riders/weekends (nothing overwhelmingly shocking, but not exactly a drop in the bucket either).... You want to split the route into 3 unequal spurs (going back to my point about not doing anything to encourage ridership growth).... Say there were to be no loss of cumulative ridership across the 3 routes whatsoever, right.....

 

Approx. what percentage of the current/real Q38 ridership do you deem would remain riding such a:

 

- "Q38" Penelope spur?

- "Q68" Eliot Spur?

- "Q78" Lefrak dinky?

Edited June 19, 2016 by B35 via Church

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Yes, easier to avert the reliability issues, but not necessarily best for overall usage...

 

See, according to the stats, the route draws in about 8400 riders/weekday & 6400 riders/weekends (nothing overwhelmingly shocking, but not exactly a drop in the bucket either).... You want to split the route into 3 unequal spurs (going back to my point about not doing anything to encourage ridership growth).... Say there were to be no loss of cumulative ridership across the 3 routes whatsoever, right.....

 

Approx. what percentage of the current/real Q38 ridership do you deem would remain riding such a:

 

- "Q38" Penelope spur?

- "Q68" Eliot Spur?

- "Q78" Lefrak dinky?

Based on estimation of loads of buses at different points and actually taking those buses, I'd say that that the Q68 and Q78 would each bring in around 35% of the current Q38 ridership (The Q68 portion would be crushloaded during the rush, runs kinda light during the midday, but does get a good chunk of ridership on the weekend, while the LeFrak spur has higher midday numbers, but lower reverse peak ridership than the Eliot Avenue spur, particularly during the AM, but also during the PM), and the Penelope spur bring in around 30% of the current Q38 ridership.

 

I feel that this is why it is impossible to cut or add service on the line. It would either be too much, or too little for the other portions of the route. There should be service increases in the rush hour for both the LeFrak City and Eliot Avenue sections of the route. The Penelope Avenue section will do just fine with the current headways. During middays, the service is enough for the LeFrak portion, but a little too much for the Eliot Avenue and the Penelope Avenue portion. On weekends, it's a little more even, although the Penelope Avenue segment has slightly less people on compared to the Eliot Avenue and LeFrak City portions of the route. 

 

However, like I did mention, I'd be inclined to extend one of the spurs (Eliot Avenue or Penelope Avenue) to Ridgewood for better connections and ridership opportunities. Personally though, I think sending the Eliot Avenue spur would be more beneficial for riders along Eliot Avenue and for riders from Ridgewood going to the Elmhurst area or across Queens, since it serves QCM, gives connections to the Q88 for service to destinations in eastern Queens, which eliminates the need for a two fare ride, or a long ride through Brooklyn, Manhattan, and back into Queens just to catch a bus going further east. That would also be more cheaper than extending the Q55 to Jamaica (for the purpose for easier connections to Eastern Queens), since there's less buses per hour on the current Q38 route, and because there's no late night service on the Q38 either. Most of the areas on the Penelope Avenue segment can accessed by taking the Q55 to the Q11/21/47/52/53. The only area which would be hard to reach is the Rego Park area (Rego Park Center) and Forest Hills, but they're not as busy the area around QCM is, nor are they sought to more than the area around QCM.

[pranavbhat924]

Q46 SBS anyone????!!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[IAlam]

Q46 SBS anyone????!!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

The line would be better off with limited zone trips

[B35 via Church]

Q46 SBS anyone????!!

St John's paying for their own shuttle to Kew Gardens-Union Tpke. anyone?!??

(they only have one going to Jamaica)

[Gotham Bus Co.]

St John's paying for their own shuttle to Kew Gardens-Union Tpke. anyone?!??

(they only have one going to Jamaica)

 

The school is paying for both shuttles through student activity fees. (Also, the Jamaica shuttle has an extra stop at 169th St .)

[Q43LTD]

I would rather just keep the Q46 a LTD. I have a feeling LTD's will eventually be phased out for SBS. However it should be route by route basis

[MysteriousBtrain]

I would rather just keep the Q46 a LTD. I have a feeling LTD's will eventually be phased out for SBS. However it should be route by route basis

I don't feel every route will automatically become SBS. Routes like the Q70, Q25, and even the Manhattan based crosstown artics I can sort of understand, but there should be a few Ltd routes that should remain intact.

For example, you can't put both the Bx41 and Bx15/55 as SBS routes. That's why the Bx55 died 40 years old while the Bx41 was more focused on.

[Q43LTD]

I don't feel every route will automatically become SBS. Routes like the Q70, Q25, and even the Manhattan based crosstown artics I can sort of understand, but there should be a few Ltd routes that should remain intact.

For example, you can't put both the Bx41 and Bx15/55 as SBS routes. That's why the Bx55 died 40 years old while the Bx41 was more focused on.

Of course not, the Staten Island LTD's and the Queens LTD's that run during rush hour should remain intact. And of course the B103

[Far rockaway]

how about a q60 LTD?

[pranavbhat924]

how about a q60 LTD?

There's already a Q60 LTD. It's called the and train..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Via Garibaldi 8]

There's already a Q60 LTD. It's called the and train..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

Which does nothing for people that need the Q60... 

[MysteriousBtrain]

There's already a Q60 LTD. It's called the and train..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

A Ltd on the Q60 should be looked into. The and do not completely parallel the Q60. We also have Ltd routes like the Bx1 with the and M101 with the , so kind of a moot point.

[NY1635]

There's already a Q60 LTD. It's called the and train..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

 

The and are usually delayed between 71st-Continental and 36th Street during rush hours.

 

how about a q60 LTD?

 

How would a Q60 LTD even work? The route is used the most between Queens Center Mall and Manhattan. It's also were the Q60 slows down a bit due to traffic, especially by Roosevelt Ave

[Via Garibaldi 8]

A Ltd on the Q60 should be looked into. The and do not completely parallel the Q60. We also have Ltd routes like the Bx1 with the and M101 with the , so kind of a moot point.

There are some instances where the bus makes more sense.  When you're shopping with a ton of bags, no one wants to schlepp down to the hot subway.  It's easier with the bus, especially for relatively short trips.  Those who are disabled or simply have issues getting to the subway also prefer the bus, so in short there's a reason to the madness.  The M101, M102 and M103 despite their bunching problems still do quite well for the aforementioned reasons.  I'm sure that the Q60 operates in a similar fashion.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Gotham Bus Co.]

The line would be better off with limited zone trips

 

Go back a few decades and you'll see "Q44A Express" trips. Westbound, they made all stops to Springfield and then non-stop to Main Street, then to the subway.

[IAlam]

Go back a few decades and you'll see "Q44A Express" trips. Westbound, they made all stops to Springfield and then non-stop to Main Street, then to the subway.

I was just about to propose that lol  

[B35 via Church]

I don't feel every route will automatically become SBS. Routes like the Q70, Q25, and even the Manhattan based crosstown artics I can sort of understand, but there should be a few Ltd routes that should remain intact.

For example, you can't put both the Bx41 and Bx15/55 as SBS routes. That's why the Bx55 died 40 years old while the Bx41 was more focused on.

Every route, no... Most routes, I'd be inclined to say yes.... I'll be maggot food when it happens though.

 

Proximity to another SBS route will mean nothing; they are really pushing the off-board payment concept (which is the best thing SBS has going for it).... LTD routes unfortunately will end up be a thing of the past.....

[bobtehpanda]

Every route, no... Most routes, I'd be inclined to say yes.... I'll be maggot food when it happens though.

 

Proximity to another SBS route will mean nothing; they are really pushing the off-board payment concept (which is the best thing SBS has going for it).... LTD routes unfortunately will end up be a thing of the past.....

 

With the new fare media theoretically there's nothing stopping the MTA from moving to a SF Muni-style all-door policy; smartcard readers at every door, and roving fare inspectors to get farebeaters. Tap readers take less than a second to actually read, so it speeds up boarding way faster. But it might make a little too much sense for the MTA to handle.

[NewFlyer 230]

Does SBS cost more to have than your regular Local and Limited routes. Those machines have to constantly be checked and maintained, you have to hire and pay the eagle team and plus you lose money when people farebeat which seems to be pretty high on SBS routes. They should definitely have they guys all the time at any random stop. I haven't been seeing them on the Q44 at least past Flushing towards Jamaica.

[IAlam]

Actually I disagree with you about the Eagle team, because every time they are on the Q44 they get at minimum 1 person per bus usually more. I'm pretty sure by lunch time they covered their own salaries. By the end of the day they pretty much covered the rest of the fare beaters.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Does SBS cost more to have than your regular Local and Limited routes. Those machines have to constantly be checked and maintained, you have to hire and pay the eagle team and plus you lose money when people farebeat which seems to be pretty high on SBS routes. They should definitely have they guys all the time at any random stop. I haven't been seeing them on the Q44 at least past Flushing towards Jamaica.

The idea is that SBS should cost less due to fewer stops and quicker boarding/de-boarding.  I don't know how the justifies the cost for the Eagle team though, but they usually travel in groups of two so if they catch enough people they may cover their cost for the day.  The also receives federal funding for the creation of these SBS routes (i.e. new buses, etc.), which is another reason they're doing it. 

[checkmatechamp13]

Which does nothing for people that need the Q60... 

 

If the and didn't exist (or at least, along the portion of Queens Blvd that they do), I'm sure ridership would be significantly higher on the Q60 than it is now. Yes, I understand that buses and rail lines often serve different groups of people, but to imply that there's no overlap between those groups is nothing short of stupid.

 

Yes, the M101 and Bx1 are good examples of limited-stop lines that work well despite having a subway line under them, but at the same time, that doesn't mean that every bus line that runs in the vicinity of a rail line automatically warrants limited-stop service. The Bx4/4A, B25, Q56, don't have limiteds, and Q60 ridership is in the same general range as those lines.

 

The Q60 runs every 7-10 minutes during rush hour, which means that locals would be running every 15-20 minutes (which is a problem considering the Q60's tendency to bunch). The only portion where you could reasonably run some limited-stop service would be in the area west of Roosevelt Avenue where it runs alongside the Q32.

 

Does SBS cost more to have than your regular Local and Limited routes. Those machines have to constantly be checked and maintained, you have to hire and pay the eagle team and plus you lose money when people farebeat which seems to be pretty high on SBS routes. They should definitely have they guys all the time at any random stop. I haven't been seeing them on the Q44 at least past Flushing towards Jamaica.

 

The MTA always attributes an increase in cost due to the Eagle Team inspections. The farebeating rate is actually lower on +SBS+ routes despite what everybody says, and on top of that, the quicker service tends to attract more ridership.

 

However, remember that there's a cost to run that whole Transit Adjudication Bureau, and on top of that, not every ticket is going to be paid. 

Edited June 22, 2016 by checkmatechamp13

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If the and didn't exist (or at least, along the portion of Queens Blvd that they do), I'm sure ridership would be significantly higher on the Q60 than it is now. Yes, I understand that buses and rail lines often serve different groups of people, but to imply that there's no overlap between those groups is nothing short of stupid.

 

Yes, the M101 and Bx1 are good examples of limited-stop lines that work well despite having a subway line under them, but at the same time, that doesn't mean that every bus line that runs in the vicinity of a rail line automatically warrants limited-stop service. The Bx4/4A, B25, Q56, don't have limiteds, and Q60 ridership is in the same general range as those lines.

 

The Q60 runs every 7-10 minutes during rush hour, which means that locals would be running every 15-20 minutes (which is a problem considering the Q60's tendency to bunch). The only portion where you could reasonably run some limited-stop service would be in the area west of Roosevelt Avenue where it runs alongside the Q32.

I never even talked about the Q60 overlapping the subway, so to imply that I implied such a thing is stupid.  If a person needs the bus, what difference does it make if the bus line overlaps the subway?  We are talking about two different things, and quite frankly having a subway line that either fully or partially duplicates a bus line shouldn't have any significant bearing on whether or not limited stop service is needed.