Pols call for Q75 bus to be restored

[Gotham Bus Co.]

http://www.qchron.com/editions/north/pols-call-for-q-bus-to-be-restored/article_9133700c-8440-5982-9c55-46107a379e80.html

Joined by City Council Transportation Committee Chairman Ydanis Rodriguez (D-Manhattan), eastern Queens lawmakers called on the MTA last Thursday to restore the Q75 line.

Before being discontinued in the agency’s 2010 budget cuts, the bus brought residents of public transit-barren Oakland Gardens to the F subway line on Hillside Avenue.

“We’re here today to call for the restoration of Q75 bus service from this very spot at 69th Avenue and 230th Street, which is long overdue,” Councilman Barry Grodenchik (D-Oakland Gardens) said. “In the midst of what we rightly call a transportation desert, this is really the worst part of the desert.”

The councilman was joined by Rodriguez, Assemblywoman Nily Rozic (D-Fresh Meadows), Assemblyman David Weprin (D-Fresh Meadows), Community Board 8 member Tammy Osherov and neighborhood resident Michael Spinner.

Earlier this year, Gov. Cuomo declared the MTA to be in a state of emergency. Owing to issues like severe delays and an aging infrastructure, the agency’s subway system is widely considered to be in a crisis.

“What has become very clear, as the MTA struggles to get its feet under itself, is that we should be augmenting mass transit wherever possible and we should be focusing on the outer reaches of New York City where people rely on mass transit to get from place A to place B,” Rozic said.

Supporting their call to bring back the Q75, Rodriguez mentioned how the challenges faced by Oakland Gardens residents are also seen in other parts of the city.

“We are asking them today to restore the Q75,” the Transportation Committee chairman said. “We have to look out for communities — such as this one and many other places in Queens and Brooklyn and the South Bronx where we are dealing with transportation deserts where the hard-working working class and middle class residents of this community live, they don’t have access, more than being able to take a bus.”

Grodenchik also wrote a letter to MTA New York City Transit Acting President Darryl Irick in August urging the bus line’s revival.

But the agency told the Chronicle it has no plans on bringing back the line.

“Currently, the Q88 and Q17 bus routes cover the same operating area as the former Q75 bus route,” an agency spokeswoman said in an email. The bus, she added, had the fourth lowest ridership in the entire city.

The spokeswoman also said that people in Oakland Gardens who want a one-stop ride to Jamaica can just cross the pedestrian bridge over the Long Island Expressway and get on the Q30 bus adjacent to the intersection of Cloverdale Street and the westbound Horace Harding Expressway.

In response to the MTA, Grodenchik says that the need to restore the Q75 is still dire.

“While I understand that other routes cover parts of the Q75 area, the section of Oakland Gardens east of Springfield Boulevard and south of Horace Harding Expressway has no public transportation whatsoever,” Grodenchik said in an emailed statement. “For those who cannot walk long distances or for whom transferring is a hardship, the reinstatement of Q75 bus service would make a tremendous difference.”

 

[Gotham Bus Co.]

Now for my two cents worth...

 

 Do they promise to actually ride the bus? Or do they merely want it there "just in case" they feel like needing it?

 

 The MTA is in the middle of a bus shortage, so all peak-period increases must be offset by cuts (i.e. it must be zero-sum). Which route(s) should lose service so that the Q75 can be restored?

 

 

[nuyorican]

Q75 had heavy ridership durning rush hour, if they bring it back maybe extend it to Queensborough Community College. 

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

Given less than 1,000 people a weekday used the Q75 leading up to it's elimination, I don't see where this push to restore it has any legs. The last thing this bus system are deadweight routes when all of them are having major issues and bellweathers like the M15 and B46 are dropping in ridership. I was going through BusTime earlier when I had some downtime at work and wanted to faceplam at the service on several different routes. 

[Gotham Bus Co.]

36 minutes ago, nuyorican said:

Q75 had heavy ridership durning rush hour, if they bring it back maybe extend it to Queensborough Community College. 

That idea was included in the 2008 expansion concepts (which went nowhere). It would have "gone around the back way" along 233rd Street, East Hampton Blvd, and 56th Avenue.

[NY1635]

I feel that this could be easily solved by having select Q88 trips short turn at the old Q75 terminal to offer Oakland Gardens a bus that give them a connection to the and at Woodhaven Blvd.  I can't imagine anyone in Oakland Gardens backtracking to Jamaica for the when they can catch the same subway line by making a transfer at Roosevelt Ave from the local trains.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

23 minutes ago, NY1635 said:

I feel that this could be easily solved by having select Q88 trips short turn at the old Q75 terminal to offer Oakland Gardens a bus that give them a connection to the and at Woodhaven Blvd.  I can't imagine anyone in Oakland Gardens backtracking to Jamaica for the when they can catch the same subway line by making a transfer at Roosevelt Ave from the local trains.

Disagree for several reasons.

 

We have to stop feeding people into the QBL local stations, and more specifically, into one area along the QBL local. The QBL local does not meet demand (especially true on rush hours and weekends). The QBL express isn't any better (it's worse, I'd argue, even with better frequencies). However,  feeding them into the QBL express earlier on would have a better chance of getting a seat on the QBL. I do not see Oakland Gardens riders putting up with Q88's, to a already overcrowded  OR  at Woodhaven, to have to transfer and cram onto an  OR  . 

 

Just look at the sheer amount of riders taking the subway after getting off the Woodhaven Boulevard buses, the Q38, and the Q29.  Then you have the Q58 and Q59 at the stop after (towards Manhattan), both which also have a significant amount of people getting off at the subway. It's bad enough transit (and connectivity in some cases) in Maspeth sucks as it is, leading to people overlooking the Q67 (although ridership has been steadily increasing) and piling Grand Avenue buses to the QBL. 

 

 I would instead revamp the Q75, so that it terminates at Kew Gardens, via Union Turnpike west of 188 Street. (could run as a limited-stop service), in order to relieve the Q46. It reduces the redundancy, and if an extension to QCC is planned, allows riders from the west to not have to ride all the way to Jamaica or Flushing to catch a bus to QCC. 

[NY1635]

12 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Disagree for several reasons.

 

We have to stop feeding people into the QBL local stations, and more specifically, into one area along the QBL local. The QBL local does not meet demand (especially true on rush hours and weekends). The QBL express isn't any better (it's worse, I'd argue, even with better frequencies). However,  feeding them into the QBL express earlier on would have a better chance of getting a seat on the QBL. I do not see Oakland Gardens riders putting up with Q88's, to a already overcrowded  OR  at Woodhaven, to have to transfer and cram onto an  OR  . 

 

Just look at the sheer amount of riders taking the subway after getting off the Woodhaven Boulevard buses, the Q38, and the Q29.  Then you have the Q58 and Q59 at the stop after (towards Manhattan), both which also have a significant amount of people getting off at the subway. It's bad enough transit (and connectivity in some cases) in Maspeth sucks as it is, leading to people overlooking the Q67 (although ridership has been steadily increasing) and piling Grand Avenue buses to the QBL. 

 

 I would instead revamp the Q75, so that it terminates at Kew Gardens, via Union Turnpike west of 188 Street. (could run as a limited-stop service), in order to relieve the Q46. It reduces the redundancy, and if an extension to QCC is planned, allows riders from the west to not have to ride all the way to Jamaica or Flushing to catch a bus to QCC. 

The Q75 isn't really needed since 73rd Avenue is already served by the Q88 and connects to the Q17 bus to Jamaica at 188th Street. Resurrecting the route just so that Oakland Gardens can gain a connection to the just seems so redundant. There's also the Q27 on Springfield Blvd which goes to QCC, so what good would a revived Q75 do?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, NY1635 said:

The Q75 isn't really needed since 73rd Avenue is already served by the Q88 and connects to the Q17 bus to Jamaica at 188th Street. Resurrecting the route just so that Oakland Gardens can gain a connection to the just seems so redundant. There's also the Q27 on Springfield Blvd which goes to QCC, so what good would a revived Q75 do?

Dude, did you not read the article? I'm not for or against either way, but I sure wish some.of you would READ before commenting about how the service isn't needed. That's easy for anyone to say that doesn't live there and is able-bodied. Gotham is the last person that should be talking down service for any neighborhood and then sits and bitches about the subway any time his wife is delayed, but how dare anyone get their bus service restored. What a bunch of hypocrites. Service restorations are only deemed necessary when people here use the service.

[NY1635]

38 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Dude, did you not read the article? I'm not for or against either way, but I sure wish some.of you would READ before commenting about how the service isn't needed. That's easy for anyone to say that doesn't live there and is able-bodied. Gotham is the last person that should be talking down service for any neighborhood and then sits and bitches about the subway any time his wife is delayed, but how dare anyone get their bus service restored. What a bunch of hypocrites. Service restorations are only deemed necessary when people here use the service.

I did read the article. Resurrecting a low ridership route and using 40ft buses just to serve a small area of a neighborhood is just not smart. The Q75 would theoretically need more than people living in just Oakland Gardens to survive.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

11 minutes ago, NY1635 said:

I did read the article. Resurrecting a low ridership route and using 40ft buses just to serve a small area of a neighborhood is just not smart. The Q75 would theoretically need more than people living in just Oakland Gardens to survive.

Ok, so if you read the article, it specifically talks about people who are NOT mobile. Should those people not be able to get around? Aside from that, there is the issue of no subway there and having to take a bus to reach it. This is just another example of how the needs to look for solutions instead of saying NO. Do a survey and find out WHY people want the bus back aside from the obvious. Again we don't live there so it's easy to say they have this and that, not to mention that the cuts happened what? Seven years ago at least. You have no idea how neighborhoods can change in that time period, especially with rents skyrocketing and ongoing demographic changes, so what worked then may not work now. If there's potential ridership during peak periods, fine. See if some buses can be re-routed or run the route during rush hour or something, but just saying NO is completely ignorant and doesn't take into account what that community's CURRENT needs are, NOT years ago when the route last ran. Commutes are increasing, especially in neighborhoods without subways, so if commute times can be decreased somehow and costs can be kept down, why not do it or at least see if it is feasible?

I don't believe in running buses down every block, but I DO believe in providing decent coverage around the City, especially in areas that are considered transit deserts (areas far from subways that rely solely on buses).

[Q43LTD]

This is like reviving the Q14 or 74. Or to a lesser extent the Q89

[NY1635]

22 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Ok, so if you read the article, it specifically talks about people who are NOT mobile. Should those people not be able to get around? Aside from that, there is the issue of no subway there and having to take a bus to reach it. This is just another example of how the needs to look for solutions instead of saying NO. Do a survey and find out WHY people want the bus back aside from the obvious. Again we don't live there so it's easy to say they have this and that, not to mention that the cuts happened what? Seven years ago at least. You have no idea how neighborhoods can change in that time period, especially with rents skyrocketing and ongoing demographic changes, so what worked then may not work now. If there's potential ridership during peak periods, fine. See if some buses can be re-routed or run the route during rush hour or something, but just saying NO is completely ignorant and doesn't take into account what that community's CURRENT needs are, NOT years ago when the route last ran. Commutes are increasing, especially in neighborhoods without subways, so if commute times can be decreased somehow and costs can be kept down, why not do it or at least see if it is feasible?

I don't believe in running buses down every block, but I DO believe in providing decent coverage around the City, especially in areas that are considered transit deserts (areas far from subways that rely solely on buses).

People who are not mobile do need to be able to get around. They just deserve better than resurrecting an old route that has no chance of succeeding in modern times. Even Gordenchik admits that there's plenty of buses that cover the same area where the Q75 used to run as evidenced by the last part of the article.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

8 minutes ago, NY1635 said:

People who are not mobile do need to be able to get around. They just deserve better than resurrecting an old route that has no chance of succeeding in modern times. Even Gordenchik admits that there's plenty of buses that cover the same area where the Q75 used to run as evidenced by the last part of the article.

Which is why I brought up revamping the Q75 to serve Kew Gardens via Union Turnpike, in order to relieve the overcrowded Q46 (and for the purpose of QCC coming from the west (but not south), in order to avoid piling on the Q30 in my original reply. Just resurrecting the former bus route as it was isn't the only option.

[XBht26]

I’d say Extend the Q64 out there but it’s heavy enough already 

[MysteriousBtrain]

27 minutes ago, XBht26 said:

I’d say Extend the Q64 out there but it’s heavy enough already 

If that route could be converted into a full-time artic, I can see it being possible. Just reroute it on 73 Av between 164 St and Springfield and we have an extension.

[rick1032]

4 hours ago, nuyorican said:

Q75 had heavy ridership durning rush hour, if they bring it back maybe extend it to Queensborough Community College. 

i agree with that statement because during rush hours it would ease the stress of the Q17, just in case some Q17 coming from Flushing terminates at h. harding and 188th street. Unless they're going to pull a Q42 effect. like it was rush hours and made it weekday only over the years afterward. then the Q75 can come back

 

34 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

If that route could be converted into a full-time artic, I can see it being possible. Just reroute it on 73 Av between 164 St and Springfield and we have an extension.

that might be a good idea. is it possible for you to make a layout of the the q64 with the new extension by using google maps or any other map source

 

1 hour ago, Q43LTD said:

This is like reviving the Q14 or 74. Or to a lesser extent the Q89

well the Q89 (Q9A) should come back but the new terminus should be ozone park liberty Ave via linden via casino

 

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Which is why I brought up revamping the Q75 to serve Kew Gardens via Union Turnpike, in order to relieve the overcrowded Q46 (and for the purpose of QCC coming from the west (but not south), in order to avoid piling on the Q30 in my original reply. Just resurrecting the former bus route as it was isn't the only option.

q46 should be an artic during rush hours. but the restoration of the q75 would be like how they did with the q42 effect

[Cait Sith]

4 hours ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

Given less than 1,000 people a weekday used the Q75 leading up to it's elimination, I don't see where this push to restore it has any legs. The last thing this bus system are deadweight routes when all of them are having major issues and bellweathers like the M15 and B46 are dropping in ridership. I was going through BusTime earlier when I had some downtime at work and wanted to faceplam at the service on several different routes. 

So we're just gonna forget that the B37 was restored when it also had similar levels of ridership and was massively declining before its cut eh?

 To @rick1032, please use the + button if you're replying to multiple posts.

 

[rick1032]

1 minute ago, Cait Sith said:

So we're just gonna forget that the B37 was restored when it also had similar levels of ridership and was massively declining before its cut eh?

 To @rick1032, please use the quote button if you're replying to multiple posts.

 

um ok. i'm new at this. and thank you for telling me about the quote button @Cait Sith probably my computer have a weird format but i use the quote button to address everyone individually. consider me as a rookie.

[Cait Sith]

1 minute ago, rick1032 said:

um ok. i'm new at this. and thank you for telling me about the quote button @Cait Sith probably my computer have a weird format but i use the quote button to address everyone individually. consider me as a rookie.

Don't worry about it. If you have any questions about the forum and such, feel free to shoot a message over to my inbox.

Just use the quote or + button if you're replying to multiple posts, it puts the clutter down to a minimum.

[rick1032]

1 minute ago, Cait Sith said:

Don't worry about it. If you have any questions about the forum and such, feel free to shoot a message over to my inbox.

Just use the quote or + button if you're replying to multiple posts, it puts the clutter down to a minimum.

no problem

[MysteriousBtrain]

49 minutes ago, rick1032 said:

that might be a good idea. is it possible for you to make a layout of the the q64 with the new extension by using google maps or any other map source

I did a quick note of what the route could possibly look like. I modified its eastern terminal to be similar but close to how the Q75 ran on 73 Av:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=188WzU2hTPvYkKGO3drDb15HbevI&usp=sharing

[Via Garibaldi 8]

7 hours ago, NY1635 said:

People who are not mobile do need to be able to get around. They just deserve better than resurrecting an old route that has no chance of succeeding in modern times. Even Gordenchik admits that there's plenty of buses that cover the same area where the Q75 used to run as evidenced by the last part of the article.

Agreed, but then it's the 's a job to listen to the community in making the route more useful should they bring it back OR modify one of the other routes in the area. If we want to talk about them having a cost crunch fine, but I would much rather them attempt to make access better for such neighborhoods where possible. With that said, it seems like some of these Queens politicians need to get off of their @sses and do more than just calling for restorations without a sustained plan of action. Assemblywoman Rozic was out there before saying more local and express bus service is needed and then nothing. No plan for how routes could be improved, etc. I'm sure she has people in her office that can work on these things, so get them involved and out there speaking with commuters at the bus stops.

[B35 via Church]

As it was, I would not bring the Q75 back..... There was never any room for growth then on that route & there wouldn't be, if it were to be reverted....

To support the general cause I guess, there would be a number of things I'd change to bring that route back...

1) Divert the Q88 along Union Tpke b/w 188th & Springfield...

2) Widen the service span of Q17 LTD trips & decrease the # of local Q17 trips running the full distance.... The aim here is to basically cut down on the # of Q17's virtually (sometimes even literally) carrying air south of Fresh Meadows; potentially freeing up resources for Q75's....

3) Truncate it on the Jamaica end to 179th (turnaround via 175th > 88th > 178th)...

4) Extend it on the northern end to QCC... Instead of ending at 230th, buses would encircle that portion of the route east of Springfield, en route to QCC due north (or to the due south)...

5) Have JAM handle operations instead (of QV)...

 

 

9 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

This is like reviving the Q14 or 74. Or to a lesser extent the Q89

Q74 should've never been fully discontinued though... I can't say that about the Q75.

Q14's market still exists & has actually grown (through the Q15/a) - it's only some Whitestone patrons that have a problem w/ the routing in that immediate area.... Seriously doubt this is the case for the Q75 though - I'm inclined to believe that these pol's are calling for a restoration of the route so that Oakland Gdns. patrons have the route in their hip pocket....

To me, it's most like the Q89 of the 3 you list.... Aside from the whole, not directly serving a subway thing (which the 75 OTOH clearly did), it was a route you took if you didn't want to be bothered w/ the Q17 and/or the Q88... Same quirk as with the Q89, if you didn't want to put up w/ all the north-south routes panning through S. Jamaica, up to Jamaica proper).....

[checkmatechamp13]

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

1) Divert the Q88 along Union Tpke b/w 188th & Springfield...

Would you make the Q75 full-time in that case?

In any case, my opinion is still of the "extend the Q64 to Oakland Gardens" bandwagon. It can be every 4th bus during rush hour (12 minute headways), alternate buses midday (15-20 minutes), and all buses weekends.