Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[NewFlyer 230]

3 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

That's not say it's not warranted. It's currently hard to get through parts of northern Brooklyn during overnight hours. The B57 used to operate during overnight hours, and now that service will be reinstated in a different form. Also, I'm not opposed to overnight service along 69th Street. The Q18 operates late enough that overnight service wouldn't require adding a bunch of service. 

The only part of Queens that basically benefits is Western Queens (LIC-Astoria-Sunnyside). Virtually everyone else loses in some way. The only main issue regarding NW Queens service is the truncating of the Q66. There's been complaints on twitter about the proposed Q66 ending at Broadway (Which I agree with, as the Q66 buses start filling up once they turn off 21st Street towards Flushing). 

The Q44 is a big issue. In order to retain "cost neutral" service with the expansion to Fordham, not only would they take buses off Parsons, but they would cut weekend service past 9:30 PM. Insane. A lot of riders from Jamaica are going to be pissed, on top of Main Street riders. Those NE Queens politicians better be ready to face the MTA, because I don't expect their constituents to be silent about this at all. It's bad enough the express bus cuts also severely impacts this area. 

I’m fine with the Q44 being removed off of Union Street and Parsons but only if there is another route that will also provide service along that stretch too. It would benefit Bronx riders a lot without having to detour through Whitestone. However I feel like with the MTA service is going to be reduced and the people over there are going to see less service than they do now which is what I don’t agree with. I wonder how many QT16’s will run the full route from Jamaica to Whitestone. We also have to keep in mind that it will be the only route on Parsons Blvd and Kissena Blvd with no help from the Q17, Q27 and Q34 as those routes are either completely eliminated or rerouted, so there will probably be a lot of buses turning around in Flushing presumably unless they run everything the full route.

 

As far as ending the Q44 early, that’s absurd, nobody is going to buy that one. Whoever thought that was a good idea, was on something. The numbers the Q44 gets speaks for itself, and they have rode them buses past 9:30pm apparently. 

[B35 via Church]

I'm not typing all of that shit again, so this is going to be a very condensed version:

3 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The people from Ravenswood might be the ones getting at the subway, but there's also a good amount of people getting on between the   and Steinway Street (with virtually all staying on until Jackson Heights). The evening buses in particular can be almost SRO by the time they get to Broadway. I don't disagree with taking the Q66 out of QBP, but I still feel like the Q66 should remain operating until 31st Street or replace the western half of the QT78, (and then have short-turns at Broadway like there currently is). 

With respect the QT78 and QT63, there's no dispute on that. 

As far as B57 overnight service, it appears like it was there for people working the overnight shifts in industrial Maspeth, and not necessarily specifically for subway access to/from some of the areas it served. That's how I see it. However, yes, the QT4 needs several more stops. There should be a stop at Calamus Avenue. 69th Street  should be a stop if the 69th Street local doesn't run to 74th Street. However, I feel like the QT78 (or whatever the final 69th Street local route ends up being) should serve 74th Street regardless of where it actually ends (where Roosevelt Island like it's proposed, or somewhere else). The QT4 going to Jackson Heights makes it difficult for certain areas along 69th Street to reach Jackson Heights. We don't know what the Brooklyn stops are yet, so I can't really comment on that yet. 

The riderbase you're making a sticking point out of, should be addressed with another route... Where this plan drops the ball in that part of Queens is that they took the western portions of the Q18 & the Q66 and sent them both down to Queens CB5 territory.... Highly unnecessary....

As for the B57 hawk, I'm not saying it existed for subway access.... Regardless of the primary reason it operated, they should have been gotten rid of overnight service on that route in-particular.... What I can tell you is that those industrial Maspeth workers during the wee hours of the morning are too busy taking Q54's.... Much of nobody would be on those B57's past Navy due east & forget about anyone taking it from Smith/9th (when it terminated there) & Downtown....

Edited January 3, 2020 by B35 via Church

[7-express]

5 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

 

It seems like they're now making everybody submit comments for the individual routes from the route profile page (basically click the corresponding route and then click where it says to submit comments). Intentional or not, the Q44s routes are not listed (but the QT44 is listed for the Q50, along with the QT50). 

Another thing that sucks is basically how the borough redesigns also impact people using routes in/from outside the particular borough. See M100, Q50 truncation to Pelham Bay. So while the borough the intended redesign is for might be aware of the changes, the other boroughs which are affected by route changes have no clue, because they believe that it only affects routes of one borough prefix. 

I guess I'll have to resubmit all of my old comments again.  The lack of the Remix site is annoying though because that was the easiest way to see the proposed system map.  Now we just have to rely on a less than stellar PDF version of it and then try to figure it out from there.  Makes me wonder if they're trying to hide the lack of service in some corridors by making you look at individual routes instead of everything as a whole.

[7-express]

5 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I’m fine with the Q44 being removed off of Union Street and Parsons but only if there is another route that will also provide service along that stretch too. It would benefit Bronx riders a lot without having to detour through Whitestone. However I feel like with the MTA service is going to be reduced and the people over there are going to see less service than they do now which is what I don’t agree with. I wonder how many QT16’s will run the full route from Jamaica to Whitestone. We also have to keep in mind that it will be the only route on Parsons Blvd and Kissena Blvd with no help from the Q17, Q27 and Q34 as those routes are either completely eliminated or rerouted, so there will probably be a lot of buses turning around in Flushing presumably unless they run everything the full route.

 

As far as ending the Q44 early, that’s absurd, nobody is going to buy that one. Whoever thought that was a good idea, was on something. The numbers the Q44 gets speaks for itself, and they have rode them buses past 9:30pm apparently. 

And there lies one of the biggest issues.  Some key corridors like Kissena and Main have heavy interlining on portions of the route with 2 or more services covering similar areas.  By dropping it down to one service, they're both reducing route options and underestimating how many people will end up stuffing into the one remaining service.  Those corridors will see the biggest service cuts and will have major issues with the plan as is.  Short turn routes are one option to help add capacity in key corridors but it seems like the planners don't want short turns or forked terminals for the sake of simplicity, but at the expense of servicing the busiest corridors.

The QT16 alone likely won't be able to handle the loads on Union/Parsons heading north.  The QT48 won't help either since it's supposed to run non-stop on Union to Willets Point and is only a peak-hour service anyways.  So people living along this corridor go from having 3 usable services (Q20A/B, Q44, Q34) to just the QT16.  The Q20 already gets pretty cozy during the rush hour with its 8-10 minute headways on it's own and that's with people jumping onto the Q44/Q34 too.  Retaining that same 8-10 minute headway with just the QT16 will ensure sardine loads during the rush hour but I guess that's what the planners are looking for...maximum utilization by stuffing everyone onto the same bus.

Edited January 3, 2020 by 7-express

[Lawrence St]

6 hours ago, paulrivera said:

I live in the Bronx and I'm not pleased about potentially losing a crosstown on weekend nights either.

The Bronx redesign was fair, reasonable, and rational compared to all this mess.

Other than the express buses, seems like we got off easy.

I would have rather them give the Fordham Portion to the Q50 and leave the Q44 as it is.

[Union Tpke]

13 hours ago, 7-express said:

Did they just nuke the Remix site?  I tried to load it and it's just asking me to logon now instead of being able to view the routes.

Yup!

[limitednyc]

i don't trust the remix program with headways? and may the q/qt44  spam decrease on weekends maybe the extension only.

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, 7-express said:

I guess I'll have to resubmit all of my old comments again.  The lack of the Remix site is annoying though because that was the easiest way to see the proposed system map.  Now we just have to rely on a less than stellar PDF version of it and then try to figure it out from there.  Makes me wonder if they're trying to hide the lack of service in some corridors by making you look at individual routes instead of everything as a whole.

I believe that is the case, and it sucks, given that I just sent one of my friends who lives in Astoria the site (I’m helping him give feedback in the redesign since lives in Astoria and he uses the bus) Now we are going to have to spend more time trying to review the whole thing.

[BrooklynBus]

8 hours ago, QM1to6Ave said:

I sent in some choice comments about the express bus cuts through the Remix site. It doesn’t even ask for contact info, it just says “your comment has been submitted to the group owner” whoever the hell that is. Somehow I don’t think anyone will read these comments. 

It's  ridiculous that they want to remain anonymous. At the Brooklyn workshop, I attended, most refused to even tell me their name. They will only pay attention to comments made by many. They will ignore individual comments. 

[7-express]

40 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

i don't trust the remix program with headways? and may the q/qt44  spam decrease on weekends maybe the extension only.

The weekend service span cuts from 24 to 18 hours are clearly listed on the QT44 route profile page in the new site.  It's not just the Remix site.

[NewFlyer 230]

8 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I don’t see what’s great about having fewer buses go down Woodhaven Blvd. You’re buying into the idea that having one bus is good enough, and the  wants people to believe that the one bus running will be MUCH MORE reliable than before. Problem is that isn’t necessarily the case, so if that one bus is a mess, you have a BIG problem now. They are trying to sell frequency over coverage, which in an ideal situation can be better, but this is NYC we’re talking about.

I should have explained myself but I was in a rush earlier so I couldn’t go into detail.

 

I like the idea of having two routes traveling down Woodhaven Blvd because it would allow for the two routes to run efficiently compared to its current setup. The current setup is a mess. The Q53 is the frequent out of the 4 routes but the most unreliable due to the traffic it faces along Broadway and Roosevelt Ave. So often times there are large gaps in service because of that. The Q52 while more reliable runs at 15-20 minute headway throughout the day. 
The Q11 and Q21 is an afterthought and I feel like it is purposely run like so. On the weekdays it is not so bad but on the weekends they have the Q21 run 5 minutes after the Q11 and then there is a 25 minute gap in local service. So what ends up happening is that you could have the Q11, the Q52 and then Q21 come all within the same amount of time and then there is a good 15 minute gap in service, that one crowded Q53 comes and then about 5-10 minutes later Q52 comes and then the local buses pass. 

I mean hey, there was one point in time when the Q11 was the only route running on Woodhaven because the Q53 was nonstop from Rego Park to Jamaica Bay. I’m not saying we should have that type of service back but I wish we could have the Q11 as the local that runs on 5-10 minute headway’s throughout most of the day and the Q53 would run on 4-8 most of the day with every other bus terminating at Queens Center Mall. The Q52 could still exist but simply as a bus route that runs between B.54th and Rockaway Blvd.

 

 

[NewFlyer 230]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

I would have rather them give the Fordham Portion to the Q50 and leave the Q44 as it is.

The Q50 wouldn’t be able to serve Fordham as it serves Co-op City on the east side of the Bronx. The Q44 made more sense because it is close by. 

[Union Tpke]

14 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

It's  ridiculous that they want to remain anonymous. At the Brooklyn workshop, I attended, most refused to even tell me their name. They will only pay attention to comments made by many. They will ignore individual comments. 

One of the people at the meeting refused to give me their email, while Andy Byford was willing to give his to me. Idiots.

[BrooklynBus]

2 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

One of the people at the meeting refused to give me their email, while Andy Byford was willing to give his to me. Idiots.

I have a feeling that maybe their were instructed by their supervisors not to give out their names because of regards for their personal safety. I still think it isn't right. How do you expect people to trust you if you want to be anonymous? 

[BrooklynBus]

15 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Who gives a rat's @ss about what he has to say when he doesn't even live here. 

He lives in Paris and because of his academic and mathematical knowledge, he feels that qualifies him. He is planning from an ivory tower and likes most of the plan. Those who know the system don't. 

[BrooklynBus]

If the draft plan is as bad as most here seem to think, we should flood the outreach sessions with our complaints. Commenting on the MTA site is not enough. I wonder how well publicized they are. Are they even on the buses? 

Here is a list from qns.com

Outreach sessions will be held at Jamaica Center on Monday, Jan. 6, from 4 to 7 p.m.; Flushing-Main Street on Tuesday, Jan. 7, from 4 to 7 p.m.; 74th St.-Broadway/Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Ave. on Wednesday, Jan. 8, from 4 to 7 p.m.; 30th Ave on the N/W Thursday, Jan. 9, from 6 to 9 p.m.; Queens Center Mall at Woodhaven Blvd. on Saturday, Jan. 11, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.; Sutphin Blvd-Archer Av. on Monday, Jan. 13, from 4 to 7 p.m.; Rockaway Blvd. on Tuesday, Jan. 14, from 6 to 9 a.m.; Court Square-23rd St. on Wednesday, Jan. 15, from 6 to 9 a.m.; and Beach 54th St. on the A line on Thursday, Jan. 16, from 4 to 7 p.m.

NeighborhoodDateLocationAddress

RidgewoodJan. 21, 2020Greater Ridgewood Youth Council59-03 Summerfield St

Ridgewood, NY 11385

FlushingJan. 22, 2020Queens Flushing Library41-17 Main St

Flushing, NY 11355

JamaicaJan. 23, 2020Queens Educational Opportunity Center15829 Archer Ave

Jamaica, NY 14433

Kew GardensJan. 28, 2020Queens Borough Hall120-55 Queens Blvd

Kew Gardens, NY 11424

Ozone ParkJan. 29, 2020JHS 202 Robert H. Goddard138-80 Lafayette St

Ozone Park, NY 11417

CoronaJan. 30, 2020Langston Hughes Library and Cultural Center100-01 Northern Blvd

Corona, NY 11368

 

Long Island CityFeb. 4, 2020Jacob Riis Settlement1025 41 Ave

Long Island City, NY 11101

RockawaysFeb. 5, 2020RISE/Rockaway Waterfront Alliance58-03 Rockaway Beach Blvd

Far Rockaway, NY 11692

 

[RailRunRob]

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

It's  ridiculous that they want to remain anonymous. At the Brooklyn workshop, I attended, most refused to even tell me their name. They will only pay attention to comments made by many. They will ignore individual comments. 

Trust is the MTA's main issue.

[BrooklynBus]

14 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Trust is the MTA's main issue.

And they will never get it as long as they are dishonest, lie and aren't transparent. Byford' good intentions are not enough. 

[RailRunRob]

2 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I would have rather them give the Fordham Portion to the Q50 and leave the Q44 as it is.

Would the Q50 be able to handle the load? Headways,Non-articulate's? IMO Fordham would get decent ridership. Plus thats quite a route overlap with both routes. What's you angle the Q44 extension affects reliability?

[RailRunRob]

8 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

And they will never get it as long as they are dishonest, lie and aren't transparent. Byford' good intentions are not enough. 

Understood. And here lies the seed No process is ever correct if you don't trust in the process. Public trust is everything That should be more of the focus double down.

[N6 Limited]

9 hours ago, QM1to6Ave said:

I sent in some choice comments about the express bus cuts through the Remix site. It doesn’t even ask for contact info, it just says “your comment has been submitted to the group owner” whoever the hell that is. Somehow I don’t think anyone will read these comments. 

You can comment on individual routes. It's probably easier for them to parse it that way.

36 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I should have explained myself but I was in a rush earlier so I couldn’t go into detail.

 

I like the idea of having two routes traveling down Woodhaven Blvd because it would allow for the two routes to run efficiently compared to its current setup. The current setup is a mess. The Q53 is the frequent out of the 4 routes but the most unreliable due to the traffic it faces along Broadway and Roosevelt Ave. So often times there are large gaps in service because of that. The Q52 while more reliable runs at 15-20 minute headway throughout the day. 
The Q11 and Q21 is an afterthought and I feel like it is purposely run like so. On the weekdays it is not so bad but on the weekends they have the Q21 run 5 minutes after the Q11 and then there is a 25 minute gap in local service. So what ends up happening is that you could have the Q11, the Q52 and then Q21 come all within the same amount of time and then there is a good 15 minute gap in service, that one crowded Q53 comes and then about 5-10 minutes later Q52 comes and then the local buses pass. 

I mean hey, there was one point in time when the Q11 was the only route running on Woodhaven because the Q53 was nonstop from Rego Park to Jamaica Bay. I’m not saying we should have that type of service back but I wish we could have the Q11 as the local that runs on 5-10 minute headway’s throughout most of the day and the Q53 would run on 4-8 most of the day with every other bus terminating at Queens Center Mall. The Q52 could still exist but simply as a bus route that runs between B.54th and Rockaway Blvd.

 

 

I think they're trying to avoid situations like that. Several light buses serving the same corridor, essentially bunched, with riders waiting for particular routes that haven't arrived yet. I'm sure that's a major source of complaints to the MTA. It's frustrating to wait for a bus and you see a million other buses passing by, sometimes virtually empty.  Basically this new set up says "theres one route

Something of note in the draft plan:

Quote

Additionally, customers will have the opportunity to “test” the proposed network in detail via a preview trip planner similar to the one currently in use as part of the Bronx Bus Network Redesign.

I wonder if they're still planning this, since the remix site is currently absent.

This contains corridor profiles may explain the routing decisions and route merges: https://new.mta.info/queensbusredesign/ecr/profiles

 

 

 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

@QM1to6Ave We are in the process of coming up with multiple fliers for Queens express bus riders. We feel this is best way to attack these proposed cuts.

[Lawrence St]

1 hour ago, RailRunRob said:

Would the Q50 be able to handle the load? Headways,Non-articulate's? IMO Fordham would get decent ridership. Plus thats quite a route overlap with both routes. What's you angle the Q44 extension affects reliability?

Fordham is ridiculously overcrowded with all the buses that stop and terminate there. And the reason why I wanted the Q50 to go to Fordham is to bring back the original plans for the Fordham-LGA SBS route which I think orginally was going to be the Bx52.

[RailRunRob]

14 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Fordham is ridiculously overcrowded with all the buses that stop and terminate there. And the reason why I wanted the Q50 to go to Fordham is to bring back the original plans for the Fordham-LGA SBS route which I think orginally was going to be the Bx52.

This is current Fordham Plaza layout correct? Might be a-few slots open for the Q44. Maybe the BX17 and 34 move to 189th? The Q44 is taking Third Ave in. The BX52 was Fordham -LGA via the Hub tho correct?

[paulrivera]

4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I would have rather them give the Fordham Portion to the Q50 and leave the Q44 as it is.

Selfishly I would love it if the Q50 followed the Bx12 to Fordham after Pelham Bay. 😆

The Q44 I feel would make more of an impact with more riders tho. The Q50 to Fordham would just be a half-hearted Bx12 reliever without properly fixing the Bx12 itself, and they’d probably still take one of the Bx12 local intervals away to make it all cost neutral.