Pols call for Q75 bus to be restored

[Q43LTD]

14 hours ago, rick1032 said:

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

That was one of the proposals, send the Q89 down Linden to Rockaway Blvd  . At this rate, I don't want any NYCT Bus serving the Casino. Those shuttles from Jamaica Station are just enough. Hence why the  is slowly removing the Q37 from there. 

6 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

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)...

 

 

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).....

I would bring back the Q74 as a rush hour route. The Q14, I'm kinda on the fence on that. Seems like everyone's on the "extend the Q64 eastward to 230" bandwagon. (myself included). I doubt anyone in Oakland Gardens was willing to backtrack to Jamaica for subway service. Now I'm not sure if I want the Q26 or the 75 serving QCC

[B35 via Church]

3 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

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. 

I'm on the opposite end of that bandwagon; I'd want no part of a Q64 extension (completely disregarding/ignoring the argument of NIMBY disapproval).... I get the main argument in support of that extension (coverage), but at the same time, I simply don't see it as necessary.... Worse than that, I'm not too sure Oakland Gardens even wants it (then again, I'm not too sure what Oakland Gdns. patrons want when it comes to public transit.... They don't want express service, they don't seem to care much about the Q27 or the Q88, and to be perfectly honest, this latest talking point of wanting to resurrect the Q75 to me isn't indicative of any show of - dire.... It annoys me to no end where you have communities clamoring for bus service knowing full well said patrons of them won't be utilizing it as their primary means of transportation.... Public transportation doesn't primarily exist to be used just in case the car breaks down, the kids took the car to "that party last night & f***ed it up", or the wife punked you out of the car like the cuck that you are).... So I'm of the ilk that says, if you're (as a community, I mean) pushing for any extension, service increase, or restoration, then f***in USE IT !!!

....in Droves.
Or else, shut up & remain living the so-called american dream with that pro-car, (anti or indifferent to) public transit attitude & keep it pushin.....

Anyway, Some tend to feel that the Q64 runs in excess & on top of it, has too long a period where buses are sitting idle (referring to their layovers, I'm guessing; b/c dwell times aren't that much of a problem [well, except for the first stop at the subway - LOL!]).... The latter portion I kind of agree with (if it's regarding layovers), but I don't see service on the Q64 as excessive.... Basically, we need most of our routes in the system to run the way the Q64 does....

As for your question.... Full time as in 24/7, nah.... Full time as in, 18/7-ish (or, the spans of what most bus routes in our system are, more or less), yes.... I wouldn't make all those changes to resurrect it, for it to be a rush hour only (or worse, peak direction) route...

side note: There is a difference between a rush hour only & a peak direction only route.
(throwing this out there for those that tend to use the two terms interchangeably... the latter is the former, but the former doesn't solely consist of the latter)

 

2 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

I would bring back the Q74 as a rush hour route. The Q14, I'm kinda on the fence on that. Seems like everyone's on the "extend the Q64 eastward to 230" bandwagon. (myself included). I doubt anyone in Oakland Gardens was willing to backtrack to Jamaica for subway service. Now I'm not sure if I want the Q26 or the 75 serving QCC

- At minimum, I'd bring the Q74 back to run during the rush.... If it were up to me, the route would be brought back w/ slightly less midday service (they never bothered to trim midday service - they just cut it outright.... that's the issue I had w/ that route's discontinuation)...

- Not sure what you're on the fence about regarding the Q14...

- As far as my opinion on extending the Q64, see above reply....
As far as QCC, now that's something I'd have to think about a little further here... Aside from the Q27 & the Q30 now (just looked at the schedule & good lord, I didn't realize there were THAT many trips terminating at QCC now), I've proposed the Q26 to run there, and just got through making a talking point of running Q75's there..... That is infact 4 routes....

...But in any case, I'm steadfast in wanting the Q26 to run over there (some may disagree, but I say the Q27 local during the rush needs help... FWIW, the Q26 gets to 46th quicker than the Q27 does; Hell, just for the Q27 to get to Holly can take an eternity).... So at minimum, I'd have Q26's, Q27's, and Q30's running there.... If it'd loom excessive to run the Q75 to QCC, then guess what - the Q75 would have to stay discontinued, because I would not bring that route back to have it end at 230th.... Nor would I consider running up to say, Northern/Bell (for example) as a compromise to QCC.... Not sure if I'd run the Q26 & the Q75 at lesser frequencies (than I think they should have) so that all 4 routes would serve that school.... So yeah, that's where I am as far as that goes (thanks for bringing up the 26 btw)......

Think I said everything that I wanted to touch on....

[NY1635]

20 hours 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.

The politician calling for the Q75 to be resurrected just wants a direct bus line to the subway that avoids all the major streets like Union, Springfield, and Hillside. If the MTA ever did revamp the route, it would be an Oakland Gardens to Jamaica-179th Street   shuttle. I cant imagine the MTA ever going ahead with a proposal to add a second bus line on Union Turnpike to the station at Kew Gardens to relieve the Q46.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

18 minutes ago, NY1635 said:

The politician calling for the Q75 to be resurrected just wants a direct bus line to the subway that avoids all the major streets like Union, Springfield, and Hillside . If the MTA ever did revamp the route, it would be an Oakland Gardens to Jamaica-179th Street   shuttle. I cant imagine the MTA ever going ahead with a proposal to add a second bus line on Union Turnpike to the station at Kew Gardens to relieve the Q46.

Where in the article is that (in bold) mentioned? 

Also, the MTA will have to add more service to the Q46 at some point, especially during rush hours and shoulder, since buses are too packed and often flag people (unless there's a huge decrease in ridership). You kill two birds with one stone.

 

For the record, I don't agree with a Q46 extension, and I'm neutral on bringing back the Q75, but if it is to be made useful and less redundant, that's one way I would do it. 

[bobtehpanda]

58 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Where in the article is that (in bold) mentioned? 

Also, the MTA will have to add more service to the Q46 at some point, especially during rush hours and shoulder, since buses are too packed and often flag people (unless there's a huge decrease in ridership). You kill two birds with one stone.

 

For the record, I don't agree with a Q46 extension, and I'm neutral on bringing back the Q75, but if it is to be made useful and less redundant, that's one way I would do it. 

I'm quite surprised that the Q46 has never been considered for SBS, because it would probably be much better; at the very least, the crapshow that is boarding at Kew Gardens could be mitigated. But then this is the same agency that closed the in-station bus-subway transfer.

[Interested Rider]

I think that to understand what has happened here involving the Q/75 it is important to review the history of the route. The route was started in the early 1950's to provide  additional service from the Fresh Meadows  and Oakland Gardens area to the subway. It was designed to provide service to the residential areas to go to and from work and school as there was never a major traffic generator like a hospital or college that would help provide the high level of passengers like the Q/46 has had.  Keeping this in mind when the express routes started in the early 1970's, it provided a better option for Q/75 riders who now had a reason to avoid the subway completely which reduced the ridership even further. Something else to keep in mind was that the route was serving communities that were not interested in a route that terminated in Jamaica. So in reality, the route was doomed to fail and so the MTA let it die in 2010.

The Q/17 has an interesting history as it originally was the Q/17/20 which ran to College Point. It was cut back to Flushing early on and it has been the same since that time until Archer Avenue was built. Unlike the Q/75 which served only residential areas, the Q/17 has Queens College and Flushing on its route both of which are passenger generators and It has a shopping center on 188th Street as well. The Q/17 was impacted by the express bus operation but only on its Fresh Meadows portion. What it has that the Q/75 did not have is that as Flushing has become more crowded, the residents have moved further out and the Q/17 is the route that provides the service. Should there be short turns on the Q/17 during peak periods? Yes as it quite obvious that the route needs more service.

The Q/88 is comparatively recent as it started sometime in the early 1970's as I do not remember taking it to school when I was enrolled. This route like the Q/17 has Queens College and two shopping centers on its route. It is what I would call a "bridge route as it connects Western and Eastern Queens. The few times that I rode it when I had to visit Queens College, the  bus was crowded. 

As far as a Q/64 (formerly the Q/65A) be extended from 164th Street to 230th Street to replace the Q/75, it has been talked about for years and as one poster wrote "who will ride it?" My response to that question is no one so forget it. The Q/64 is a short route with a major traffic generator with the college and is a fast way to get to the subway.

My favorite route when I was enrolled at Queens College was the Q/44VP which became the Q/74. it seems that the TA did not like shuttles and at one time it had the Malba Shuttle (Q44B), the Laurelton Shuttle, the Rosedale Shuttle and the Vleigh Place Shuttle in Queens that ran primarily during rush hours and were phased out with the exception of the Q/44VP which was extended to Queens College about the time I enrolled. It was what I considered a good rush hour route until it hit Jewel Avenue and it was me and the driver for the rest of the route. Since the MTA  has phased out all shuttles in the city, I doubt if this route will be bought back even though there may be a need for it. 

For those who are interested in bus history, the Q/26 used to run to the Queens Village Station via Hollis Court Boulevard until the Clearview Expressway was built and then was cut back to the expressway. 

The Q/46 becoming an SBS route?  Definitely yes!  

My thanks to Bernard Linder for his Queens Bus History that was published in Motor Coach Age and is the definitive work  on the subject up to the early 1970's and is my source for much of the history that I posted here.

 

[Q43LTD]

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

I'm on the opposite end of that bandwagon; I'd want no part of a Q64 extension (completely disregarding/ignoring the argument of NIMBY disapproval).... I get the main argument in support of that extension (coverage), but at the same time, I simply don't see it as necessary.... Worse than that, I'm not too sure Oakland Gardens even wants it (then again, I'm not too sure what Oakland Gdns. patrons want when it comes to public transit.... They don't want express service, they don't seem to care much about the Q27 or the Q88, and to be perfectly honest, this latest talking point of wanting to resurrect the Q75 to me isn't indicative of any show of - dire.... It annoys me to no end where you have communities clamoring for bus service knowing full well said patrons of them won't be utilizing it as their primary means of transportation.... Public transportation doesn't primarily exist to be used just in case the car breaks down, the kids took the car to "that party last night & f***ed it up", or the wife punked you out of the car like the cuck that you are).... So I'm of the ilk that says, if you're (as a community, I mean) pushing for any extension, service increase, or restoration, then f***in USE IT !!!

....in Droves.
Or else, shut up & remain living the so-called american dream with that pro-car, (anti or indifferent to) public transit attitude & keep it pushin.....

Anyway, Some tend to feel that the Q64 runs in excess & on top of it, has too long a period where buses are sitting idle (referring to their layovers, I'm guessing; b/c dwell times aren't that much of a problem [well, except for the first stop at the subway - LOL!]).... The latter portion I kind of agree with (if it's regarding layovers), but I don't see service on the Q64 as excessive.... Basically, we need most of our routes in the system to run the way the Q64 does....

As for your question.... Full time as in 24/7, nah.... Full time as in, 18/7-ish (or, the spans of what most bus routes in our system are, more or less), yes.... I wouldn't make all those changes to resurrect it, for it to be a rush hour only (or worse, peak direction) route...

side note: There is a difference between a rush hour only & a peak direction only route.
(throwing this out there for those that tend to use the two terms interchangeably... the latter is the former, but the former doesn't solely consist of the latter)

 

- At minimum, I'd bring the Q74 back to run during the rush.... If it were up to me, the route would be brought back w/ slightly less midday service (they never bothered to trim midday service - they just cut it outright.... that's the issue I had w/ that route's discontinuation)...

- Not sure what you're on the fence about regarding the Q14...

- As far as my opinion on extending the Q64, see above reply....
As far as QCC, now that's something I'd have to think about a little further here... Aside from the Q27 & the Q30 now (just looked at the schedule & good lord, I didn't realize there were THAT many trips terminating at QCC now), I've proposed the Q26 to run there, and just got through making a talking point of running Q75's there..... That is infact 4 routes....

...But in any case, I'm steadfast in wanting the Q26 to run over there (some may disagree, but I say the Q27 local during the rush needs help... FWIW, the Q26 gets to 46th quicker than the Q27 does; Hell, just for the Q27 to get to Holly can take an eternity).... So at minimum, I'd have Q26's, Q27's, and Q30's running there.... If it'd loom excessive to run the Q75 to QCC, then guess what - the Q75 would have to stay discontinued, because I would not bring that route back to have it end at 230th.... Nor would I consider running up to say, Northern/Bell (for example) as a compromise to QCC.... Not sure if I'd run the Q26 & the Q75 at lesser frequencies (than I think they should have) so that all 4 routes would serve that school.... So yeah, that's where I am as far as that goes (thanks for bringing up the 26 btw)......

Think I said everything that I wanted to touch on....

I was on the fence about reviving the Q14. (Since Whitestone patrons hate the Q15A) There was this talk about extending the Q34 to Francis Lewis. Now it's like QCC is like NCC... 

 

[NY1635]

2 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Where in the article is that (in bold) mentioned? 

Also, the MTA will have to add more service to the Q46 at some point, especially during rush hours and shoulder, since buses are too packed and often flag people (unless there's a huge decrease in ridership). You kill two birds with one stone.

 

For the record, I don't agree with a Q46 extension, and I'm neutral on bringing back the Q75, but if it is to be made useful and less redundant, that's one way I would do it. 

What other reason could he possibly have for reviving a dead route that ran thru residential areas? He even acknowledges that do alternatives exists in the last paragraphs. It's just that said alternatives like the Q27 and the Q88 take too long to get to the subway because they go thru areas with heavy traffic like Flushing and Woodhaven respectively, or too indirect to serve the small part of East of Springfield and South of HHE that he wants covered by buses.

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

Would shortening the Q27 to where all buses end at Jamaica Av and letting the Q2 or 110 cover the segment of Springfield south of Jamaica Av make sense? A more reliable Q27 seems to be the best option considering there's already low headways and serves major trip generators like QCC and Flushing. 

[Q43LTD]

2 minutes ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

Would shortening the Q27 to where all buses end at Jamaica Av and letting the Q2 or 110 cover the segment of Springfield south of Jamaica Av make sense? A more reliable Q27 seems to be the best option considering there's already low headways and serves major trip generators like QCC and Flushing. 

I don't know about having the Q2 or 110 going down Springfield. Prior to 2004, the Q83 covered the area from QV Station to Murdock. 

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, Interested Rider said:

As far as a Q/64 (formerly the Q/65A) be extended from 164th Street to 230th Street to replace the Q/75, it has been talked about for years and as one poster wrote "who will ride it?" My response to that question is no one so forget it. The Q/64 is a short route with a major traffic generator with the college and is a fast way to get to the subway.

Now that you mention it, I think the Q64 to the 188 St shopping center might be nice, and you could end it at the oval just before the shopping center.

[bobtehpanda]

38 minutes ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

Would shortening the Q27 to where all buses end at Jamaica Av and letting the Q2 or 110 cover the segment of Springfield south of Jamaica Av make sense? A more reliable Q27 seems to be the best option considering there's already low headways and serves major trip generators like QCC and Flushing. 

The Q27 will always be unreliable since it is essentially picking up the slack for a  extension that never came to pass.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

2 hours ago, NY1635 said:

What other reason could he possibly have for reviving a dead route that ran thru residential areas? He even acknowledges that do alternatives exists in the last paragraphs. It's just that said alternatives like the Q27 and the Q88 take too long to get to the subway because they go thru areas with heavy traffic like Flushing and Woodhaven respectively, or too indirect to serve the small part of East of Springfield and South of HHE that he wants covered by buses.

You're assuming way too much. Perhaps a bus to subway is what people wanted, and the Q88 (not talking about the Q17) is too much of a hassle. The traffic is not THE issue, but more of how indirect taking the Q88 to the subway (and then transferring if one does not want to endure the local commute into Manhattan) is.  Like I said, the bus does not have to go to Jamaica, or have to follow its old routing exactly;there is no requirement to do so (although the MTA uses this to their advantage; see B37, Bx24). 

No matter how a Q75 revival is routed (if it was to be revived), it would still encounter some chokepoint or obstacle at some time of day.  That will not change at all. Hillside Avenue can be quite a hassle. Turning buses at the  at 179 Street would likely require buses to turn on local streets and onto Jamaica Avenue to turnaround. Having it run to 165 Street would mean more exposure to Hillside Avenue traffic. Traffic is unavoidable on most routes, and it isn't any different in Oakland Gardens than Jamaica, which makes said indirectness even more unbearable.

 

[Interested Rider]

i would like to respond to some of the comments posted and add some additional information that I forgot to post when I wrote my original response.

Jamaica Avenue is a franchise line of demarcation which separated the various companies that provided service in the area prior to the TA takeover.  The Q/27 extension to  120th Avenue is the first route from beyond Union Turnpike to cross that line. The purpose (I am just speculating) may be connected to providing service to The Jamaica Avenue borderline dates back to the time before the TA took over the bus lines in Eastern Queens in the 1940's. The reason cold be to provide service to Queensborough Community College from the area south of Jamaica  Avenue and to provide service on a street not previously served (I am referring to the portion of Springfield Boulevard south of Murdock Avenue). The original Q/27 route used to terminate at the Expressway at all times with every other bus from 6 AM -12 Midnight terminating at Jamaica Avenue. The problem with the route is at the other end is Flushing and any route that terminates there has a problem as unlike Jamaica, there is no place where all the routes could terminate like a bus terminal which would relieve a lot of the problems but Flushing was a problem in the early 1970's when I used to take the Q/17 to Queens College.

Sometimes a bus route is needed just to connect two different parts of the borough and that is what the Q/88 does for Queens on an east west line and is the only line that provides this service other than the Q/46 and the Q/27 (The Q/17 goes north and south for a considerable part of its route and the Q/30 (formerly the Q/17A) does the same thing). . Why it took so long for the TA to realize the need for this route when the justification was there years before it was finally placed in operation, i really do not know.. The route fills in an important gap in east-west service and like the  Q/64 and the Q/46, it provides service to area other than Jamaica and Flushing which the north-south routes serve quite well.  

The bus service in Eastern Queens and for reference purposes,  is totally different from other communities in the city as it was not one company that operated the service prior to the TA takeover in 1948 but three companies with specific areas. The trolley service that operated in the area was gone many years before the TA takeover and almost all the lines became the private bus lines that live on as MTA bus. The subway whether in Jamaica or Flushing became the western terminal for its routes and if it was 179th Street buses would loop at 175th Street and Hillside Avenue which the Q/75,76 and 77 did prior to the extension to the 165th Street Terminal after Archer Avenue was completed, 165th Street or Flushing, it was always that line line that TA did not cross. This is why the route system has changed little over the years with some new routes but for the most part, the route structure remains the same.

One last word on the person mentioned in the article Ydanis Rodrieguez. He is a member of the New York City Council from upper Manhattan  and was appointed  to the MTA Board by the mayor along with Polly trottenberg. 

 

 

[QM1to6Ave]

Totally agree that the Q46 is long over due for SBS! And more buses in general on the line

[B35 via Church]

17 hours ago, NY1635 said:

The politician calling for the Q75 to be resurrected just wants a direct bus line to the subway that avoids all the major streets like Union, Springfield, and Hillside. If the MTA ever did revamp the route, it would be an Oakland Gardens to Jamaica-179th Street   shuttle. I cant imagine the MTA ever going ahead with a proposal to add a second bus line on Union Turnpike to the station at Kew Gardens to relieve the Q46.

Vanessa revealed this politician's true feelings about the Q75.... I'll let her fine ass explain it:

 

15 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

I'm quite surprised that the Q46 has never been considered for SBS, because it would probably be much better; at the very least, the crapshow that is boarding at Kew Gardens could be mitigated. But then this is the same agency that closed the in-station bus-subway transfer.

Matter of time.... I'm of the train of thought that says the MTA will eventually find a way to turn each & every heavily utilized route, at minimum, into an SBS one.... Any other remnants of the network will end up being dinky shuttles....

14 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

I was on the fence about reviving the Q14. (Since Whitestone patrons hate the Q15A) There was this talk about extending the Q34 to Francis Lewis. Now it's like QCC is like NCC...

There's no point in reviving the Q14.... Sorry Whitestone patrons, you're not getting your personal geriatric lily white shuttle to Northern that you barely used anyway.... Get accustomed to the flourishing Asian usage on the Q15/a & "bi zui" (sp?)..... All that old money is drying up & I'm glad Asians are taking over more territory well north of the heart of Flushing....

I'm not seeing any correlation b/w that old Q34 proposal & proposing more routes run to QCC though... QCC is becoming like NCC (as you put it) because it's evident that ppl. have gotten fed up with the Q27 on the Flushing end.... The new terminal change doesn't help, because it means getting out of Flushing that much longer now.... I don't know how true this is, but some students apparently are carpooling at that municipal lot (that coincidentally, the Q27 now terminates alongside of).... Now if that's been ongoing before the fact, then IDK, but I'm hearing more about it now....

But yeah, if NCC only had the n35 or the n43 (instead of both, along w/ the n16), you don't think that would be a cause for concern? To think, before the dawn of the 21st century, QCC had a grand total of zero direct bus service.... Unacceptable.... Now I don't remember the exact #, but there's something like 16,000 kids that attend that school now (that rivals KCC, if not trumps it).... Before Y2K (lol), I don't think QCC had half as many students going there.... Now with 2 public buses serving it, I can't fathom that not having anything to do with the significant increases in student enrollment it has seen....

I commend the MTA for doing what they did w/ the Q30 ; didn't need practically every trip running to Little Neck plaza anyway....

[B35 via Church]

14 hours ago, JubaionBx12+SBS said:

Would shortening the Q27 to where all buses end at Jamaica Av and letting the Q2 or 110 cover the segment of Springfield south of Jamaica Av make sense? A more reliable Q27 seems to be the best option considering there's already low headways and serves major trip generators like QCC and Flushing. 

Jamaica av. as a terminal has always felt like a stub on the Q27 to me... This is why I sided with the extension down to 120th about a year or so after they started running Q27's inside QCC.... The problem is that the Q27 also runs way out to Flushing on the opposite end..... So the way I see it, the simplest way to make the Q27 more reliable is by cutting it at HHE.... Most SE Queens folks are off the bus at that point.

As for the other part of your inquiry.... Well, the Q83 used to run full time to Jamaica av. up from Murdock (well, Colfax) & that didn't do much of anything for those trying to get to(wards) Jamaica along that part of Springfield... So I don't have a reason to believe that folks along Springfield south of Hempstead av  would start taking diverted Q2's or Q110's to(wards) Jamaica.... Even taking the Q77 would make more sense than taking a Q2 of sorts (if it's the that's being sought, that is).... The notion that the Q77 would loom more direct than some would-be SE Queens route - imagine that .... But yeah, SE Queens needs a route that takes them up past Hillside to the north (speaking of "bridge routes" that Interested Rider below makes a reference of)..... Ending Q27's at Jamaica av is better than nothing, sure - but at the same time, it's not enough IMO.....

So no, running Q2's or Q110's down to 120th wouldn't solve anything..... There is enough piece-mealing going on along Springfield.

 

15 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

The Q/88 is comparatively recent as it started sometime in the early 1970's as I do not remember taking it to school when I was enrolled. This route like the Q/17 has Queens College and two shopping centers on its route. It is what I would call a "bridge route as it connects Western and Eastern Queens. The few times that I rode it when I had to visit Queens College, the  bus was crowded.

6 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

Sometimes a bus route is needed just to connect two different parts of the borough and that is what the Q/88 does for Queens on an east west line and is the only line that provides this service other than the Q/46 and the Q/27 (The Q/17 goes north and south for a considerable part of its route and the Q/30 (formerly the Q/17A) does the same thing). . Why it took so long for the TA to realize the need for this route when the justification was there years before it was finally placed in operation, i really do not know.. The route fills in an important gap in east-west service and like the  Q/64 and the Q/46, it provides service to area other than Jamaica and Flushing which the north-south routes serve quite well. 

Man, you're killing me with this Q88 assessment of yours; you're making the Q88 out to be like it's the Q60 or something...

The Q88 is a glorified schoolkid route that happens to terminate in Queens Village.... Outside of schoolkids, Q88 usage south of Union Tpke especially, is embarrassingly poor.... Straggler level.... Virtually no other commuter b/w Jamaica av (inclusive) & Union Tpke (not inclusive) along/around the route, are trying to get to Oakland Gardens, Fresh Meadows, Utopia, South Flushing, and Elmhurst (to catch the subway, or for much of any other reason)... The very second that Q88's turn off HHE from the west, there is this palpable dropoff when it comes to rush hour commuters & what not.... So I'm not exactly buying this notion that the Q88 currently is this important east-west connector or whatever.... Then again, I should ask, what are you considering as "east" in this denomination of yours.....

This all ties back to Oakland Gardens, because really, they don't use any of their buses that well... There are other areas in this city that long to have the amt. of BPH/service that they get (b/w the Q27, Q46, and Q88... as well as direct midtown & lower manhattan express bus service)....

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Jamaica av. as a terminal has always felt like a stub on the Q27 to me... This is why I sided with the extension down to 120th about a year or so after they started running Q27's inside QCC.... The problem is that the Q27 also runs way out to Flushing on the opposite end..... So the way I see it, the simplest way to make the Q27 more reliable is by cutting it at HHE.... Most SE Queens folks are off the bus at that point.

The problem is that an HHE cut means an end to reliable cross-Queens travel in the east, because you end up splitting the route into an overloaded extension substitute, and a weak QCC/Cardozo feeder for SE Queens that you probably could only justify running at 20 minute headways.

Enough people from Union and Hillside transfer onto the Q27 for a ride into Flushing as is, and it is definitely much faster than the other options for that, because the next Flushing bus crossing those streets is the Q17 all the way at 188th St.

...actually, come to think of it, they should make the Q26 full time and a local (so that the Q27 can express/LTD wherever the Q26 co-runs with it, similar to the Q17/88 setup), and have it run down Francis Lewis to mitigate the impacts of cutting the Q27 short. You could terminate it somewhere in SE Queens, either follow the Q110 to Belmont Park or the Q77 to the Q27 terminus.

[B35 via Church]

42 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

The problem is that an HHE cut means an end to reliable cross-Queens travel in the east, because you end up splitting the route into an overloaded extension substitute, and a weak QCC/Cardozo feeder for SE Queens that you probably could only justify running at 20 minute headways.

Enough people from Union and Hillside transfer onto the Q27 for a ride into Flushing as is, and it is definitely much faster than the other options for that, because the next Flushing bus crossing those streets is the Q17 all the way at 188th St.

...actually, come to think of it, they should make the Q26 full time and a local (so that the Q27 can express/LTD wherever the Q26 co-runs with it, similar to the Q17/88 setup), and have it run down Francis Lewis to mitigate the impacts of cutting the Q27 short. You could terminate it somewhere in SE Queens, either follow the Q110 to Belmont Park or the Q77 to the Q27 terminus.

Yes, I'm well aware of the drawbacks to splitting the Q27.... It's not exactly something that I'm advocating (I'm a proponent of leaving it running b/w Flushing & Cambria Heights, quite honestly), but at the same time, I'm saying in so many words that I'd split the Q27 in that fashion, over having all Q27's end at Jamaica av & running Q2's or Q110's down to Cambria Heights.....

The question I have for you is, where else are you terminating Q27's from the south, after having it already serve QCC & before having it hit the heart of Flushing?

 

[bobtehpanda]

7 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Yes, I'm well aware of the drawbacks to splitting the Q27.... It's not exactly something that I'm advocating (I'm a proponent of leaving it running b/w Flushing & Cambria Heights, quite honestly), but at the same time, I'm saying in so many words that I'd split the Q27 in that fashion, over having all Q27's end at Jamaica av & running Q2's or Q110's down to Cambria Heights.....

The question I have for you is, where else are you terminating Q27's from the south, after having it already serve QCC & before having it hit the heart of Flushing?

 

To be perfectly honest, I don't see what's wrong with Jamaica Av (other than the need to have buses running in some capacity between Jamaica Av and 120 Av on Springfield Blvd). I don't know much about the route south of Jamaica Av, but in my experience any reliability problems on the Q27 are coming from the QCC-Flushing person, so cutting it back won't do much good.

I actually think a good candidate for taking up that section would be the Q1, mostly because I don't think Braddock deserves much of anything. But there are faster ways to get to Jamaica from all of those areas than riding a Q1 up to Hillside Springfield. How busy is that 120 Av to Jamaica Av section, anyways?

[B35 via Church]

4 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

To be perfectly honest, I don't see what's wrong with Jamaica Av (other than the need to have buses running in some capacity between Jamaica Av and 120 Av on Springfield Blvd). I don't know much about the route south of Jamaica Av, but in my experience any reliability problems on the Q27 are coming from the QCC-Flushing person, so cutting it back won't do much good.

I actually think a good candidate for taking up that section would be the Q1, mostly because I don't think Braddock deserves much of anything. But there are faster ways to get to Jamaica from all of those areas than riding a Q1 up to Hillside Springfield. How busy is that 120 Av to Jamaica Av section, anyways?

Lazy answer: Jamaica av. isn't far enough south.... JMO.

Detailed answer: How would it not (do much good), when you yourself proclaim that the reliability issues along the route are occurring west of QCC? You pinpoint a clear & definitive portion of the route that's the most problematic.... It gets enough ridership to hold its own, so I'm not seeing how splitting the Q27 in such a manner not amounting to doing much good... You find the problem, you quarantine it & deal with it accordingly.... If the Q27 wasn't as long as it is, we wouldn't be having this discussion.... Look at what happened with the n20; yes there's turnover galore, but where else would you conceivably have split that route, outside of LIRR Great Neck? The same general train of thought applies here....

It's not necessarily about what's wrong with Jamaica av, per se.... My point is that there's a moderate amt. of SE Queens folks emanating south of Jamaica av, that are riding up past Hillside, to at least Union Tpke... You already have the Q1 & the Q88 over-saturating Springfield b/w Jamaica av & Hillside av.... The problem I'm having, quite frankly, is this *let's just plug any ole route to fill that void south of Jamaica av on the Q27*..... Again, some may disagree, and the MTA may have even accidentally tapped into that demand (whatever year that was), but I agreed with the swapping of the Q83 up to the rail station for a southward extension of the Q27 into Cambria Heights instead.... Those 83's used to carry air; can't say the same thing for the Q27 south of Jamaica av. by any stretch of the imagination.....

In laymens, the Q27 gets you out of SE Queens without having to cut through Jamaica proper first..... There is no other (local) bus route that does that....

I say all that, but let me be very crystal clear here.... I would rather leave the Q27 running between Flushing & Cambria Heights, than to go about (cutting the route back to Jamaica av from Flushing or splitting the route at HHE).... Too bad Flushing is as far away from HHE/Springfield....

Springfield south of Jamaica av used to be quite dead in terms of bus activity 20 or so years ago.... The Q27 extension gave it life.... So I'm of the camp that says leave the Q27 alone down there (that includes, not extending it to Merrick... which some believe should happen)....

[Q43LTD]

It was 2004

[T J Trainman]

Where did the Q75 run to and from?

[Interested Rider]

The Q/27 change of terminals from Jamaica Avenue to 120th Avenue most likely has to do with the original franchise to operate the route which gives the MTA the ability to extend and (if need arises) to shorten the route. The 120th Avenue location is a good turn around point as it is located where Francis Lewis and Springfield Boulevards meet and riders that want to continue further down on Springfield Boulevard can transfer to the Q/77  to Merrick Boulevard. Again, my opinion is leave the route as is as it is the only route that bridges the gap from north of the expressway past the Jamaica Avenue franchise line to serve communities south of that line.

i have been referring in my posts to "franchise lines" and would like to provide some meaning and some examples of what it is and how this makes the situation totally different from the other boroughs. When the city took over the various trolley and bus systems there was  usually one company that was involved or multiple companies that were part and parcel of the same company. Brooklyn had the BMT bus and trolley lines, Bronx had Surface Transit, Manhattan had Fifth Avenue Coach and New York Omnibus and Staten island had two companies. Queens is different as Western Queens has four different companies and one that serves Central and Southern Queens, this is what we know as the private companies. Eastern Queens had three different companies with one having the routes running from Jamaica, another from Flushing and a third company which provided service as well. When the routes were  established and franchises secured, there  seemed to be some sort of compact that prohibited one company from encroaching on another's territory. The only way that the compact cold be void is if the then Bureau of Franchises at that time wold approve it such as the express routes A prime example of this was seen when the Q/74 was being eliminated in 2010, The suggestion was made to merge the route with the Q/37 which is a Green Bus Line franchise to provide direct service from South Ozone Park to Queens College. That died a quick death even though it made sense as it involved two different unions and crossing the line. This is why a Green Bus Lines extension of one of its routes from the Jamaica Bus terminal to (for example) St. Johns university will never happen even though it may make sense. When the TA took over the Queens routes, the residents were what I would call "car centric"and the bus was for school and work, nothing else. The new residents that replaced them are more what I would call "bus centric" which is the reason for the rise in ridership.

A word about the Q/88 and yes it is a 'school' route. There are other similar routes in the city such the S/55 and S/56 which come to mind that used to have far less service as compared with now as school runs are integrated into the regular schedule on all lines including the route that runs outside my window. The point that I was making was that the Q/88 provides connections with a large number of bus routes that previously required going south (or  north) and then west to reach these routes. So even though it may be characterized as a school route, it provides an alternative to reach  Western Queens which did not exist before the Q/88. 

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, T J Trainman said:

Where did the Q75 run to and from?

Between 165th st terminal & Oakland Gardens (230th b/w 67th & 69th avs).... Traveled along Hillside to 188th, to 73rd, to Springfield, to 69th, to 230th, to stand (alongside the park)....

Sometimes, buses wouldn't even layover on the Oakland Gardens end...

1 hour ago, Interested Rider said:

A word about the Q/88 and yes it is a 'school' route. There are other similar routes in the city such the S/55 and S/56 which come to mind that used to have far less service as compared with now as school runs are integrated into the regular schedule on all lines including the route that runs outside my window. The point that I was making was that the Q/88 provides connections with a large number of bus routes that previously required going south (or  north) and then west to reach these routes. So even though it may be characterized as a school route, it provides an alternative to reach  Western Queens which did not exist before the Q/88. 

Yeah, with the difference being that nobody is exalting the S55 & S56! A better example would the B9... The ridership figures (both in that low 10k range) & their route lengths are comparable... Headways are better on the Q88 though (B9 usage is more spread out, Q88's usage is heavily concentrated on the western portion).....

The Q88 is the most useful for commuters between Elmhurst & Fresh Meadows... Everything else on that route exists for simple coverage/is very secondary.... Oakland Gardens folks don't hold it in high regard & neither will I.... The Q88 for SE Queens patrons is an afterthought... The ridership past Fresh Meadows due east speaks for itself.... The Western portion I'm not questioning, it's this important east-west connector bit that simply isn't all that evident - regardless of the simple fact that the ability exists to xfer to as many routes.... If Q88 commuters aren't taking advantage of all those connections from off the route east of Fresh Meadows, then what's the point.....

Look no further than that silly Q36 extension... Look at all those riders taking advantage of the connections to the Q12 (an undoubted juggernaut when it comes to transporting riders to/from Flushing)...