Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[Fire Mountain]

18 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

The Q75 that the MTA proposed is a waste. In my opinion the route should travel down 73rd Street between Springfield Blvd all the way to Main Street. Then I would have it take the Q74’s old route via Vleigh Place to Union Turnpike to Queens Blvd. The MTA is giving Union Turnpike in general a lot more service than needed. Having the Q75 run down 73rd will allow opportunity for new ridership and connectivity and that was taken away in the last proposed plan.


 

About Union, that’s what I’m saying! There’s no need for 3 rush routes along that corridor. The 75 is like a throwaway route to me. 
About 73rd Avenue, it would’ve been actually put to good use if they had the 75 there. I can see some decent ridership from that avenue 

[Lex]

21 hours ago, xD4nn said:

I would have to agree that having the Q75 is a waste. Little Neck loses direct access to LIRR Jamaica and the Q36 would be even slower under this plan. the Q75 should be routed to somewhere other than Little Neck. The existing Q30 should remain intact. They are prioritizing QCC for no apparent reason which I have mentioned previously. 

I have a very hard time believing that Little Neck/Douglaston residents care nearly as much about that connection as you do. If they cared that much about getting the LIRR, they would probably gun for the Port Washington Branch or Queens Village over Jamaica. The far longer bus trip offers no real benefit aside from having more options in Jamaica to/from Manhattan/Brooklyn, which quickly becomes a wash because that's all it has going for it. Maybe you could argue that the subway connection is worse, but even that has ways around it (ending in Kew Gardens or Forest Hills, the latter having more Manhattan-bound subway options and a Zone 1 LIRR station a short distance from Queens Boulevard).

Most people using the existing Q30 to Jamaica are either seeking Manhattan or Jamaica itself. There's no reason to expect this to fundamentally change. There are valid criticisms of the plan, but this ain't it, chief.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

6 hours ago, Fire Mountain said:

About 73rd Avenue, it would’ve been actually put to good use if they had the 75 there. I can see some decent ridership from that avenue 

 

They tried that and the NIMBYs got loud.

[Q43LTD]

The Q73 idea was pretty much a handful of ideas that I liked from the other draft. 

[Fire Mountain]

17 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

They tried that and the NIMBYs got loud.

Woowww 🤦🏾‍♂️ 

 

2 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

The Q73 idea was pretty much a handful of ideas that I liked from the other draft. 

Same. This 75 they put out is downright useless. Sure it’ll get me to my current job, but what’s the overall point? If they had made the 75 go to QCC (like in the previous plan) that would’ve made more sense. At least then it will have an actual purpose 

[Ex696]

Is there any specific reason they had it end at Briarwood over Union Turnpike? There must be, because I don't see any logical reasoning behind why the MTA would pick that as a terminal over Union Turnpike, which is around the same distance from the Union Tpke-Main St intersection as Briarwood, and has more service than 75th Avenue.

[Fire Mountain]

15 minutes ago, Ex696 said:

Is there any specific reason they had it end at Briarwood over Union Turnpike? There must be, because I don't see any logical reasoning behind why the MTA would pick that as a terminal over Union Turnpike, which is around the same distance from the Union Tpke-Main St intersection as Briarwood, and has more service than 75th Avenue.

I bet there isn’t. For some odd reason the MTA just feels the need to have a bus terminate at that station which might not even be doable cause where would it sit and everything? That’s not exactly the best terminal spot

[TheNextGen2009]

42 minutes ago, Ex696 said:

Is there any specific reason they had it end at Briarwood over Union Turnpike? There must be, because I don't see any logical reasoning behind why the MTA would pick that as a terminal over Union Turnpike, which is around the same distance from the Union Tpke-Main St intersection as Briarwood, and has more service than 75th Avenue.

Layover space. Having 4 (3 technically) routes would be too much to handle. The Q75 being directed over there would've made things much worse.

Then again, the Q75 has no business anywhere other than Jamaica. The previous plan was fine as is. 

[Ex696]

29 minutes ago, TheNextGen2009 said:

Having 4 (3 technically) routes would be too much to handle. The Q75 being directed over there would've made things much worse.

Why have the Q45 and Q75 at the same time, it just makes sense to have the Q75 be the local on the Union Turnpike or like you said, just have it terminate in Jamaica.

[xD4nn]

2 hours ago, Ex696 said:

Is there any specific reason they had it end at Briarwood over Union Turnpike? There must be, because I don't see any logical reasoning behind why the MTA would pick that as a terminal over Union Turnpike, which is around the same distance from the Union Tpke-Main St intersection as Briarwood, and has more service than 75th Avenue.

Most likely layover space and it probably being based out of Jamaica. 

[Cait Sith]

4 hours ago, Ex696 said:

Is there any specific reason they had it end at Briarwood over Union Turnpike? There must be, because I don't see any logical reasoning behind why the MTA would pick that as a terminal over Union Turnpike, which is around the same distance from the Union Tpke-Main St intersection as Briarwood, and has more service than 75th Avenue.

The turnaround and layover space. Briarwood has a much easier turnaround. It'll utilize the little loop-ish street behind one of the station entrances that allows it to go back onto Main Street easily.

Queens Blvd & Union Turnpike will also have several more routes using that spot, it'll be too much bus traffic going through there.

If you're talking about Main/Union, there's simply no logical turnaround routing that would make sense.

Edited January 12 by Cait Sith

[Q43LTD]

Some random thoughts about this Queens redesign:

The Q9 is proposed to be extended south to 135 Av. I find that funny since its ex GBL brethren have Rockaway Blvd as a short turn, not a full time terminal. Most notably the Q6 and 10.

The Q37 being extended to JFK is kind of similar as if the Q77 were extended to JFK. 2 options from Queens Blvd, 2 options from Jamaica Terminal

[B35 via Church]

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Ugh...they're so "creative" when it comes to some of these other routes, and all of a sudden the creative juices stop when it comes time to figure out a layover space...SMH...

Layover & turnaround scenarios is something I strongly believe planners flat out ignore.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

My issue with the setup is that they're basically giving both of those neighborhoods the same levels of service that "mainline" Woodhaven Blvd/Cross Bay Blvd gets. I think that's overkill. For example, weekend service is every 15 minutes, whereas right now it's hourly on each of the two branches. I think doubling the frequencies would be fair...quadrupling...not so much...

Lol... I wouldn't preserve ending buses in Hamilton Beach because they're overserving both Hamilton Beach & Old Howard Beach.... Quite frankly, I don't see that level of service to either branch being upheld anyway - regardless of which branch(es) trips are terminating in...

If they don't leave things as they are with the current Q11 down there, I can easily see a scenario where they have alternating trips [not serving Old Howard Beach and Hamilton Beach (whether they'd have such trips ending at Pitkin, or ending somewhere in Lindenwood, or something another)] & [serving both Old Howard Beach & Hamilton Beach (with these trips ending in Old Howard Beach, as per the final plan)], if they're going to keep those proposed service levels....

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I mean to a certain extent, I can understand attempting to avoid congested areas, but not when you avoid major hubs and transfer points because of it...especially the sole subway connection on that end of the route...

I don't disagree... Just stupid all the way around to stub the thing like that.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I guess I got a bit ahead of myself when making that statement...I definitely can't stand the B53 (and especially the fact that they combined the Broadway route with the Williamsburg/Greenpoint route)...as for that segment of the Q24 west of Broadway Junction, I can't think of something better to replace it than leaving it as is, and I don't think that segment of Broadway should be left without bus service, so I'd just leave the Q24/B46 as-is.

This isn't to say I necessarily support it, but I do understand why they'd want to cut the B46 back to Woodhull (even moreso than them wanting to cut the Q24 back to B'way Junction.... again).... However, no parts of that reason should ever be to justify a route like that B53.... I'm of the firm belief that they really/ultimately want all B46 service (local & SBS) ending at Woodhull.... While they still got the B47 at Woodhull for now anyway, I still can't get over their proposing to end the B15 at Montrose , of all places...

For the sake of discussion I guess, regarding your last statement there, while I'm not all that wild about a Broadway route, I wouldn't so much mind something running b/w Woodhull Hospital & B'way Junction.... The primary purpose would of course be for mere coverage, with the secondary purpose being for taking the Q24 & B47 off Broadway - over taking the B46 away from WBP & the B15 from Woodhull as the MTA proposed in that Brooklyn network revamp...

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Ah...got it...the Q30 is basically the existing Q30 QCC short-turns, while the Q75 is the Little Neck portion of the Q30 rerouted via Union Turnpike to end at Briarwood.

Yep... Very strange way to break up the current Q30... Not in favor of that impending Q75 in the slightest; not sure which I despise more - it, or the Q88 proposed in the previous draft... If it's anything I'd propose changing when it comes to HHE/LNP, it's to have the Q12 & the Q30 both end there somehow - I've always thought there was value in connecting those 2 routes.... The hell with extending the Q12 to LIRR Great Neck; that would significantly compromise the route for the sake of an exponential increase in ridership (similar to my sentiment regarding extending the Q44 to Fordham)... But yeah, if it came down to these 3 ways of serving the eastern portion of HHE, I'm 100% a proponent of doing so by way of the current Q30....

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

To clarify, I would have Q36 buses via Hillside Avenue-Little Neck Parkway-LIE Service Road-Community Drive.

Q43 buses would run via Hillside Avenue and Langdale Street to LIJ

Q110 buses would run via Jamaica Avenue all the way to the 257th Street (as much as I agree with LIRR Floral Park from a connectivity point of view, I think NIMBYs are too much of an issue in that area).

Q82 would also run to 257th Street and provide a connection to Hillside Avenue from that end of Jamaica Avenue (I don't see a need for the Q2, Q82, and the n1/n6 to all run towards Belmont Racetrack and provide service to Hillside Avenue).

So I see.

When it comes to serving Queens patrons, I'm not considering the n1/n6 because they're not open door services in Queens... Queens patrons proximate to the county line aren't remotely taking n1's & n6's to circumnavigate taking Q2's.... The reason I don't take issue with the impending Q82, is because I see it as more of (but not completely) a complement to the Q2 - as opposed to a supplement of it (which I'm of the belief is the basis of the point of contention/disapproval)... With the Q110 ending up being stripped from Hempstead av, the Q2 would be overburdened a bit (if it were to be the only route serving Hempstead av)... Considering all the stops being removed from Hollis av, dwell times at the remaining stops are going to significantly increase; the Q2 carries heavy along Hollis av.... Even being that the Q2 would be more frequent, I think riders (Hempstead av) will increasingly grow to be fed up with what could potentially happen along Hollis av... This is where the Q82 comes in..... The real question is, how many/what percent of Hempstead av. area patrons are seeking 179th , in comparison to Jamaica Center.... I wouldn't know if the latter comes all that close to the former, given the amount of folks typically gunning for Q2's over Q110's out there...

Gun to my head decision, for the sake of running an MTA route to North Shore Hospital, I'd just extend the Q30 the 1 stop & call it a day.... I would not run a service like the QT34 all day, for fear of a severe lack of total ridership..... Lastly, while running the Q110 to 257th is a great contingency plan to avoid dealing with NIMBY's, I don't think they're nearly as much a problem/as potent like they were when it came down to the suggestion of running the Q79 to LIRR Floral Park back then..... I know its taboo to talk about on these forums, but while it's still predominantly old money Whites out there, new money Asians have been & still are snatching up property in that central western part of Nassau County; that whole Floral Park - New Hyde Park - North New Hyde Park - Garden City Park region.... Unlike those old money Whites of yesteryear, the Indian population are making their presence known on public transit too - whether it's on the n22, n24, or on the LIRR Main Line at Merillon, New Hyde Park, and Floral Park itself....

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Yes, I agree...the Q67 already provides the quicker/more direct route to the  anyway, so it's better to let the Q39 focus on serving QBP directly.

I just wish they had the Q39 run with the Q67 between 55th av/58th st & 48th/Laurel Hill.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Hmm...definitely an interesting concept...I wonder how many Section 5 residents take the Bx23 down to PBP for the Q50 rather than getting a grand tour of their own neighborhood...

If they can catch a 1-2-3-4-5 trip (meaning, the trips from PBP that serve section 1 first & section 5 last, before running back down to PBP), that would be pretty damn savvy.... I never paid attention if anyone's actually doing that.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

No, as odd as it might seem, I'm thinking of the old Q22A route...I'd have it go up Norton-Bayswater-Mott...I know that the area isn't super high-density, but I definitely didn't like the way the MTA made it seem as if it's Todt Hill or the far northern section of Douglaston or some other area with mansions that doesn't warrant bus service...I mean there's apartment buildings along those blocks of Mott west of the  station...I don't think a standalone shuttle would really serve that area properly, and an extension of the Q22 down to the old Q22A terminal would be somewhat more of a backtrack...I think Far Rockaway could use a connection up to Cross Bay anyway (meaning, a counterpart to the Q53 out in Rockaway Park), and I think this accomplishes it without duplicating the Q22 too much.

So you don't think it deserved the old S60 treatment huh .... Jokes aside, to be perfectly honest, IDK what those patrons want when it comes to public bus service... I never got the sense they were all that fond of the Q22a back when that existed... IDK if it's a case of not wanting buses running through their area full time, or at all (like out in Breezy Point)..... Running Q52's in particular through there though just seems wildly excessive - even given the general idea of wanting to extend that route to Far Rockaway.... I'm not even talking about anything relating to turning radii.. To give an example of what I mean, I couldn't imagine running the Bx5 through an area like Country Club... IDK if there was ever any truth to it, but supposedly at one point, they had artics running on the Bx13... I would've liked to have seen that - better yet, rode on it.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

To clarify, you're referring to the proposed Q38 only (meaning the Furmanville Road, 63rd Drive, etc segment), correct? Or would this also include the Eliot Avenue segment (current Q38, proposed Q14)?

The impending Q38 (via Penelope, 63rd dr, etc.).

Edited January 13 by B35 via Church

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

On 1/8/2024 at 5:04 AM, B35 via Church said:

Q31: Yeah, it can be given another number or whatever, but the one thing I wouldn't have a route of sorts do, is serve Westchester Square... Waste of time, for the intended purpose of the route AFAIC.

Q36: When you started the comment by saying "Quite honestly, if that's the proposed routing why bother serving Hillside Avenue.", I'm taking that to mean you're referencing the whole route - as if to say, why is it going Hillside-Springfield-Jamaica-LNP, instead of staying on Jamaica av all the way to LNP; like you were trying to preserve it serving the length of LNP (hence my previous reply)..... In any case, given that you're talking about a local/LTD setup along Jamaica av, the only question I really have here is, where would you have the Q36 ending on the eastern end of the route? 257th/Jericho Tpke, LIRR LNP, LIRR Floral Park, or something else?

Q38: An extension to the from Middle Village in general, would supplement a significant amount of folks that currently use the Q54 to/from Brooklyn (which, given how unreliable the thing is, could use some consistent help).... Ending it at Lorimer subway specifically would not also connect it to the , but would (IMO) be more of a viable area to terminate a bus route, over, say, having it terminate at Graham like the old B18 or like an older rendition of the B13 used to.... Instead, buses could layover on either side of the triangle (Meeker/Metropolitan)... So to answer your question, buses (from Fresh Pond/Metropolitan) would continue on Metropolitan - to Grand - to Union - back to Metropolitan, to terminate.... I wouldn't subject buses to the more eastern portion of the Brooklyn portion of Metropolitan.... Too much truck traffic over there around Morgan, specifically....

Q67: Could've sworn I had a map for it, but I had one rendition/idea of it running to the Forest View Crescent apts. (this was before they barred buses terminating on the same side of the apartments along Union Tpke), and another rendition/idea of it running to that area where Cooper runs into Myrtle... I'll redraw the latter when I get home later.... But as for that QT77, that shit screamed potential & utter failure on multiple levels....

Q82: I don't entirely disagree with the sentiment, but I just want to touch on the n6 point right quick (are they really running n6 short turns to UBS?  wow, what a waste of resources).... The n6 won't factor into anything in this regard.... It obviously doesn't run inside that terminal (where the Q2/Q110 currently ends) to pick up those folks.... It'll also be no different than the phenomenon with the Q43/n22 by the county line... Virtually nobody in Queens walks back to catch a Jamaica bound n22 at Cherry lane... Everybody & their mammas all pile up at that first stop of the WB Q43 - even though there's only a short block difference or so between that last WB stop in Nassau on the n22 & the first Q43 pickup stop.... The difference in distance between Hempstead/225th (which is technically the 2nd WB pickup stop of the current Q2/Q110) & the last n6 WB stop in Nassau is greater/longer....

Q31: The area around Westchester Square isn't exactly that close to ether the Q44 or Q50 (it's not insanely far, but it can be a hassle to get to either). Plus there's a bunch of route that hit he location going to other parts of the Bronx, so I don't see it necessarily being a waste. Plus if it serves HMC, it can replace the Bx24 (and then that could so something else past Westchester Square). 

Q36: I don't think I would have everything going up to Little Neck LIRR, so it would be a split between that and LIRR Floral Park. How the split depends on the frequencies provided for such a route, but I'm okay with the existing headways along Little Neck Parkway. 

Q38: Yeah I don't think anything should be terminating at Graham Ave  either. I personally don't have too many problems with such an extension. Have you considered potentially sending it out to the Waterfront to replace the Q59? Perhaps ending it by North 6th Street near the ferry stop & parks or something. It would provide it with a more unique purpose and serve a little more of commercial Williamsburg in the process.

With such a proposal though, I would trim the Q38 to end at Junction & Queens Boulevards with the Q72 (first stop would be the existing stop on 63rd Drive south of Queens Boulevard) it were to be extended that far, I think I would cut the Q38 on the eastern end and have it terminate at the Q72 stop at Junction & Queens Boulevards. The Q59 can take over the Q38s section out to 108th Street since it would be streamlined in Brooklyn. I think trading that whole tour it does through the waterfront and along Grand St/Metropolitan Ave in Williamsburg for 62nd Drive/63rd Road would still make the proposed Q59 a shorter and more reliable route than the existing one. 

Q67: I guess my one concern is that it doesn't hit the  directly in that area. It comes close but it is a bit of a walk, and with the industrial ridership on weekdays + the schoolkids going to Christ The King and any subway commuters, it is used. However on weekends not as much because those three groups are very little (or non-existent). Not to say I don't disagree with an extension as Fresh Pond Road/Metropolitan is basically done due to available space in the area. IDK how the Q67 would get to Cooper/Myrtle under your proposal, but that one may hit the  in some way or another I suppose. 

Q82: Regarding UBS Arena in particular, while I see your point regarding post-event ridership, the EB n1 and n6 UBS Arena stop on Hempstead Turnpike is walkable to the arena itself. Plus the fewer stops overall because of it being closed-door in Queens, and I think you could see some event goers gravitate towards that route in particular. Especially since the n6 local alone would be more frequent (add the n1 and n6X in the mix on weekdays, and it's no contest). Other than that, yeah I guess we'll just have to see how everything else turns out if the Q82 ends up being part of the final plan. I would think that it would since it was there since the very beginning, but you never know.

On 1/9/2024 at 2:16 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

 

To add onto my comments from this thread, after some thought and discussion, I'd like to modify my earlier comments (from almost 2 years ago...how time flies...or more likely...how long this whole thing has dragged on for...)

Anyway, for the QM11 reroute to Kew Gardens, I agree with you, since it's the only Downtown express route in that area (so people coming off the Queens Village expresses have the option to transfer to this or the QM65). Like you said, with the Atlantic Ticket being so popular (before they foolishly killed it), it probably would've been faster for most passengers to take the LIRR from that section of Queens to Atlantic Terminal for the subway, but I guess now that Atlantic Ticket isn't an option, I guess that makes the QM65 a bit stronger of a route. At the height of rush hour, the QM7 should continue running straight to Union Turnpike & Main Street.

For LeFrak, one idea I'd try my hand at is seeing if the LeFrak section of the QM10/11/40 could be extended out to College Point. Probably the simplest way would be to have it start at the Q25 terminal, and follow the Q25 route down to the Whitestone Expressway, Then go down through the Whitestone/GCP and get off at HHE/108th Street, serve LeFrak City, and continue down the route...outbound would be a bit more difficult, since buses would have to go through the Junction Blvd/HHE intersection, but it would still technically directly serve part of the complex (and if riders really need to get to 57th Avenue specifically and can't walk it out, there's the Q14 available to transfer to). I definitely agree with separating the 63rd Drive services from the LeFrak services.

On the Manhattan side, I generally think buses should be using the Queens-Midtown Tunnel wherever possible...ideally most Queens buses would be using the BM5 route, but having all those buses on layover by 57th & 1st or 57th & 3rd/Lexington, and then having all those buses turning from 57th onto 5th would probably prove problematic.

I'd try to at least give some more options via the Queens-Midtown Tunnel, though. I think having the 3rd Avenue routes run down Lexington would be manageable, since there aren't as many 3rd Avenue variants as there are 6th Avenue variants. I'd also have some more trips running across 34th Street towards Hudson Yards (I think the MTA had the right idea with that...basically take the super-express trips and run them across to Hudson Yards to provide more coverage...but they picked random routes).

For Hudson Yards service, I'd have a few QM2, QM5, and QM20 trips operate to Hudson Yards (say, every 20 minutes or so from 6am - 8am and 4:30pm - 6:30pm peak direction). Those routes already have the super-express trips in the evening, and don't run near the LIRR, so their riders don't have easy access to the Penn Station area. Then adjustments could be made from there. 

The QM65 might be a stronger route I suppose with the elimination of the Atlantic Ticket. My question is, by how? 

As far as College Point goes, IDK exactly what the demand is there for College Point. However I don't believe it's large enough to have a dedicated route for it, especially given the extra mileage/runtime that would be incurred as a result of it. I see riders up there more content with taking Q25s and Q65s to the . The Horace Harding corridor as a better opportunity given the nearby density, demographics, and accessibility to get across the highway. I think it would be more useful if you use that to send QM10s/QM40s across the park and out towards Electchester or Fresh Meadows as a rush hour local variant of the QM5 (while having QM5/QM35s operate express after a certain point). Even greater benefit for QM5 riders, and the savings from any runtime decrease + frequency changes would be reallocated to the QM10/QM40. 

As far as using the Queens-Midtown Tunnel, as long as there is no PM LIE HOV lane in effect I would avoid routing more outbound buses down that way. Queens Boulevard is better flowing despite the chokepoints along the way. The LIE in Maspeth is terrible in the afternoon, and adding more buses down that route would subject to that traffic. 

There's also like one or two SX trips max on each of the QM routes. So if you were to go for something like that you would basically have to choose one of the two routes:

• Bay Terrace/Bayside/Whitestone
• Union Turnpike

Quite frankly I don't see Hudson Yards being all that hot to have multiple routes running primarily dedicated to serving it, so if I had to pick and choose one, I would likely go with Union Turnpike since there are more options available to make it a worthwhile route, like possibly making stops along Queens Boulevard. The far eastern parts of Queens in that area would have the QM5, which if you add in the QM10/QM40 proposal I mentioned previously, would make the QM5 competitive or faster than the existing scheduled QM5 SX. I don't see nearly the same amount of opportunities with a route out of Bay Terrace.

On 1/10/2024 at 5:32 PM, NewFlyer 230 said:

I am not a fan of the QM5 staying on Union Turnpike. Instead of it looping around 64th Ave to head back to Union Turnpike the route should continue north on 188th street and make a left on the Horace Harding and I would have the QM5 serve a new area that doesn’t have express service. My QM5 would stop at Utopia Parkway, 164th street, Parsons Blvd, Kissena Blvd, 150th Street and Main Street then it will continue onto the L.I.E to Midtown. The QM1 would pick up the slack on Union Turnpike between 188th street and Main Street along with the QM6. 
 

On 1/10/2024 at 7:58 PM, MysteriousBtrain said:

As long as we're on this topic, the QM Union Tpke routes in the new plan was actually the one good exp proposal. Imo should have kept it like that. 

Another thing I would change is giving the QM63/64/68 direct access to Bellevue during AM hours. It's easy access from FDR and idk why it would be skipped if the stop is retained during PM hrs. (Although 2 Av is the added, I don't see this stop being a suitable replacement if there's enough Bellevue riders that complain.)

 

On 1/10/2024 at 8:52 PM, NewFlyer 230 said:

What I’m attempting to do with the QM5 via Horace Harding (188th street-Main Street) is cater to new riders while also strengthening out the route. The MTA is taking the cheap way out by keeping everything the same but overall express bus usage is down compared to what it was back in 2005/2006 when the MTA takeover occurred. I remember a time when the QM4 would have a line for it at some of the tops and nowadays a QM4 can skip a stop like Kissena Blvd during the middle of rush hour. 
The QM4 runs on Jewel Ave so I’d rather it doing that instead of having some combined service with the QM4. 
 

My problem with the Queens express network is that most of the routes are outdated and with the redesigned there was no effort made to at least expand service to increase service. In a later post I can explain the routing I’d have some routes do in Manhattan. I’m not all too sure how the 3rd Ave express routes do like the QM32, QM44, QM35 and etc but my plan would be to eliminate some of the weak performing 3rd Ave routes in favor of route that terminate around Broadway and Houston Street in that part of the city. Not only does it serve a new area the Queens express routes don’t serve but it can help when the QBL is undergoing construction and train service is slow. 

I also agree that the QM1/QM5/QM6 routes were pretty good in the previous proposal. The stops though needed some changes, and I am more or less onboard with @NewFlyer 230with the stop selections along Horace Harding. That is why make sure to express (no pun intended) this sentiment in any comments to the redesign team, elected officials as well at meetings. Also if you know anyone who takes those routes and would benefit from it, also let them know and tell them to share their thoughts as well.

I actually think the previous routes were generally well received, however in an effort to please everyone (and no one at the same time), they basically undid everything. The routes now largely look the same, but there are reductions in frequency, so it's not the same (plus they insist on having the QM6 run non-stop west of 188th Street at all times, smh). I can understand frequency reductions if the new route's catchment area is smaller, but they're the same so what gives?? It's a slap punch in the face to an area which relies on express buses more than most other areas in the borough. Those headways aren't just some minor details, those matter too.

 

On 1/10/2024 at 5:34 PM, xD4nn said:

I would have to agree that having the Q75 is a waste. Little Neck loses direct access to LIRR Jamaica and the Q36 would be even slower under this plan. the Q75 should be routed to somewhere other than Little Neck. The existing Q30 should remain intact. They are prioritizing QCC for no apparent reason which I have mentioned previously. 

 

On 1/11/2024 at 4:06 PM, Lex said:

I have a very hard time believing that Little Neck/Douglaston residents care nearly as much about that connection as you do. If they cared that much about getting the LIRR, they would probably gun for the Port Washington Branch or Queens Village over Jamaica. The far longer bus trip offers no real benefit aside from having more options in Jamaica to/from Manhattan/Brooklyn, which quickly becomes a wash because that's all it has going for it. Maybe you could argue that the subway connection is worse, but even that has ways around it (ending in Kew Gardens or Forest Hills, the latter having more Manhattan-bound subway options and a Zone 1 LIRR station a short distance from Queens Boulevard).

 

On 1/10/2024 at 5:32 PM, NewFlyer 230 said:

The Q75 that the MTA proposed is a waste. In my opinion the route should travel down 73rd Street between Springfield Blvd all the way to Main Street. Then I would have it take the Q74’s old route via Vleigh Place to Union Turnpike to Queens Blvd. The MTA is giving Union Turnpike in general a lot more service than needed. Having the Q75 run down 73rd will allow opportunity for new ridership and connectivity and that was taken away in the last proposed plan.
 

@Lex beat me to it. Not only do I not see Little Neck residents mad at losing direct service to Jamaica LIRR, I don't see them taking issue if they lost all direct service to Jamaica (period). They'll still have it with the Q36 on weekdays but most people are not going to Jamaica on the thing. The problem there is that every single draft it's been something different proposed for Horace Harding and Little Neck in terms of east-west route and subway access:

First Draft

• QT12 via Northern Blvd to/from Main Street
• QT34 via HHE/Winchester/Hillside to/from 179th Street  
• QT87 via Jewel/73rd Ave/Springfield/HHE to/from 71st Avenue

Second Draft

• Q45 via LNP & Hillside to/from 179th Street  
• Q88 via HHE to/from Woodhaven Boulevard

Third Draft (Current)

• Q36 via LNP/Jamaica Ave/Springfield Blvd/Hillside to/from 179th Street
• Q75 via HHE/188th/Union Turnpike to/from Briarwood  

^^^Like, they need to make up their damn minds here.

I generally agree with @NewFlyer 230 in opposition on it serving Briarwood (especially the way it does), however I'm not on board with that proposal because it still doesn't address a major issue created with this new draft, and that is the lack of a proper eastern Horace Harding route. The current Q30 hits most areas, however I do think there should be such a route headed out to Kissena Boulevard (since the Q30 misses the entire Pomonok area (which is very dense) and Queens College. The proposed Q75 is the worst of both worlds: it misses Utopia Parkway where you have all the schools (Francis Lewis HS, JHS 216, and even PS 73 further down) while serving a subway station which is hard to access from the street level due to the roadway configuration/geography in that area and still only has the  during most commuting hours.

I get that running along 73rd Avenue would more or less fill in a coverage gap, but I can't agree with it coming at the expense of a Horace Harding route like that. Plus with it running on 73rd Avenue in that fashion, you miss a lot of the commercial areas / ridership generators which are along Horace Harding. That is why I've never been in agreeance with a route running the full length of 73rd Avenue like that. Also, I think they had the right idea of having former 73rd Avenue routes head to 71st Avenue subway station for subway access. Union Turnpike has too much going on, and the Q64 could use the help.

Like I mentioned previously, I would have the Q75 run along Horace Harding between Little Neck Parkway and Kissena Boulevard, down Kissena Boulevard to Jewel Ave, and via the Q64 to/from 71st Avenue subway station. The rush section would take place once it hits 188th Street like they proposed on the current Q75, with only the following stops:

• HHE / Utopia Pkwy
• HHE / 164th
• HHE/ Parsons Blvd
• Kissena Blvd/HHE
• Jewel Ave/Kissena Blvd
• Jewel Ave/Main St
• Jewel Ave/Park Dr E. (for Park Access)
• 71st Avenue  

About the same mileage and runtime given that it doesn't have to backtrack so far south as it does to get to Briarwood. That and the fact that the travel time on the subway would be less. I also didn't have a problem with running the Q12 down there in some form, I do think there's some demand for areas along Northern Boulevard and Flushing. 

[B35 via Church]

16 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Q31: The area around Westchester Square isn't exactly that close to ether the Q44 or Q50 (it's not insanely far, but it can be a hassle to get to either). Plus there's a bunch of route that hit he location going to other parts of the Bronx, so I don't see it necessarily being a waste. Plus if it serves HMC, it can replace the Bx24 (and then that could so something else past Westchester Square). 

Q36: I don't think I would have everything going up to Little Neck LIRR, so it would be a split between that and LIRR Floral Park. How the split depends on the frequencies provided for such a route, but I'm okay with the existing headways along Little Neck Parkway. 

Q38: Yeah I don't think anything should be terminating at Graham Ave  either. I personally don't have too many problems with such an extension. Have you considered potentially sending it out to the Waterfront to replace the Q59? Perhaps ending it by North 6th Street near the ferry stop & parks or something. It would provide it with a more unique purpose and serve a little more of commercial Williamsburg in the process.

With such a proposal though, I would trim the Q38 to end at Junction & Queens Boulevards with the Q72 (first stop would be the existing stop on 63rd Drive south of Queens Boulevard) it were to be extended that far, I think I would cut the Q38 on the eastern end and have it terminate at the Q72 stop at Junction & Queens Boulevards. The Q59 can take over the Q38s section out to 108th Street since it would be streamlined in Brooklyn. I think trading that whole tour it does through the waterfront and along Grand St/Metropolitan Ave in Williamsburg for 62nd Drive/63rd Road would still make the proposed Q59 a shorter and more reliable route than the existing one. 

Q67: I guess my one concern is that it doesn't hit the  directly in that area. It comes close but it is a bit of a walk, and with the industrial ridership on weekdays + the schoolkids going to Christ The King and any subway commuters, it is used. However on weekends not as much because those three groups are very little (or non-existent). Not to say I don't disagree with an extension as Fresh Pond Road/Metropolitan is basically done due to available space in the area. IDK how the Q67 would get to Cooper/Myrtle under your proposal, but that one may hit the  in some way or another I suppose. 

Q82: Regarding UBS Arena in particular, while I see your point regarding post-event ridership, the EB n1 and n6 UBS Arena stop on Hempstead Turnpike is walkable to the arena itself. Plus the fewer stops overall because of it being closed-door in Queens, and I think you could see some event goers gravitate towards that route in particular. Especially since the n6 local alone would be more frequent (add the n1 and n6X in the mix on weekdays, and it's no contest). Other than that, yeah I guess we'll just have to see how everything else turns out if the Q82 ends up being part of the final plan. I would think that it would since it was there since the very beginning, but you never know.

Q31: Westchester Sq. makes for a convenient xfer point, but the problem is that it & Bronx State Hospital are in opposite directions... That's why the Bx21 backdoors to terminate at Westchester Sq. after serving Bronx State Hospital... As long as I have the route connecting to the elsewhere, I don't see not serving Westchester Sq as detrimental... Maybe I should've drawn a map, but the only connection that would be missed out on is the Bx4/4a....

• it would run along the Bx21 b/w Westchester/Waters & Eastchester/Morris Park
• it would run along the Bx31 b/w Waters & Pelham Pkwy
• it would connect with the Bx8 along Westchester av, as well as at Middletown/Crosby
• it would run along the Bx24 along Marconi (I wouldn't have the route u-turn at the Call Center though)
• it would connect with the Bx40/42 at E. Tremont/Bruckner Blvd like the Q50 already does

Speaking of which, the other thing I want to avoid is running the thing on E. Tremont av.... The main point of the route is to serve the bevy of medical facilities in the general area of the Bronx... Anything else is secondary... That's why I'm not overly concerned with not having it serve Westchester Sq.... Something replacing the Bx24 is a Bronx issue & quite frankly, it shouldn't take a route coming from Flushing to accomplish that

Q38: I thought about ending it around Domino Park (and I do see it getting decent usage around there too), but with every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Sally trying the be the next Spielberg with all these dam indie film shoots around & about the general area (leading to all these street closures), I'm rather leery about it.... Regardless, to your point, I don't have a problem with terminating such a route at QB... I mean, I get wanting to run the Q54 & the Q59 together in Brooklyn, but not at the expense/mercy of a B62 that'd skip WBP & with the best proposed Brooklyn route thus far - The B53 </sarcasm>  - Neither of which serves Williamsburg in an easterly-westerly fashion.

Q67: If it's anything that I'd have terminating where they have the impending Q14 doing so, it's the Q18.... I would've liked to have seen the Q18 b/w Woodside av & the LIE branched between running along 65th pl. & 69th st, to then run down the rest of 69th st to shoot across Met. av to Fresh Pond rd.... I have always despised where/how the current Q18 terminates on the southern end of the route....

As for that proposal I had to try to make the Q67 more of a commuter route (the one I had ending on Cooper/Myrtle), I don't think I'm going to revisit it (large in part, because I would like such a route to at least connect to Woodhaven Blvd).... To sum it up, it started on Cooper/71st, then did Cooper-73rd-Cooper-80th-Metropolitan-69th-Borden.... Long story short, I didn't have it serving the .

[Q43LTD]

Now that 63 and 80 combo from the previous draft isn't such a bad idea after all. I guess I was afraid of 80 St losing access to Queens Center. 

[40 to 241st]

I have been thinking to myself about the Bronx- Queens routes the Q50 and Q44 I wasn't sure if I should bring up my proposal for this because of how controversial it can be, but then I thought maybe I should bring it up and see what people think.  

1. Mta originally wanted the Q44 to be extended to fordham of coarse we know that this would be long as shit so they canned this proposal. But there's definitely good demand from Queens to Fordham so I thought why not have the current Q44 and Q50 switch terminals in Queens so then the Q44 won't have to be that long. Just to finalize what I'm trying to say: 

• Q44: Flushing - Fordham 
• Q50: Co-op City- Jamaica 

2. Bx15 can be extended to Laguardia  plus it serves more of the bronx than the Q50 does making a better candidate to go there. 

[Ex696]

18 hours ago, 40 to 241st said:

• Q44: Flushing - Fordham 
• Q50: Co-op City- Jamaica

Too much Q44 through ridership at Flushing, and also, of all routes you could switch the Q44 with, you chose the Q50??

[Ex696]

And also this proposed Q50 would be even longer than the proposed Q44 extension to Fordham, which defeats the point of extending it over the Q44 in the first place.

[40 to 241st]

2 minutes ago, Ex696 said:

And also this proposed Q50 would be even longer than the proposed Q44 extension to Fordham, which defeats the point of extending it over the Q44 in the first place.

If I made the Q50 select would it be faster than the Q44

[Ex696]

1 minute ago, 40 to 241st said:

If I made the Q50 select would it be faster than the Q44

The Q50 section in the Bronx is 7.3 miles, the Q44, with the proposed Fordham extension, is 4.6 miles. making the Q50 a Select bus service route isn't gonna make it faster than the Q44.

[40 to 241st]

1 minute ago, Ex696 said:

The Q50 section in the Bronx is 7.3 miles, the Q44, with the proposed Fordham extension, is 4.6 miles. making the Q50 a Select bus service route isn't gonna make it faster than the Q44.

Thanks for letting me know anyways we have the Bx15 we can extend that. 

[MysteriousBtrain]

25 minutes ago, 40 to 241st said:

Thanks for letting me know anyways we have the Bx15 we can extend that. 

Since the Bx15 somehow became even shorter than the Bx41 it would be a good candidate to go into LaGuardia. Needs to be a little bit more useful than being a "Third Avenue bus"

[40 to 241st]

35 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Since the Bx15 somehow became even shorter than the Bx41 it would be a good candidate to go into LaGuardia. Needs to be a little bit more useful than being a "Third Avenue bus"

Thank you so much. I don’t know why people want the Bx41 to serve LaGuardia rather than the Bx15. If the Bx15 goes there it can receive a decent ridership boast. 

[TDL]

https://www.rockawave.com/articles/letters-1-5-24/