Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Lawrence St

Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

Right someone sees a line on a map and say "omg they're reducing service 20 min headway" but resources should be allocated accordingly.

You, uh, haven't seen the Q35, have you? (I'm not even getting into some of the other routes, mostly because the only other ones I'm really willing to speak about are the Q44 and Q53, both of which are also getting shafted, along with the corridors they serve.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I'm not sure why you are praising this plan, when it calls for considerable service cuts.  There is no way that people should be forced to wait ONE HOUR during RUSH HOUR for a bus, when they may wait every 20 - 30 minutes currently. That is not an improvement.  You are looking at just the routes. I am looking at the cuts to the service spans AND the frequencies and the fact that there are NO alternatives in some cases.  Cutting bus service at 9:30pm back to Queens is absurd, when buses currently run until 12:30am at night. That's a three hour cut to the span of service.

You also talked the need for more direct trips. Well riders will be forced to make more transfers under this plan, thus elongating their trips, so I'm not sure how this plan makes service more direct. The routes will be more direct, but service won't be more direct for the actual passengers.

I more-so like the opportunities the plan presents. I realize some service spans and frequencies are being reduced. They should add a filter to the interactive map of which buses won't run after 10PM etc, because those spans are hidden. Some purple lines run all night, Some end at 10, some Green lines are not 24 hours, etc.

I've also seen light buses rolling around, so I can see the angle they are coming from as well.

As for "more direct", an example would be, one day I was at Springfield and Hempstead Ave and wanted to go to Green Acres. The N1 is not the most frequent route and I wouldn't have made it to Elmont Rd in time for the next trip, but a Q27 was available. So I took the Q27 to 120th Ave, then had to wait for the pokey Q77 (no timed transfers), to transfer to the Q5.  With the new plan, it's the QT71 to the QT42 (or probably QT43 after people complain.)

Or just going from that same intersection to Northern Blvd would be a chore as well. The Q27 stops short then heads west to Flushing. With the plan I can take the QT71 straight up, and even beyond to stop by Unos.

If I want to go from Linden and Sutphin to Francis Lewis and Linden, no crosstown bus. I have to take the Q6 to Jamaica, then the Q4 or walk over to the bus terminal for the Q77.

There are many examples. And yes, it's currently hub and spoke system because of where the subway terminates, but there are no inner or outer rims, to connect them all so there's a lot of back tracking of up to an hour for simple trips that in a car would be like 10 mins. 

From those examples, and complaints just talking with people and fellow riders over the years, it's possible that the interconnection of routes would require less vehicles, reduce crowding and congestion going to the hub, as capacity the at the maximum load point would no longer require as many buses since riders could use "more direct" ways to get to their destination.  Another example, some riders wouldn't need or want to go to the (E) or (J) if there was an easy way to get to the (A) (why wasn't the (A) at least extended to Jamaica anyway?) .

 

4 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

1. The premise for the grid network they're forcing on us was that offering more frequent service would reduce the impact of transferring, and the need for direct routes. I don't agree with a grid network for queens to begin with, but if they can't even get the frequency part sorted out properly, what was the point? 

 

2. That's just simply not true. The 90th Street station has no bus in the surrounding area, so nobody is transferring from anywhere. The Q49 only feeds in to (7) because of the connections and the heavy commercial activity in that area. Also, have you seen the loads of people on the Q33 going to/from 74th Street? They beat the amount of people waiting at 82nd Street by a landslide. 

The issue at the malls is because of the lack of enforcement of the bus lanes. At Queens Center Mall, buses are constantly fighting to pull in and out of the bus stops because cars and taxis are hogging up space and idling there. When multiple routes show up and there's this idling, it causes more congestion.

1) This is just a draft right, they'd be sure adjust frequencies once the network was running and they witness crowding, etc.

2) I wasn't referrfing to 90th St, really. As for the Q49 and Q33 most are going to the (E) and (F) probably.

1 hour ago, Lex said:

You, uh, haven't seen the Q35, have you? (I'm not even getting into some of the other routes, mostly because the only other ones I'm really willing to speak about are the Q44 and Q53, both of which are also getting shafted, along with the corridors they serve.)

I've only seen the Q35 a few times on Flatbush Ave.  I've used the Q44 and Q53.  Come to think of it, they may be trying to cut to barebones headway and increase it until the buses are consistently full, this way it will be seen as service increases and not cuts. 

Edited by N6 Limited
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I more-so like the opportunities the plan presents. I realize some service spans and frequencies are being reduced. They should add a filter to the interactive map of which buses won't run after 10PM etc, because those spans are hidden. Some purple lines run all night, Some end at 10, some Green lines are not 24 hours, etc.

I've also seen light buses rolling around, so I can see the angle they are coming from as well.

As for "more direct", an example would be, one day I was at Springfield and Hempstead Ave and wanted to go to Green Acres. The N1 is not the most frequent route and I wouldn't have made it to Elmont Rd in time for the next trip, but a Q27 was available. So I took the Q27 to 120th Ave, then had to wait for the pokey Q77 (no timed transfers), to transfer to the Q5.  With the new plan, it's the QT71 to the QT42 (or probably QT43 after people complain.)

Or just going from that same intersection to Northern Blvd would be a chore as well. The Q27 stops short then heads west to Flushing. With the plan I can take the QT71 straight up, and even beyond to stop by Unos.

If I want to go from Linden and Sutphin to Francis Lewis and Linden, no crosstown bus. I have to take the Q6 to Jamaica, then the Q4 or walk over to the bus terminal for the Q77.

There are many examples. And yes, it's currently hub and spoke system because of where the subway terminates, but there are no inner or outer rims, to connect them all so there's a lot of back tracking of up to an hour for simple trips that in a car would be like 10 mins. 

From those examples, and complaints just talking with people and fellow riders over the years, it's possible that the interconnection of routes would require less vehicles, crowding and congestion going to the hub, as capacity the at the maximum load point would no longer require as many buses since riders could use "more direct" ways to get to their destination.  Another example, some riders wouldn't need or want to go to the (E) or (J) if there was an easy way to get to the (A) (why wasn't the (A) at least extended to Jamaica anyway?) .

 

1) This is just a draft right, they'd be sure adjust frequencies once the network was running and they witness crowding, etc.

2) I wasn't refferfing to 90th St, really. As for the Q49 and Q33 most are going to the (E) and (F) probably.

I've only seen the Q35 a few times on Flatbush Ave.  I've used the Q44 and Q53.  Come to think of it, they may be trying to cut to barebones headway and increase it until the buses are consistently full, this way it will be seen as service increases and not cuts. 

You're not getting it. There has been NO money added to this redesign for Queens. It's supposed to be cost neutral, so there won't be tons of service to add with overcrowding. They actually added some money to the Staten Island redesign and there are still tons of issues with overcrowding.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You're not getting it. There has been NO money added to this redesign for Queens. It's supposed to be cost neutral, so there won't be tons of service to add with overcrowding. They actually added some money to the Staten Island redesign and there are still tons of issues with overcrowding.

I know it's cost neutral.  Basically, they can barely add any service without cutting something else anyway, so they might as well just redesign the network and make it more useful and efficient with NYCDOT's help. As ridership increases, which is what usually happens with redesigns, then maybe  putting in more money won't be such a red flag and possible better farebox recovery ratio could help with that also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I know it's cost neutral.  Basically, they can barely add any service without cutting something else anyway, so they might as well just redesign the network and make it more useful and efficient with NYCDOT's help. As ridership increases, which is what usually happens with redesigns, then maybe  putting in more money won't be such a red flag and possible better farebox recovery ratio could help with that also.

You're not going to get ridership increases when you have hour gaps in service during rush hour. People will ditch the buses and DRIVE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You're not going to get ridership increases when you have hour gaps in service during rush hour. People will ditch the buses and DRIVE. 

Which routes are you referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, N6 Limited said:

Which routes are you referring to?

Several. There's no Sunday express bus service anywhere.  Several express bus lines not only start two hours later, but then have an hour gap in between trips.  Just ridiculous. There are tons of other problems as well.  We've been reaching out to some of the co-ops and condos in Queens and board members have joined my advocacy group. They are FURIOUS. This plan would kill property values all over the borough. Who is going to want to move to large housing developments when there's no bus service?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Million dollar question in that regard is - What are they using as a basis as to who they're so proclaiming they're making trips more direct for?

I'm sorry, but they are throwing out that term way too loosely; almost as if the word "direct" is being used as a nothing more than a mere buzzword to try to get folks to be on board with the plan.... The (final versions of the) routes will roll out whenever they will & the riders will eventually, actually determine whether the routes will be more direct for them...

As far as opting to making a grid out of Queens' network, well until we get more subway stations panning east of Flushing & Jamaica, opting to deconstruct the existing feeder networks based out of those 2 aforementioned areas, simply will not fly for far too many people....

In a general sense, I don't think they went overboard in gridding out the Eastern Queens network. Look at the Q27: They kept the 46th Avenue portion (QT15), the HHE-Jamaica Avenue portion (QT31) and you can even get from Cambria Heights to Flushing on the QT73. Francis Lewis Blvd loses direct access to Jamaica, but south of Hillside, most of the intersecting routes go there anyway, north of the HHE, you're better off going to Flushing for the subway, and between the HHE and Hillside Avenue, both the QT32 & QT33 provide service to Queens Blvd express stations. 

Obviously there are some routing decisions that are head-scratchers (the QT84 comes to mind, especially the Francis Lewis Blvd portion) but I think the basic principle of what they are trying to do is sound.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had not looked over the plan in detail previously, but here is what I think after reviewing it thoroughly:

Overall there are more routes I like than dislike, with most of the issues coming down to either not enough service, frequency wise or span wise, or too much service during late night hours. There are however several route that have glaring issues that frequency cannot change.

Frequency change:

QT3 Jamaica-Williamsburg via Metropolitan Ave

  • Should not have late night service 

QT6 Flushing-Ridgewood via Horace Harding Expwy/Grand Ave

  • Should not have late night service

QT7 Cambria Heights-Spring Creek via Linden Blvd

  • Should not have late night service on weekdays, as it only runs 19 hours on Saturday and Sundays

QT14 Electchester-JFK Airport via Jewel Ave/Lefferts Blvd

  • Should have higher frequency between Electhester and Forest Hills with short turns

QT22 Rockaway Park-Cedarhurst via Rockaway Beach Blvd/Beach Channel Dr

  • Should either be extended to JFK Depot Or Cedarhurst LIRR; Burnside/Rockaway is not a great terminal spot

QT24 Jamaica-Bushwick via Atlantic Ave/Broadway

  • Should not go past Broadway Junction

QT62 Cedarhurst-East New York via Rockaway Blvd

  • Should be truncated to JFK Depot or extended to Cedarhurst LIRR; Burnside/Rockaway is not a great terminal spot

Needs a change in frequency or service span:

  • QT35 Rockaway Park-Brooklyn College via Rockaway Beach Blvd/Flatbush Ave (better frequency)
  • QT38 Jamaica-Queens Village via Hillside/Hollis Aves (longer hours)
  • QT39 Jamaica-Cambria Heights via Hillside/Murdock Ave (24/7 as coverage between Hollis and Linden)
  • QT40 Jamaica-Cambria Heights via Merrick/Linden Blvds (longer span)
  • QT42 Jamaica-Green Acres Mall via Merrick Blvd (longer span)
  • QT43 Jamaica-Rosedale via Guy R. Brewer Blvd/Bedell St (longer span)
  • QT51 Flushing-Bay Terrace via Crocheron Ave/Bell Blvd (Weekdays only at a minimum, not just peak direction)
  • QT54 Jamaica-Williamsburg via Hillside/Metropolitan Aves (24/7, 60 min late nights)
  • QT55 Jamaica-Ridgewood via Jamaica/Myrtle Aves (60 min late nights)
  • QT56 Jamaica-Broadway Junction via Jamaica Ave (60 min late nights)
  • QT58 Flushing-Ridgewood via Corona/Grand Aves (24/7)
  • QT61 East Elmhurst-Columbus Circle via 23/Roosevelt Aves (longer span)
  • QT68 Jamaica-JFK Airport via Liberty Ave/Farmers Blvd (60 min late nights)
  • QT69 Jackson Heights-Hunters Point via Ditmars Blvd/21 St (longer span)
  • QT77 Elmhurst-Long Island City via Eliot Ave/21 St (longer span)
  • QT78 Middle Village-Roosevelt Island via 36 Ave/69 St (60 min late nights)
  • QT80 Astoria-Ridgewood via 30 Ave/58 St (longer span and more frequent during weekdays)
  • QT81 Astoria-Whitestone via Astoria Blvd/150 St (longer span)
  • QT82 Glendale-East Elmhurst via 80/National Sts (longer span and more frequency on weekdays)
  • QT83 Elmhurst-Howard Beach via Woodhaven/Cross Bay Blvds (24/7, 60 min late nights; more frequent overall)
  • QT84 Flushing-Bayside via 20 Ave/Francis Lewis Blvd (longer span)
  • QT86 College Point-Glendale via Main St/Yellowstone Blvd (24/7 to Kew Gardens (60 min); more freuquent overall)
  • QT87 Little Neck-Forest Hills via 73/Jewel Aves (weekday rush more frequent)

Bad:

QT44 SBS Jamaica-Fordham via Main St/Cross Bronx Expwy

  • Should be 24/7

QT50 Pelham Bay-LaGuardia Airport via Buckner Blvd/Roosevelt Ave

  • Bronx should have an airport route, but not the Q50. Something from the West Bronx, over the RFK Bridge.
  • Contradicts the Bronx proposal which maintained rush hour service to Co-op City. Should be left as a Flushing-Pelham Bay/Co-op CIty route

QT52 SBS Elmhurst-Arverne via Woodhaven/Cross Bay Blvds

  • If one had to be eliminated, the Q52 should have been eliminated and the Q53 should have been truncated from Woodside to Elmhurst. 
  • The Q52 side of the Wye already has the better subway service, and not it keeps the better bus connections? Doesn’t make much sense

QT74 Jackson Heights Shuttle

  • Just bring back the Q49 and maybe extend it to Flushing during the rush to maintain the Astoria Blvd connection with Flushing that skips Roosevelt Ave/108 St

QT75 Woodside-Bryant Park

  • Does too much between 48 St and Queens Plaza

Routes the MTA should add for coverage

  • QT90 Little Neck LIRR to Queens Village LIRR via Little Neck Pkwy/260 St/Jamaica Ave (Daily with hourly service outside the rush, timed to connect to the LIRR in either Little Neck or Queens Village)
  • QT91 Glendale (80 St/Myrtle Ave) to Woodside LIRR via 80 St/Grand Ave/65 Pl (Rush hours only)

As for express bus service, while I understand the need for costs to be cut, and that people relay on express buses in Queens, including myself, I would only add Sunday service to these routes, hourly on both:

  • QMT164 Bay Terrace-6 Ave 
  • QMT166 Fresh Meadows-6 Ave 

I would not maintain service on the 73 Ave corridor (QM5) or Union Tpke corridor past 188 St (QM6), as commuters in the area would have access to the QT32, QT33, QT34, or QT36 that would get them to the subway quicker than they would be able to today. 

I also have to disagree with the arguement from BrooklynBus regarding stop eliminations. I think that we need to look at a stop by stop basis of what stops to put back, not what stops to eliminate. I will admit that on some routes the MTA went a little overboard removing the stops, such as the QT12 on Horace Harding, which makes 9 stops between QCM and 188 St, compared to 34 stops on the Q88. But other routes like the Q64, literally stop every block from 164 St to 138 St. With routes like these, looking at what stop to eliminate each time, the trip from 164 St to Forest Hills would end up being maybe 10 or 11 stops, much more than the MTA’s recommendation of 4 stops, but less than the 17 stops it makes today. In this example I would say, start with the 4 stops, and see which you would add back, maybe Parsons Blvd, 150 St, 136 St, and wind up with 7 stops to the subway, a better compromise than what you would have gotten if you reviewed what to eliminate stop by stop.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Several. There's no Sunday express bus service anywhere.  Several express bus lines not only start two hours later, but then have an hour gap in between trips.  Just ridiculous. There are tons of other problems as well.  We've been reaching out to some of the co-ops and condos in Queens and board members have joined my advocacy group. They are FURIOUS. This plan would kill property values all over the borough. Who is going to want to move to large housing developments when there's no bus service?

Yes some of the times are a bit ridiculous. Does the MTA have Automatic Passenger Counters on their bus? Someone mentioned that in another thread. But, If there are only 5 people on the bus on Sundays...

24 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

In a general sense, I don't think they went overboard in gridding out the Eastern Queens network. Look at the Q27: They kept the 46th Avenue portion (QT15), the HHE-Jamaica Avenue portion (QT31) and you can even get from Cambria Heights to Flushing on the QT73. Francis Lewis Blvd loses direct access to Jamaica, but south of Hillside, most of the intersecting routes go there anyway, north of the HHE, you're better off going to Flushing for the subway, and between the HHE and Hillside Avenue, both the QT32 & QT33 provide service to Queens Blvd express stations. 

Obviously there are some routing decisions that are head-scratchers (the QT84 comes to mind, especially the Francis Lewis Blvd portion) but I think the basic principle of what they are trying to do is sound.

I agree, buses that go to train stations and routes that allow you to avoid those areas if it's unnecessary.

The QT84s routing looks like it's to take over the Q25 and Q76 , serve the (7) , Shopping Center on 20th Ave, and connect to Bayside.

Edited by N6 Limited
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

1) This is just a draft right, they'd be sure adjust frequencies once the network was running and they witness crowding, etc.

2) I wasn't referrfing to 90th St, really. As for the Q49 and Q33 most are going to the (E) and (F) probably.

I've only seen the Q35 a few times on Flatbush Ave.  I've used the Q44 and Q53.  Come to think of it, they may be trying to cut to barebones headway and increase it until the buses are consistently full, this way it will be seen as service increases and not cuts. 

1) Just because it's a draft doesn't make any more justified to come out with an overall terrible bus network. My area basically loses most useful subway connections, will see less night service, loses bus service completely on several roads, and leaves actual coverage gaps. Most outer neighborhoods in SE Queens lose overnight bus service altogether. The one bus running 24/7 is the Springfield Blvd bus, which wouldn't even go to Jamaica or Flushing. It's insulting to even consider this a draft plan, when all these service cuts are being proposed.

And what makes you think they are going to adjust frequencies properly? All they have been doing is cutting bus service in any way possible.

 

2) Okay, then why did you mention that there people are not staying on buses because of Roosevelt Avenue to begin with? You're contradicting yourself here. 

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

In a general sense, I don't think they went overboard in gridding out the Eastern Queens network. Look at the Q27: They kept the 46th Avenue portion (QT15), the HHE-Jamaica Avenue portion (QT31) and you can even get from Cambria Heights to Flushing on the QT73. Francis Lewis Blvd loses direct access to Jamaica, but south of Hillside, most of the intersecting routes go there anyway, north of the HHE, you're better off going to Flushing for the subway, and between the HHE and Hillside Avenue, both the QT32 & QT33 provide service to Queens Blvd express stations. 

Obviously there are some routing decisions that are head-scratchers (the QT84 comes to mind, especially the Francis Lewis Blvd portion) but I think the basic principle of what they are trying to do is sound.

Not everybody is going to the subway. Flushing and Jamaica are major commercial areas as well. Plus, there's the connection to other bus routes there. You can't just tell those people to go to Union Turnpike because, they're not trying to go there. 

A Francis Lewis Boulevard route doesn't make any sense because people south of Hillside aren't going north of Hillside in large amounts. Those that do, are not going to destinations around Francis Lewis Boulevard.

Also, the walks to the bus stops on the east-west route aren't necessarily a piece of cake. You need to consider that most people have to walk to Francis Lewis Boulevard. With how they're spacing bus stops on all these routes, they'll need to walk to Francis Lewis Boulevard then walk up, or walk up the avenue blocks to the specific avenue, then walk to the bus stops. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jaf0519 said:

I had not looked over the plan in detail previously, but here is what I think after reviewing it thoroughly:

Overall there are more routes I like than dislike, with most of the issues coming down to either not enough service, frequency wise or span wise, or too much service during late night hours. There are however several route that have glaring issues that frequency cannot change.

****Local Bus List****

As for express bus service, while I understand the need for costs to be cut, and that people relay on express buses in Queens, including myself, I would only add Sunday service to these routes, hourly on both:

  • QMT164 Bay Terrace-6 Ave 
  • QMT166 Fresh Meadows-6 Ave 

I would not maintain service on the 73 Ave corridor (QM5) or Union Tpke corridor past 188 St (QM6), as commuters in the area would have access to the QT32, QT33, QT34, or QT36 that would get them to the subway quicker than they would be able to today. 

 

I would add the QT82 under 'Bad'. It does too much of everything in that area and fails at it. The Penelope Ave sections of the Q38, the Q29, and Q47 should remain.

I don't see what the QT32 and crew have to do with the express bus. The QT34 and QT36 don't even go to Union Turnpike, they go to Jamaica. How is that faster?

Sure, Union Turnpike and 73rd Ave riders might get to the subway faster than under the existing network, but that's rather irrelevant, because the main issue with that commute is the subway. With all the GOs, long waits, service gaps, and service changes which occur, it can be unreliable. You miss one train, now you have to wait 12 minutes (if it is on time). There goes more than the time savings you got on the faster bus. Even with that taken into consideration, the express bus is still getting to Queens Boulevard faster than the bus. 

 

 

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

When do they plan on implementing the final?

At the bottom of the page it says the goal is to roll out the new network by 2022 (my guess is they will do Brooklyn & Queens at the same time, since there's so many routes that cross between the boroughs)

https://new.mta.info/system_modernization/bus_network/queensbusredesign/draftplan

7 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

That's just simply not true. The 90th Street station has no bus in the surrounding area, so nobody is transferring from anywhere. The Q49 only feeds in to (7) because of the connections and the heavy commercial activity in that area. Also, have you seen the loads of people on the Q33 going to/from 74th Street? They beat the amount of people waiting at 82nd Street by a landslide. 

And what portion of it is caused by the structure of the network that funnels so many buses to Broadway & Roosevelt to begin with? For example, to get from Queens Center Mall to the northern section of Jackson Heights, you have to take the subway or Q53 to reach the Q33. Now you can take the QT10 directly (though it seems to be missing a stop near the Queens Center Mall, which is likely an error. The terminal is actually by Rego Park).

I'm sure some of those people are taking the (7) train because they want a chance at getting a seat: That can be solved by having short-turns start at 82nd & Roosevelt (or more likely 83rd & Roosevelt, since I'm not sure they'll be making 82nd two-way) heading north. 

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

Yes some of the times are a bit ridiculous. Does the MTA have Automatic Passenger Counters on their bus? Someone mentioned that in another thread. But, If there are only 5 people on the bus on Sundays...

I agree, buses that go to train stations and routes that allow you to avoid those areas if it's unnecessary.

The QT84s routing looks like it's to take over the Q25 and Q76 , serve the (7) , Shopping Center on 20th Ave, and connect to Bayside.

That's what its purpose is, but once it turns onto Francis Lewis Blvd (coming from Flushing), I forsee buses being virtually empty. If they're going to run service up Utopia Parkway and have that be the main north-south artery through that area, they might as well just do that. The only advantage I see of them running it that way is that it gives a connection to the QT71 (so you can go from say, Queens Village to College Point without going through Flushing), but I don't forsee many people taking advantage of that connection (and with Willets Point Blvd having peak-only service, and Beechurst having peak-only access to Flushing, I think there are more pressing issues to worry about).

34 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Not everybody is going to the subway. Flushing and Jamaica are major commercial areas as well. Plus, there's the connection to other bus routes there. You can't just tell those people to go to Union Turnpike because, they're not trying to go there. 

A Francis Lewis Boulevard route doesn't make any sense because people south of Hillside aren't going north of Hillside in large amounts. Those that do, are not going to destinations around Francis Lewis Boulevard.

Also, the walks to the bus stops on the east-west route aren't necessarily a piece of cake. You need to consider that most people have to walk to Francis Lewis Boulevard. With how they're spacing bus stops on all these routes, they'll need to walk to Francis Lewis Boulevard then walk up, or walk up the avenue blocks to the specific avenue, then walk to the bus stops. 

And that's why some of the new crosstown routes come in (and some routes that pass through Flushing or Jamaica without terminating there): For example, if someone needed to get from Francis Lewis & 73rd to Sutphin & Linden, they could now do so by taking the QT73 to the QT7, as opposed to the Q76 to the Q6. If they needed to get somewhere on the northern part of Merrick Blvd, they could transfer from the QT71 to the QT18. If they needed to get to Ozone Park, they can take the QT73 to the QT67.

As for the commercial areas argument, there's new commercial areas that have easier access as a result of this (e.g. the Francis Lewis route now goes to Flushing instead of Jamaica, the Springfield Blvd route now connects to the commercial parts of Bell Blvd near Bay Terrace and near the Bayside LIRR station). For that matter, areas north of Northern Blvd trade one route to Jamaica (the Q76) for two that are much more direct (the QT64/65). There are some areas that lose off-peak service to Flushing, but that can be remedied through further restructuring.

As for the spacing between the routes/stops, along the QT71 the east-west routes are generally less than 1/2 mile apart and the areas are fairly well-gridded (again, generally speaking. There's a couple of exceptions, like Hillside Avenue-Union Turnpike, and 48th Avenue-Horace Harding Expressway). So the maximum walk to get to an east-west route is under 1/4 mile in most cases (if you live between two east-west routes, you will walk to the closest one). If someone walked 1/4 mile to get to Francis Lewis Blvd, then we're talking about a maximum of 1/2 mile of walking for most cases.

3 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

If I want to go from Linden and Sutphin to Francis Lewis and Linden, no crosstown bus. I have to take the Q6 to Jamaica, then the Q4 or walk over to the bus terminal for the Q77.

You have it reversed (Q6-Q77 directly, or Q6 and walk to the Q4). But yes, I agree with your point about the crosstown routes. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...What exactly can I find the legal basis for the "cost-neutral" thing? I read about that too much but I don't know where to look for the law or whatever it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

And what portion of it is caused by the structure of the network that funnels so many buses to Broadway & Roosevelt to begin with? For example, to get from Queens Center Mall to the northern section of Jackson Heights, you have to take the subway or Q53 to reach the Q33. Now you can take the QT10 directly (though it seems to be missing a stop near the Queens Center Mall, which is likely an error. The terminal is actually by Rego Park).

I'm sure some of those people are taking the (7) train because they want a chance at getting a seat: That can be solved by having short-turns start at 82nd & Roosevelt (or more likely 83rd & Roosevelt, since I'm not sure they'll be making 82nd two-way) heading north. 

There's no reason to go to 74th, when the Q29 is available at 82nd Street. Yes, the trip is now direct for those people going to QCM, but a significantly greater amount of people are impacted now that they don't have access to the (E) or (F) . You can't assume that everyone is going to the (7) just because it's the nearest train in that area. There's no need for short-turns on that end of the Q33 either. They need to all go to 74th Street. 

42 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

And that's why some of the new crosstown routes come in (and some routes that pass through Flushing or Jamaica without terminating there): For example, if someone needed to get from Francis Lewis & 73rd to Sutphin & Linden, they could now do so by taking the QT73 to the QT7, as opposed to the Q76 to the Q6. If they needed to get somewhere on the northern part of Merrick Blvd, they could transfer from the QT71 to the QT18. If they needed to get to Ozone Park, they can take the QT73 to the QT67.

As for the commercial areas argument, there's new commercial areas that have easier access as a result of this (e.g. the Francis Lewis route now goes to Flushing instead of Jamaica, the Springfield Blvd route now connects to the commercial parts of Bell Blvd near Bay Terrace and near the Bayside LIRR station). For that matter, areas north of Northern Blvd trade one route to Jamaica (the Q76) for two that are much more direct (the QT64/65). There are some areas that lose off-peak service to Flushing, but that can be remedied through further restructuring.

As for the spacing between the routes/stops, along the QT71 the east-west routes are generally less than 1/2 mile apart and the areas are fairly well-gridded (again, generally speaking. There's a couple of exceptions, like Hillside Avenue-Union Turnpike, and 48th Avenue-Horace Harding Expressway). So the maximum walk to get to an east-west route is under 1/4 mile in most cases (if you live between two east-west routes, you will walk to the closest one). If someone walked 1/4 mile to get to Francis Lewis Blvd, then we're talking about a maximum of 1/2 mile of walking for most cases.

No one in that part of the Fresh Meadows area is even looking for service to SE/SW Queens like that. Their demographics and where they typically travel to are virtually different.

I'm not talking about commercial Bayside though, I'm talking about the loss of direct access to major commercial areas and hubs like Flushing and Jamaica, where more people are going. I am also specifically talking about your point regarding people going to the east-west routes to get to Jamaica. I don't have a problem with the QT71 route-wise, so that's irrelevant.  My problem is with the QT73 and how it's supposedly replacing both the Q76 and Q77.

The vast majority of Francis Lewis between Horace Harding and the GCP is parkland. Much of nobody is getting on buses between GCP and Hillside Ave. The QT31 also covers some parts of the section between Horace Harding and Northern Boulevard. So only a small portion of people that are not near Northern Boulevard, or Hollis Court Boulevard would benefit, while people going to Jamaica on both the Q76 and Q77 (which is far greater) would be negatively impacted. 

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BM5 via Woodhaven I was thinking of an editorial where someone mentioned taking the Q33 to the Q53 to reach Woodhaven Blvd. But yes, you're right, for the QCM under the current system you can do it without passing through Broadway/Roosevelt.

As for your other comment, it seems to be two points that you're making: One being that the proposed system doesn't do enough to get people to major hubs like Flushing & Jamaica, and the other about the QT73 specifically.

For the first point, I've already made my points (the crosstown routes and through-routing will help, and most people in Eastern Queens will still be within walking distance of a route to one of the major hubs)

For the QT73, remember that the Q76 is the only route from Jamaica that serves that part of NE Queens (the Q31 swings over along 48th & Bell, and the other routes run towards College Point). So most riders north of Northern Blvd will be able to take the QT64 or QT65. Even for those along Northern Blvd, some are transferring from the Q12/13, so those riders would just transfer at Utopia Parkway if they wanted Jamaica. 

For the area around Francis Lewis/HHE, fair enough, since they are also losing the Q30 to Jamaica.

But in any case, if you're saying that they need to go to Jamaica as a transfer point, but then you say that they don't need southern Queens, you just defeated your own argument. If they are going towards areas on the QBL, they would be better off taking one of the bus lines that heads in that direction directly (e.g. QT32, QT87, QT12, etc). The only major connection you can say they are really missing out on is the (J) train if they are heading towards Brooklyn or Lower Manhattan (but even then, that's a fairly long walk from the 165th Street Bus Terminal to the (J) station. To get to the AirTrain/LIRR station is even longer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

...What exactly can I find the legal basis for the "cost-neutral" thing? I read about that too much but I don't know where to look for the law or whatever it is.

It's probably the one where the MTA (or state?) is bound by law to have a balanced budget.

35 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

You have it reversed (Q6-Q77 directly, or Q6 and walk to the Q4). But yes, I agree with your point about the crosstown routes. 

That's right. I usually walk between Jamaica Center/Sutphin and Jamaica Bus terminal because the bus ride is horrible. Going to the terminal there's the traffic, then the bus loops around 168th street. And leaving from the terminal(Q6,Q8, etc), it dwells at each stop on Jamaica Ave as shoppers board, and fold their strollers, look for their metrocards, etc. 

 

15 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I'm not talking about commercial Bayside though, I'm talking about the loss of direct access to major commercial areas and hubs like Flushing and Jamaica, where more people are going. I am also specifically talking about your point regarding people going to the east-west routes to get to Jamaica. I don't have a problem with the QT71 route-wise, so that's irrelevant.  My problem is with the QT73 and how it's supposedly replacing both the Q76 and Q77.

Redundant service and mileage on Hillside between the Bus terminal and Francis Lewis. 2.3 miles. Almost 5 miles round trip, that's 10 miles combined just for for one run of each route. Those buses are rarely even half full as many along the routes [walk to, (something people supposedly don't do)] alternatives to get to Jamaica and Flushing due to their round about routings. So with that, they can be converted into a crosstown to help people get across Queens and to numerous connecting routes. The one time I've seen a SRO Q77, I was actually on it, because the N6 broke down on Francis Lewis Blvd on the way to Jamaica and we all hopped on the Q77 when we saw it coming. (the bus had like 3 riders before we filled it up). 

Some people are not interested in getting to certain parts of Queens because it's too difficult, the proposed connectivity makes travel easier.

50 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The vast majority of Francis Lewis between Horace Harding and the GCP is parkland. Much of nobody is getting on buses between GCP and Hillside Ave. The QT31 also covers some parts of the section between Horace Harding and Northern Boulevard. So only a small portion of people that are not near Northern Boulevard, or Hollis Court Boulevard would benefit, while people going to Jamaica on both the Q76 and Q77 (which is far greater) would be negatively impacted. 

That's exactly why it'll be a quick crosstown, and will get to Northern and the (7) pretty quick. No one gets on between GCP and Hillside because there is much more service on Hillside, why wait for a bus on 20-30 min headway when there is one on Hillside every 3 seconds?

Those going to Jamaica will have the QT18 running frequently as well as the QT34 and QT36 running limited all day.

15 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The only major connection you can say they are really missing out on is the (J) train if they are heading towards Brooklyn or Lower Manhattan (but even then, that's a fairly long walk from the 165th Street Bus Terminal to the (J) station. To get to the AirTrain/LIRR station is even longer)

Now they can transfer to the QT67 for the (J) or (A) , or the QT7 for the (A) . (Although now they can transfer in Jamaica for routes to the (J) but most of them are starting in Jamaica so they're getting bogged down by passengers boarding. Q43 stops are far from all other stops at the subway so transferring to it isn't that quick and easy.

--------------------------------------------------

The planned routes open up many options to get around so that it's not just 2 particular bus pairs to get somewhere. One has many routes to chose now, and bus time/trip planners can help choose the quickest one if they're already on the bus. Its almost to the point where if you miss a bus connection you can stay on your current bus another 5 mins and connect to another route going the same direction.

 

.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

In a general sense, I don't think they went overboard in gridding out the Eastern Queens network. Look at the Q27: They kept the 46th Avenue portion (QT15), the HHE-Jamaica Avenue portion (QT31) and you can even get from Cambria Heights to Flushing on the QT73. Francis Lewis Blvd loses direct access to Jamaica, but south of Hillside, most of the intersecting routes go there anyway, north of the HHE, you're better off going to Flushing for the subway, and between the HHE and Hillside Avenue, both the QT32 & QT33 provide service to Queens Blvd express stations. 

Obviously there are some routing decisions that are head-scratchers (the QT84 comes to mind, especially the Francis Lewis Blvd portion) but I think the basic principle of what they are trying to do is sound.

They didn't go overboard in gridding SE Queens, but they have with NE Queens & the general portion of the network around Jackson Heights....

What are you claiming the basic principle to even be though? They're introducing 4 different route types for these local routes, which to me, if anything, is tantamount to complicating matters....

4 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Just because it's a draft doesn't make any more justified to come out with an overall terrible bus network. My area basically loses most useful subway connections, will see less night service, loses bus service completely on several roads, and leaves actual coverage gaps. Most outer neighborhoods in SE Queens lose overnight bus service altogether. The one bus running 24/7 is the Springfield Blvd bus, which wouldn't even go to Jamaica or Flushing. It's insulting to even consider this a draft plan, when all these service cuts are being proposed.

And what makes you think they are going to adjust frequencies properly? All they have been doing is cutting bus service in any way possible.

To sum it up, the negatives far outweigh the positives AFAIC....

We're introduced with a draft plan of this nature, but yet I'm supposed to optimistic? At best (much like with the Bronx plan), all we have to hope for is that many routes would be left alone......

Some of these concepts being introduced should be variants of routes, instead of whole routes being constructed/formulated based on that sole concept.... An example would be to take the QT41 concept & have some Q84 rush hour trips (from Cambria Hgts. - 130th av) doing that, instead of only having the Q84 portion west of Springfield do so....

Another example is what's being done with the Hillside corridor, east of Jamaica.... Even if they wanted to cut the Q43 back to 179th (F), they could have the QT36 be one route making regular stops b/w 179th (F) & LIJ, with rush hour trips making the dash to/from the subway west of Springfield... Instead, they're having all QT36's making the mad dash to the subway & having the QT18 serve the local (if I could even call it that anymore) stops between 179th (F) & Springfield...

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the rate things are going, I'm surprised no one has Mark Holmes' head on a silver platter....

The people in my area have been getting prepared for the JHS 202 open house and the rest within the Richmond Hill/Ozone Park area. I'll more than likely be in attendance at the 202 Open House, as I want to see the shitshow go down.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad I'm not the only one that gets the thing.

I also have a couple questions.

I keep hearing complaints about the redesign, but aren't those who complain the main ones you hear from in any situation? Those who are happy aren't really gonna care enough to speak.

Therefore, is this redesign REALLY as much of a problem as people think?

Is it possible we've actually struck silver? I mean, it would be gold if the absolute max headway was 20 minutes (average wait of 10 minutes) on all routes.

Lastly, I wonder how many peoples criticisms come from current patterns, and not patterns based on the new system. Because I see waaaayyy too much of the former. And that's a very flawed way to look at total change.

(In some ways, you can say that mindset has stalled our country as a whole)

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

At the rate things are going, I'm surprised no one has Mark Holmes' head on a silver platter....

The masses likely don't know (or care) who he even is.

30 minutes ago, LTA1992 said:

Lastly, I wonder how many peoples criticisms come from current patterns, and not patterns based on the new system. Because I see waaaayyy too much of the former. And that's a very flawed way to look at total change.

So what's the alternative, hope & pray that this change will benefit the masses for the better?

I'm not understanding what you expect commuters' criticisms to be based off of....

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

That may be fine for express and limited routes but for many local routes which carry  elderly riders like myself, it is totally wrong. 

You cannot use an arbitrary figure to determine whether a stop is needed or not as there are many stops that should remain close together especially with local routes are there are other factors that determine usage.

 

Remix lets them load in a lot of data to create overlays, they can probably aggregate metrocard dips:  time of use, bus route and gps data to see stop usage, as well as heavily used transfer points. Maybe even filter by bus to bus and bus-subway transfers and sort by volume per route/location. They can also figure out round trips that way. Maybe with the QT10 they saw a lot of riders on the Q33 make return trips via the Woodhaven Blvd Station. 

 

  

3 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I don't see what the QT32 and crew have to do with the express bus. The QT34 and QT36 don't even go to Union Turnpike, they go to Jamaica. How is that faster?

Sure, Union Turnpike and 73rd Ave riders might get to the subway faster than under the existing network, but that's rather irrelevant, because the main issue with that commute is the subway. With all the GOs, long waits, service gaps, and service changes which occur, it can be unreliable. You miss one train, now you have to wait 12 minutes (if it is on time). There goes more than the time savings you got on the faster bus. Even with that taken into consideration, the express bus is still getting to Queens Boulevard faster than the bus. 

 

That's why I started using the LIRR, the Queens Blvd line delays were torture. 

At least they'll have a lot of routes that go straight up to a LIRR Station (or down to QV)

With the 

Edited by N6 Limited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@BM5 via Woodhaven I was thinking of an editorial where someone mentioned taking the Q33 to the Q53 to reach Woodhaven Blvd. But yes, you're right, for the QCM under the current system you can do it without passing through Broadway/Roosevelt.

As for your other comment, it seems to be two points that you're making: One being that the proposed system doesn't do enough to get people to major hubs like Flushing & Jamaica, and the other about the QT73 specifically.

For the first point, I've already made my points (the crosstown routes and through-routing will help, and most people in Eastern Queens will still be within walking distance of a route to one of the major hubs)

For the QT73, remember that the Q76 is the only route from Jamaica that serves that part of NE Queens (the Q31 swings over along 48th & Bell, and the other routes run towards College Point). So most riders north of Northern Blvd will be able to take the QT64 or QT65. Even for those along Northern Blvd, some are transferring from the Q12/13, so those riders would just transfer at Utopia Parkway if they wanted Jamaica. 

For the area around Francis Lewis/HHE, fair enough, since they are also losing the Q30 to Jamaica.

But in any case, if you're saying that they need to go to Jamaica as a transfer point, but then you say that they don't need southern Queens, you just defeated your own argument. If they are going towards areas on the QBL, they would be better off taking one of the bus lines that heads in that direction directly (e.g. QT32, QT87, QT12, etc). The only major connection you can say they are really missing out on is the (J) train if they are heading towards Brooklyn or Lower Manhattan (but even then, that's a fairly long walk from the 165th Street Bus Terminal to the (J) station. To get to the AirTrain/LIRR station is even longer)

Under the existing system in St. Albans & Hollis south of Hillside, the N-S routes serve Hillside Avenue (for the (F), the commercial areas, and other bus connections going north or west), while the E-W go serve Jamaica Center/Jamaica Avenue (with the exception of the Q2). There's different options for different folks depending on where they are going. Under the new system, I don't really see why they needed to swap the Q3/Q83 west of Farmers (more or less). However, I would rather have the QT68 go up to Hillside Ave via Archer Ave & Parsons instead of Merrick/168th, that way service to Jamaica Center is at least preserved. 

Demand from that specific area of Fresh Meadows to SE/SW Queens does not warrant a bus (not the entire area itself), because it's virtually low. Also, the QT73 has similar (it's actually worse during rush hours) headways compared to the Q76, which is really not convenient for transferring between it and the east-west lines. The western portion of the Q17 could do better, because there's more people going towards Jamaica (outside of schoolkids, it still lacks, but it does better than ridership on Francis Lewis Boulevard). In fact, I kinda wish they kept that part intact (or at least reroute the QT64 so it can serve Fresh Meadows Shopping Center, and retain Jamaica coverage). My point about needing Jamaica is more relevant for the Q77 than the Q76. 

 

2 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

Redundant service and mileage on Hillside between the Bus terminal and Francis Lewis. 2.3 miles. Almost 5 miles round trip, that's 10 miles combined just for for one run of each route. Those buses are rarely even half full as many along the routes [walk to, (something people supposedly don't do)] alternatives to get to Jamaica and Flushing due to their round about routings. So with that, they can be converted into a crosstown to help people get across Queens and to numerous connecting routes. The one time I've seen a SRO Q77, I was actually on it, because the N6 broke down on Francis Lewis Blvd on the way to Jamaica and we all hopped on the Q77 when we saw it coming. (the bus had like 3 riders before we filled it up). 

If you think the Q77 does not carry enough towards Jamaica, then cutting off the southern section and sending the northern portion to Flushing via Francis Lewis will garner even less ridership. The Q77 is also pretty busy throughout the day on weekdays, especially when schools let out (can't speak on weekend ridership). I've been on Q77 buses beyond SRO on Hillside. Sending buses across Queens is not helpful if there is not a substantial enough base that will use it. Q77 buses are most definitely not tanking at Hillside & Francis Lewis Boulevard from the south. Also, a specific bus with 3 people is a resultant of many factors, including the specific time of day, where the masses are headed at that time, location caught,bunching/traffic conditions, etc. This is a problem that I have, people see an empty bus once and then they believe that the route must not being operating well. 

2 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

Some people are not interested in getting to certain parts of Queens because it's too difficult, the proposed connectivity makes travel easier.

Some people, but not the majority. The majority is just not looking for service to those areas at all. For example, I'm not interested in getting to Little Neck and Auburndale. Under the new network, I'll have easier ways to get to Auburndale and Little Neck. Do I care? No. The QT86 connection to Flushing OTOH, is a different story. Why, because Flushing is a destination I see myself frequenting more than Auburndale or Little Neck. 

2 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

That's exactly why it'll be a quick crosstown, and will get to Northern and the (7) pretty quick. No one gets on between GCP and Hillside because there is much more service on Hillside, why wait for a bus on 20-30 min headway when there is one on Hillside every 3 seconds?

But who in Hollis and Saint Albans is going to Auburndale and Flushing for the (7) ? It's quick, and it'll be even quicker because it will pick up much of nobody. People will have to walk to the east-west routes, but now the Murdock Avenue section of the Q83 no longer has access to Jamaica Center. I wouldn't have a problem with this whole QT73 concept if it didn't outright replace the Q77 and parts of the Q84. People in Cambria Heights and  Laurelton taking the Q84 could still get to Flushing from Jamaica, with so many options to choose from. Under the new plan, they're given direct service to Flushing, which is relatively infrequent, and on top of that, they lose Jamaica access, and access to many areas in Brooklyn as well. A lot of people are far from Linden or Merrick Boulevards that walking is just not viable. 

1 hour ago, LTA1992 said:

I'm glad I'm not the only one that gets the thing.

I also have a couple questions.

I keep hearing complaints about the redesign, but aren't those who complain the main ones you hear from in any situation? Those who are happy aren't really gonna care enough to speak.

Therefore, is this redesign REALLY as much of a problem as people think?

Is it possible we've actually struck silver? I mean, it would be gold if the absolute max headway was 20 minutes (average wait of 10 minutes) on all routes.

Lastly, I wonder how many peoples criticisms come from current patterns, and not patterns based on the new system. Because I see waaaayyy too much of the former. And that's a very flawed way to look at total change.

(In some ways, you can say that mindset has stalled our country as a whole)

Yes, because I enjoy outright losing bus lines, losing bus connections, and having literal coverage gaps, and less service hours. That is not a problem at all for me....

Even the most critical of this plan have mentioned stuff about the plan which are actually beneficial. If you choose to be ignorant on that matter, that's on you, but it's out there, so before you go around harping about how people are criticizing any change of the system because their routes are not preserved, I would suggest to at least be accurate on your claim. Travel patterns change over time, but they don't change just because some planners decided to redraw the bus network with crayons. Go tell a Jackson Heights, Maspeth, Glendale, Middle Village resident that losing subway connections and access to hospitals and commercial destinations is not "REALLY as much of a problem". Go tell SE Queens, where more people are likely to be working overnight/odd hour shifts that most outermost neighborhoods losing most 24/7 bus service is not "REALLY as much of a problem". 

What that also tells me, is that you have no clue about how the Queens network works and what people actually need.  You put on this act like this holy grail "progressive" and pin those critical of the plan (and the MTA's intentions with this plan), who are not willing to fall in line with this BS as radicals, framing it as having a mindset that "has stalled our country as a whole", and yet you provide zero rebuttals, and zero substantive counterpoints to any of the specific criticisms you believe are unfair. All your posts have indirectly addressing people, why? Because you have nothing  substantive to contribute. Of course you don't have to worry because you in Wakefield will be barely impacted (if any) by this, while us who actually live or commute regularly in the borough actually have to deal with the mess. Gee, if that doesn't sound like modern day politics in a nutshell. 

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven
  • Thanks 1
  • Thumbs Up 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Under the new system, I don't really see why they needed to swap the Q3/Q83 west of Farmers (more or less). However, I would rather have the QT68 go up to Hillside Ave via Archer Ave & Parsons instead of Merrick/168th, that way service to Jamaica Center is at least preserved.

They're trying to connect SE Queens to Jamaica Hospital with this route & Hillside is being used as an "unofficial" bypass.....

I get what you're saying with having buses run Archer > Parsons > Hillside.... In fairness though, running via 168th/Merrick to get from Hillside to Liberty & Farmers is faster....

...which leads to my larger point - While there is validity to questioning that swap by itself, I'm not stopping at just that..... I'm more questioning the validity of having a route avert the "heart" of Jamaica so that it can get to the hospital faster.... It's prioritizing the hospital over Downtown Jamaica/the "heart" of Jamaica (or whatever you wanna call it).... I just don't see too many riders along Farmers being all too thrilled about this route.

Regarding its serving of JFK, I would be interested to see how much usage would be divvied up between the QT20 (Sutphin) & the QT68..... Personally, I would've used the Q9 as the second Jamaica area route running to JFK (instead of the Q6) - but the QT20 isn't a bad concept either - although they would need to run a shit ton of buses on that route - which again, spills into another problem with the overall plan in general, regarding insufficient service levels).... Let's be honest, when they say "8 minutes or better" peak, how much "or better" are they really considering? I'm paraphrasing, but VG8 pointed this out in another post; if they wanted to suggest more service on these routes, they would simply suggest it, instead of this "or better" framing bullshit....

14 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Even the most critical of this plan have mentioned stuff about the plan which are actually beneficial.

I've noticed that also, and I'm not solely referring to the confines of this forum either.... Folks aren't being critical for the sheer f*** of it...

I mean it's whatever, but I'm just not that person that subscribes to any change being good, just because it's a change.... That isn't to say everything should be left alone either.....

The point is, Merits matter.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LTA1992 said:

I'm glad I'm not the only one that gets the thing.

I also have a couple questions.

I keep hearing complaints about the redesign, but aren't those who complain the main ones you hear from in any situation? Those who are happy aren't really gonna care enough to speak.

Therefore, is this redesign REALLY as much of a problem as people think?

Is it possible we've actually struck silver? I mean, it would be gold if the absolute max headway was 20 minutes (average wait of 10 minutes) on all routes.

Lastly, I wonder how many peoples criticisms come from current patterns, and not patterns based on the new system. Because I see waaaayyy too much of the former. And that's a very flawed way to look at total change.

(In some ways, you can say that mindset has stalled our country as a whole)

The problem is there are more cuts than additional services.

You have a handful of stops being discontinued for no reason (QT5), headways cut for no reason (QT44), express service getting cut once again, certain routes getting merged and rerouted for no particular reason except for "connectivity purposes" (meaning serving a section of Queens just to look like service is being retained and /or added, again QT5 comes to mind, also the QT41 is another great example of this), etc.

Edited by MysteriousBtrain
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.