Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[Q43LTD]

47 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The Q1 can kick rocks for all I care... The other routes, yeah, agreed.

 

Oh yeah. The Q45 and 57 should do the trick. 

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, Q43LTD said:

Oh yeah. The Q45 and 57 should do the trick. 

God, not that Q57 (speaking of route combinations that need not be).... A Jamaica av. route from LNP/Hillside (dumb terminal btw) that goes on to do most of the Q112 to Rockaway Blvd ...

Torture.

[Q43LTD]

54 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

God, not that Q57 (speaking of route combinations that need not be).... A Jamaica av. route from LNP/Hillside (dumb terminal btw) that goes on to do most of the Q112 to Rockaway Blvd ...

Torture.

And it's scheduled to have 24 hour service

[Gotham Bus Co.]

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

On the PDF here, it never states why they have the proposed Q27 ending in Oakland Gardens...

My guess is that  it's a convenient place to turn buses around, and/or  some politician asked for restored service to the old Q75 terminal.

[Cait Sith]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

God, not that Q57 (speaking of route combinations that need not be).... A Jamaica av. route from LNP/Hillside (dumb terminal btw) that goes on to do most of the Q112 to Rockaway Blvd ...

Torture.

Not to mention(and I just peeped this), they want to send the Q57 via SUTPHIN.......not the routing I'd choose, but I understand why they did it.

Having taken a 2nd look around the AirTrain area, I see the Q24 is starting where the Q25/34/65 currently does, the Q8 and Q57 picking up at the LIRR Station. I'd rather flip the two, having the Q24 pick up at the LIRR station, and have the Q8 and Q57 pick up at the AirTrain Station for the purpose of allowing the Q24 to make the right turn to 94th a little better. If the Q24 is picking up at the corner, those ops will have to turn real wide just to make it into 94th Avenue.

31 minutes ago, Q43LTD said:

And it's scheduled to have 24 hour service

The remarkable thing about that is the headway, with the off-peak headways being 15 or better. After 9pm till like 7am will probably be the only times that route will actually function properly.

[Q43LTD]

17 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

Not to mention(and I just peeped this), they want to send the Q57 via SUTPHIN.......not the routing I'd choose, but I understand why they did it.

Having taken a 2nd look around the AirTrain area, I see the Q24 is starting where the Q25/34/65 currently does, the Q8 and Q57 picking up at the LIRR Station. I'd rather flip the two, having the Q24 pick up at the LIRR station, and have the Q8 and Q57 pick up at the AirTrain Station for the purpose of allowing the Q24 to make the right turn to 94th a little better. If the Q24 is picking up at the corner, those ops will have to turn real wide just to make it into 94th Avenue.

The remarkable thing about that is the headway, with the off-peak headways being 15 or better. After 9pm till like 7am will probably be the only times that route will actually function properly.

Would it have been better if the 57 used the Van Wyck instead? Could add some short trips at Jamaica LIRR 

[Cait Sith]

18 minutes ago, Q43LTD said:

Would it have been better if the 57 used the Van Wyck instead? Could add some short trips at Jamaica LIRR 

Nah, the Q57 is filling a gap that the Q112 currently covers along Liberty. That part of Liberty East of the Van Wyck sees some pretty decent usage from Q112 riders. Having the Q57 pick up at the LIRR stop replacing the Q41 also compensates for the Q41 no longer existing along 127th Street. The amount of people that board the Q41 currently between 101st and 109th Avenues is a decent number, especially with the Q112 transfers. It also fills a gap for riders that take the Q41 from Jamaica to Rockaway Blvd(and that's a pretty hefty number in itself).

The Q109 on the other hand, covers the entirety of 109th Avenue, where ridership is not that bad, however, with them straightening out the Q109, it eliminates the current transfer that the Q41 and Q112 have at Liberty Avenue & 127th/128th Streets.

From Jamaica to the Rockaway Blvd Station, the Q109 will be the faster route(especially during the rush hour), but the Q57 will definitely be the higher ridership route between the two.

I just really wish that they'd fix the traffic signal synchronization along Sutphin Blvd between Jamaica & 94th Avenues.

Edited January 16, 2023 by Cait Sith

[B35 via Church]

15 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

I just really wish that they'd fix the traffic signal synchronization along Sutphin Blvd between Jamaica & 94th Avenues.

Thanks to vision zero, you can forget about that....

[N6 Limited]

3 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

I just really wish that they'd fix the traffic signal synchronization along Sutphin Blvd between Jamaica & 94th Avenues.

They also need to sync the signals along 150th St  @ Archer and Jamaica Aves, maybe 3-4 cars can fit between the two aves, and if a bus is there, then it’s maybe 1 or 2 cars. That sync could reduce the traffic on Sutphin Blvd. Also, possibly add left turn phase at Liberty Ave and 150th St since the Busway is essentially forcing motorists to go that way.

I’ve seen southbound Sutphin Blvd completely Jammed between Archer and Jamaica Aves, then it’s totally fine after. It’s kind of odd, and I’d be frustrated if I was on one of those buses.

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Thanks to vision zero, you can forget about that....

I’m starting to see more corridors around the city placed back into sync now that they’ve spammed the city with 24/7 speed cameras.

Edited January 16, 2023 by N6 Limited

[Lawrence St]

On 1/16/2023 at 12:18 AM, N6 Limited said:

They also need to sync the signals along 150th St  @ Archer and Jamaica Aves, maybe 3-4 cars can fit between the two aves, and if a bus is there, then it’s maybe 1 or 2 cars. That sync could reduce the traffic on Sutphin Blvd. Also, possibly add left turn phase at Liberty Ave and 150th St since the Busway is essentially forcing motorists to go that way.

I’ve seen southbound Sutphin Blvd completely Jammed between Archer and Jamaica Aves, then it’s totally fine after. It’s kind of odd, and I’d be frustrated if I was on one of those buses.

I’m starting to see more corridors around the city placed back into sync now that they’ve spammed the city with 24/7 speed cameras.

That's incorrect. Lights are out of sync all over the place, especially in places like Cross Bay Blvd because of the speed cameras and vision zero infrastructure. 

I understand wanting the city to be safer, but vision zero is slowly becoming the #1 cause of congestion & traffic buildups, because certain streets built for 35 MPH speeds are limited to 25 MPH in places where they shouldn't be.

Taking into consideration the current late night Q53-SBS, it takes about 1 hour and 1 minute to go from 61st St to 116th St with the current speeds of 25 MPH. If Cross Bay Blvd was increased to 35 MPH, it would greatly reduce the travel time down to somewhere between 42-47 minutes. If TSP was installed, it would bring it further to around 38 minutes.

Edited February 5, 2023 by Lawrence St

[N6 Limited]

5 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

That's incorrect. Lights are out of sync all over the place, especially in places like Cross Bay Blvd because of the speed cameras and vision zero infrastructure. 

When speed cameras are installed, there is no longer a need for out of sync “traffic calming” measures,  they want the signals back in sync so traffic can flow but also so they can get violations. Out-of-sync signals, unless it encourages speeding up to catch a signal before it turns red, is not lucrative for them.

When it comes to corridors like Cross Bay Blvd, Atlantic Ave, etc, “in-sync” may have a different definition. As opposed to Bushwick Ave where almost the entire corridor turns green simultaneously, the signals may be sequentialized in the peak direction (similar to Manhattan’s Avenues), which makes the opposite direction seem “out of sync”.

5 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I understand wanting the city to be safer, but vision zero is slowly becoming the #1 cause of congestion & traffic buildups, because certain streets built for 35 MPH speeds are limited to 25 MPH in places where they shouldn't be.

Taking into consideration the current late night Q53-SBS, it takes about 1 hour and 1 minute to go from 61st St to 116th St with the current speeds of 25 MPH. If Cross Bay Blvd was increased to 35 MPH, it would greatly reduce the travel time down to somewhere between 42-47 minutes. If TSP was installed, it would bring it further to around 38 minutes.

Slowly becoming? This has been in the top 3 causes of congestion & traffic buildups [and bus speed reductions] (outside Manhattan anyway) since 2014 when it was implemented. From my observations, the other two would be Blocking the box and TLC plated vehicles.

I agree, 25MPH severely slows down these buses, you can just feel it when riding. It’s like, yeah we’re in the bus lane but the bus is still poking along. Those bus lanes would be much more useful at 35MPH. Imagine the Q60 keeping up with local trains.

 

 

[Lawrence St]

5 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

When speed cameras are installed, there is no longer a need for out of sync “traffic calming” measures,  they want the signals back in sync so traffic can flow but also so they can get violations. Out-of-sync signals, unless it encourages speeding up to catch a signal before it turns red, is not lucrative for them.

When it comes to corridors like Cross Bay Blvd, Atlantic Ave, etc, “in-sync” may have a different definition. As opposed to Bushwick Ave where almost the entire corridor turns green simultaneously, the signals may be sequentialized in the peak direction (similar to Manhattan’s Avenues), which makes the opposite direction seem “out of sync”.

Slowly becoming? This has been in the top 3 causes of congestion & traffic buildups [and bus speed reductions] (outside Manhattan anyway) since 2014 when it was implemented. From my observations, the other two would be Blocking the box and TLC plated vehicles.

I agree, 25MPH severely slows down these buses, you can just feel it when riding. It’s like, yeah we’re in the bus lane but the bus is still poking along. Those bus lanes would be much more useful at 35MPH. Imagine the Q60 keeping up with local trains.

 

 

So you see my point, most of bus delays come from vision zero, not from cars which is was the entire "starting point" for vision zero in the first place.

They can't add bus lanes everywhere and expect bus speeds to increase, it won't work, not with these ridiculous speed limits.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

30 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

So you see my point, most of bus delays come from vision zero, not from cars which is was the entire "starting point" for vision zero in the first place.

They can't add bus lanes everywhere and expect bus speeds to increase, it won't work, not with these ridiculous speed limits.

If you mean not from personal cars, that was true.  At one point, personal cars at least going into Manhattan had decreased, but during the pandemic, many people bought cars.  Putting personal cars aside, just the sheer volume of for-hire vehicles alone creates a ton of congestion.  NYC is the most congested in the US.  Some of the congestion is due to Vision Zero, but some is indeed due to sheer volume.

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/nyc-worst-traffic-in-country-study-finds/

[Lawrence St]

4 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

If you mean not from personal cars, that was true.  At one point, personal cars at least going into Manhattan had decreased, but during the pandemic, many people bought cars.  Putting personal cars aside, just the sheer volume of for-hire vehicles alone creates a ton of congestion.  NYC is the most congested in the US.  Some of the congestion is due to Vision Zero, but some is indeed due to sheer volume.

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/nyc-worst-traffic-in-country-study-finds/

That's understandable. The city has done little to mitigate that congestion other then put a cap on the number of for-hire vehicle's, but that barely fixed it.

Then there's the issue of activists wanting to tear down the highways in NYC, among other issues. Traffic on the BQE has skyrocketed with the loss of lanes on the inbound Brooklyn Bridge and on both levels of I-278, which in turn delays every southern express bus in the district. I seriously don't understand where they expect all this traffic to go if they keep instigating we need less car lanes, more bike lanes, and no highways.

[GojiMet86]

3 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

That's understandable. The city has done little to mitigate that congestion other then put a cap on the number of for-hire vehicle's, but that barely fixed it.

Then there's the issue of activists wanting to tear down the highways in NYC, among other issues. Traffic on the BQE has skyrocketed with the loss of lanes on the inbound Brooklyn Bridge and on both levels of I-278, which in turn delays every southern express bus in the district. I seriously don't understand where they expect all this traffic to go if they keep instigating we need less car lanes, more bike lanes, and no highways.

Adding more lanes is just going to intice more people to fill up those lanes.

It has been proven time and time again that all that does is increase traffic congestion.

[Lawrence St]

2 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

Adding more lanes is just going to intice more people to fill up those lanes.

It has been proven time and time again that all that does is increase traffic congestion.

I sadly have to disagree with you.

Removing lanes from streets that were built for 8 lanes (using 8th Ave as an example) and reducing it to 2 travel lanes is completely un-necessary and increases traffic as a result. Bus lanes in this instance don't work because all that traffic trying to turn delays the bus from moving forward.  Obviously this now induces a chokepoint that wasn't previously there.

Adding lanes does work when the end point isn't 50% less capacity then the current number of lanes. And look at how traffic flows on 12th Avenue with all those extra lanes, I never ever got stuck in traffic there once. Yet if I use 8th Ave it takes me 24 minutes to get from 14th St to 42nd St. 

And sorry, but most of these articles and studies are biased when it comes to anything dealing with car infrastructure. I don't even use my car and leave it in NJ, but I should would like to stop getting thrown around in an express bus when the driver has to keep slamming on the brakes to avoid hitting a cyclist who ran a red or a taxi cab that cuts in front of him to pick up a fare.

[Cait Sith]

7 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

That's incorrect. Lights are out of sync all over the place, especially in places like Cross Bay Blvd because of the speed cameras and vision zero infrastructure.

This. I see this every day.

Atlantic Avenue went from being sync'd seamlessly to being out of sync because of the traffic cameras and the introduction of traffic signals at some intersections....Atlantic & 134th being one of them.
 

38 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

Adding more lanes is just going to intice more people to fill up those lanes.

It has been proven time and time again that all that does is increase traffic congestion.

I don't completely agree with this.

Removing lanes also does the same thing. It pushes more vehicles over to less lanes, causing basically the same slowdowns that they were trying to prevent. 5th & Madison Avenues during the rush hour basically proves that, especially when vehicles are trying to make turns.

Regardless of which way the coin is tossed, traffic will still accumulate one way or another. It doesn't help that the city has a tendency to half-ass their approaches with mitigating traffic congestion(which they've been doing since Bloomberg was in office) with solutions that don't really help in the long run.

I say this as someone who has visited the Bay Area, Chicago(the new most congested city in the US and still has better on-time performance with their buses than we do here in NYC) and Seattle(a city that arguably has the best bus network in the nation even with the amount of traffic lanes they still have and never removed), and has seen how they handle traffic lanes(removing and adding) and bus lanes......their approaches are far better than what these morons in NYCDOT are doing in our city. NYC looks at things with a glass half full and with a very one-sided view of things. We could really learn a thing or two from other cities, but again, NYCDOT always half-asses things.

Edited February 6, 2023 by Cait Sith

[GojiMet86]

30 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I sadly have to disagree with you.

Removing lanes from streets that were built for 8 lanes (using 8th Ave as an example) and reducing it to 2 travel lanes is completely un-necessary and increases traffic as a result. Bus lanes in this instance don't work because all that traffic trying to turn delays the bus from moving forward.  Obviously this now induces a chokepoint that wasn't previously there.

Adding lanes does work when the end point isn't 50% less capacity then the current number of lanes. And look at how traffic flows on 12th Avenue with all those extra lanes, I never ever got stuck in traffic there once. Yet if I use 8th Ave it takes me 24 minutes to get from 14th St to 42nd St. 

And sorry, but most of these articles and studies are biased when it comes to anything dealing with car infrastructure. I don't even use my car and leave it in NJ, but I should would like to stop getting thrown around in an express bus when the driver has to keep slamming on the brakes to avoid hitting a cyclist who ran a red or a taxi cab that cuts in front of him to pick up a fare.

Many DOT studies from other states all point to the same problem with adding highway lanes. That's why even Texas, the most car friendly state, is slowing down these projects.

I guarantee adding back those lanes will make things even worse than they are now.

[BrooklynBus]

40 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

Adding more lanes is just going to intice more people to fill up those lanes.

It has been proven time and time again that all that does is increase traffic congestion.

That doesn’t hold true when you add lanes to remove a bottle neck. The right lane of the BQE southbound used to exit at Hamilton Ave. Because of that bottleneck, traffic always moved at 20 mph from 7 AM to 10 PM every day. When the bottleneck was removed by rebuilding the overpass to three lanes in 1975, it was only 20 mph during rush hours and at least 40 mph all other times. That was nearly 50 years ago and the traffic has not increased since then or the speeds slow down. So no, everyone did not rush out and buy cars when that third lane was added. 
 

It may hold true if you expand a 20 mile roadway from three lanes to four, or it may not. 

[Lawrence St]

2 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

That doesn’t hold true when you add lanes to remove a bottle neck. The right lane of the BQE southbound used to exit at Hamilton Ave. Because of that bottleneck, traffic always moved at 20 mph from 7 AM to 10 PM every day. When the bottleneck was removed by rebuilding the overpass to three lanes in 1975, it was only 20 mph during rush hours and at least 40 mph all other times. That was nearly 50 years ago and the traffic has not increased since then or the speeds slow down. So no, everyone did not rush out and buy cars when that third lane was added. 
 

It may hold true if you expand a 20 mile roadway from three lanes to four, or it may not. 

EXACTLY!

[GojiMet86]

Lemme ask you guys this.

When has adding more lanes and highways incentivized people to take the subway or bus?......

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

That's understandable. The city has done little to mitigate that congestion other then put a cap on the number of for-hire vehicle's, but that barely fixed it.

Then there's the issue of activists wanting to tear down the highways in NYC, among other issues. Traffic on the BQE has skyrocketed with the loss of lanes on the inbound Brooklyn Bridge and on both levels of I-278, which in turn delays every southern express bus in the district. I seriously don't understand where they expect all this traffic to go if they keep instigating we need less car lanes, more bike lanes, and no highways.

The way to mitigate it is to improve public transportation.  The City is not built to withstand the amount of vehicular congestion we are seeing, so the City and DOT are essentially coming up with hostile ways to disincentivize people driving.  Traffic has skyrocketed on the BQE because more people stopped using public transportation and are instead DRIVING.  That is a fact. I know quite a few people that used to take the express bus into Manhattan that now drive every day.  If you lose ten people that stop taking public transportation that now drive, unless they carpool, that's now ten cars on the road that didn't exist before.

As someone who gets around by car and public transit, there is a place for cars and a place for public transit and right now because public transit has deteriorated, we are seeing a shift to insane vehicular traffic, and WFH and the hybrid schedule are both exacerbating that problem.

56 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I sadly have to disagree with you.

Removing lanes from streets that were built for 8 lanes (using 8th Ave as an example) and reducing it to 2 travel lanes is completely un-necessary and increases traffic as a result. Bus lanes in this instance don't work because all that traffic trying to turn delays the bus from moving forward.  Obviously this now induces a chokepoint that wasn't previously there.

Adding lanes does work when the end point isn't 50% less capacity then the current number of lanes. And look at how traffic flows on 12th Avenue with all those extra lanes, I never ever got stuck in traffic there once. Yet if I use 8th Ave it takes me 24 minutes to get from 14th St to 42nd St. 

And sorry, but most of these articles and studies are biased when it comes to anything dealing with car infrastructure. I don't even use my car and leave it in NJ, but I should would like to stop getting thrown around in an express bus when the driver has to keep slamming on the brakes to avoid hitting a cyclist who ran a red or a taxi cab that cuts in front of him to pick up a fare.

Adding lanes induces more vehicular usage. This has been shown time and time again.  The reason lanes are being constricted is because you have too many people driving recklessly on the road.  That coupled with pedestrians, cyclists, etc. means lots more accidents.  We've also had a lot more streetcar racing, which has exacerbated the safety problem. While I don't fully agree with narrowing the streets, I do understand the reason. If more common sense was used, these measures likely wouldn't be as drastic as they have been, but traffic related fatalities have continued to increase.

38 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

This. I see this every day.

Atlantic Avenue went from being sync'd seamlessly to being out of sync because of the traffic cameras and the introduction of traffic signals at some intersections....Atlantic & 134th being one of them.
 

I don't completely agree with this.

Removing lanes also does the same thing. It pushes more vehicles over to less lanes, causing basically the same slowdowns that they were trying to prevent. 5th & Madison Avenues during the rush hour basically proves that, especially when vehicles are trying to make turns.

Regardless of which way the coin is tossed, traffic will still accumulate one way or another. It doesn't help that the city has a tendency to half-ass their approaches with mitigating traffic congestion (which they've been doing since Bloomberg was in office) with solutions that don't really help in the long run.

I say this as someone who has visited the Bay Area, Chicago (the new most congested city in the US and still has better on-time performance with their buses than we do here in NYC) and Seattle (a city that arguably has the best bus network in the nation even with the amount of traffic lanes they still have and never removed), and has seen how they handle traffic lanes (removing and adding) and bus lanes......their approaches are far better than what these morons in NYCDOT are doing in our city. NYC looks at things with a glass half full and with a very one-sided view of things. We could really learn a thing or two from other cities, but again, NYCDOT always half-asses things.

The lights are not synched on purpose.  That's all part of the Vision Zero program, which deters speeding. You can't travel at high speeds if you have to stop every so many blocks.  Furthermore, to actually envision the plan that DOT wants would cost much much more, so they've taken a blanket approach Citywide in an attempt to keep costs down. You take one or two designs. You examine the costs for those two options and then you expand it.  That's pretty much what is happening, and the DOT has been very clear about this approach when re-designing streets. The goal is to deter speeding and decrease fatalities first and foremost.

P.S. NYC is now the most congested in the country.

19 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

That doesn’t hold true when you add lanes to remove a bottle neck. The right lane of the BQE southbound used to exit at Hamilton Ave. Because of that bottleneck, traffic always moved at 20 mph from 7 AM to 10 PM every day. When the bottleneck was removed by rebuilding the overpass to three lanes in 1975, it was only 20 mph during rush hours and at least 40 mph all other times. That was nearly 50 years ago and the traffic has not increased since then or the speeds slow down. So no, everyone did not rush out and buy cars when that third lane was added. 
 

It may hold true if you expand a 20 mile roadway from three lanes to four, or it may not. 

Sorry, but registrations for cars here in NYC has definitely increased. That is a fact - a 40% increase back in 2021.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/new-york-car-ownership-jumps-nearly-40-as-pandemic-creates-mass-transit-worries/

That trend has not stopped either, as NYC now has the worst congestion in the country.

Edited February 6, 2023 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Lawrence St]

14 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

Lemme ask you guys this.

When has adding more lanes and highways incentivized people to take the subway or bus?......

When the subway has an increase in crime and issues with delays?

If I still lived in Manhattan and I had a choice between driving or taking the subway, you best be sure I'm going to drive.

[Cait Sith]

20 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

Lemme ask you guys this.

When has adding more lanes and highways incentivized people to take the subway or bus?......

Removing them doesn't legitimately incentivize that either. It's just blanket marketing.

Ridership over the years have not increased with the removal of traffic lanes. Ridership has been decreasing well before COVID(the ridership data that is posted online shows this). Using the highest ridership stats(2019), and the best example, the Q52-Q53 SBS, both lines combined almost lost 6 percent of total ridership. That might not sound like a lot, but it also doesn't show how ridership is growing on that corridor with what they've done with the lanes.

Until there is actual, legitimate statistics showing that bus or subway ridership has increased as a result to this, I don't believe the hype. MTA's own ridership data up to the highest point in 2019 shows that ridership has been on the decline on several corridors that had lane modifications.

 

8 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

P.S. NYC is now the most congested in the country.

Chicago would like to have a word with you on that.

And also here, with data showing that Chicago has been more congested than NYC in all of 2022.

Edited February 6, 2023 by Cait Sith

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Just now, Cait Sith said:

Chicago would like to have a word with you on that.

Yeah, this issue is now a countrywide problem.  Lots of transit agencies are grappling with ridership losses, so the congestion is being felt in a number of cities. I was out today in Manhattan. The amount of vehicular congestion on some blocks was just insane.  Traffic was moving, but it took quite a while before you could cross on some streets.