Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[QM1to6Ave]

1 hour ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

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.

Exactly! Like with the new versions of the Q46, where one goes from 188th street onto 108th street in Forest Hills. Who is demanding such a routing? 108th street is incredibly slow, so this route is going to have bunching for sure. If they really want to make buses more efficient, they need shorter routes with very frequent service, but that would require a ton of money being invested. 

 

As it is, I don't know what they will do with all the B/Os who do exp runs. are there even enough runs for all the current B/Os under this plan?

[B35 via Church]

34 minutes ago, QM1to6Ave said:

As it is, I don't know what they will do with all the B/Os who do exp runs. are there even enough runs for all the current B/Os under this plan?

When it comes to the front line workers, I have to adopt the mindset of "hope for the best & fear for the worst".... That fear as it relates to this draft plan (if everything holds as currently proposed) is downsizing.....

We all can comment on the validity or justification of the proposed routes until we're blue in the face, but if there's less service being suggested across the board, that's ultimately going to mean less operators needed.... What you're bringing up here has crossed my mind, ever since we were sitting here trying to decipher the incomplete map that dude on twitter uploaded a couple weeks ago.... This isn't just about cutting costs with the routes themselves...

Edited January 16, 2020 by B35 via Church

[B35 via Church]

On 1/14/2020 at 3:16 AM, Q43LTD said:

After working OT on Christmas and New Years, and battling the flu, I'm gonna put in my input on these proposed routes. Bronx bus revamp of 1984, the Queens redesign would like for you to hold his beer.

** input on every proposed local route **

I'll do the express ones later

If things stand as proposed, how would this plan affect you if you still lived in Queens?

What would you have to do different (if anything)?

On 1/13/2020 at 7:46 AM, Interested Rider said:

When I started in 1979, it was "don't send me problems, send me solutions" to one where it became don't bother with suggestions as we know everything....

Lol, the irony - I want answers because I don't know shit.... to, you're my subordinate, I'm all-knowing - now shut up & get back to work....

Crazy thing is, the apparent mindset of upper management in enough of these workplaces nowadays is a composite of the two (let those that post on Glassdoor.com tell it anyway).....

[NY1635]

I saw the Q77 bound for Springfield Gardens fully seated on Francis Lewis Blvd while heading to Jamaica on the n24 heading to Jamaica. I'm guessing that it's ridership is growing because less people are cramming themselves on to the Q85 at Springfield and Conduit Avenue or using that stop as a major transfer point. I also noticed the paper schedule listing 145th Road as Laurelton when that area has always been known as Springfield Gardens. Even the Front Sign of the Q77 is showed Springfield Gardens. Maybe Queens needs Clever Devices similar to the ones used on NJ Transit and Suffolk Transit. The ones the city uses keeps advertising travel destinations for Staten Island. 

[BrooklynBus]

14 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.

I agree with the need for gridlike north south service, but during rush hours they need to maintain one-bus access to the subway. 

[BrooklynBus]

Riders confront the MTA in Jackson Heights.

https://www.pix11.com/news/local-news/queens/riders-confront-transit-officials-about-changes-to-bus-routes-in-queens?fbclid=IwAR25kHo_T1GLFkxdLpbhhpSFKXNCjd1nuO-DBDSNJZdM0kTF17Ns86K4uV8

I hope the same thing happens in Rockaway on February 6th at the YMCA.

[Lawrence St]

What about the elimination of the Little Neck Parkway extension of the Q36?

[N6 Limited]

6 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

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) I think people are just complaining at the idea of there being less service latenight or overnight when the buses are EMPTY anyway, it's really that simple. It's a waste of money, which is what the public always complains about the MTA doing.  They're having owl service on corridors being used and reducing service on buses carrying air. 

I counted 11 routes that are proposed to have 24 hr service in SE queens:

QT67, QT71, QT20, QT7, QT45, QT68, QT62, QT13, QT19, QT18, QT73

Some run at 60 min headway, some at 30 min headway. All are walkable from the routes that are not running overnight.

 

2) I was saying that metrocard data may show the majority transferring a 82nd street, and the remaining people you see may be headed to the  or .

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

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....

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 , they could have the QT36 be one route making regular stops b/w 179th & 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 & Springfield...

I like the idea of the 4 types of routes. It's a simple concept, what's complicated is the current Queens Map.

As for the Q84, there is low ridership east of Springfield Blvd, so they merged that portion with the Francis Lewis corridor, they already tried to cancel the Q84 previously.

I'm getting the feeling that people believe the MTA should have empty buses just rolling around for fun.

The Hillside and Merrick Corridor routes makes perfect sense. They're both high priority corridors with high ridership, bus lanes (Hillside Ave) and TSP. So they have the QT18 which will be very productive serving those corridors avoiding the heavy congestion of Jamaica and serving the F train as an alternative to the Jamaica Center routes and connecting to Union Turnpike. 

The Hillside and Merrick routes will be limited along the portion the QT18 runs so they won't be slowed down and those on the ends can get to and from Jamaica and Subway quickly. This should not be limited to rush hour, riders in eastern Queens want faster service.

With the QT18 being the local, all the other routes can zoom by like the N22 does, which means they need less buses to run the route which actually allows them to provide the quicker service.

2 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

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.....

Be sure to tell us everything. What issues would Richmond Hill/Ozone park have besides the 101 Ave route?

2 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)

Good Questions. Yes many people who complain, complain about everything. They want better bus service but don't change anything, they want better train service but don't work on the tracks. (Closing the line is one thing, but keeping them open and having severe service delays because of flagging and dumb service patterns like Local E and F service with R trains still terminating at 71st Ave is horrible, that's completely different. it should not take an hour+ to get to Jamaica from midtown and vice versa) Something they don't like in general "offends" them so they use other people to broaden their reach. 

When I hear things like "the whole redesign should be stopped, it's hurting all 700,00 Queens bus riders" it's a little too much. A lot of these changes are based on public feedback of wanting faster buses, more connections, more reliable service. 

Faster buses need to stop less, avoid left turns etc.

More connections , routes need to be re-done

More reliable service, they have to avoid congested areas.

There are 2 million people in Queens, can't please everyone.

Most criticisms I've seen are based on the old network, the new network is supposed to work a whole. They should look at it as a whole. The MTA needs to hurry up and put the trip planner on the site so people can see how their trips change. People are complaining about routes being removed like the Q32 like there's no bus with 98% of the same routing. Complaining about no bus on Northern west of the the Northern Blvd station, when there IS one.

People should know the bus system anyway so they can get around by alternative routes if necessary, this will actually make the whole map simpler,look less like a bunch of tangled wires and allow easy 'detours'. 

Public input is helpful, but sometimes people don't know what they're talking about. People were complaining about the "Drop in service" to Astoria because the MTA was going to move the  to 2nd Ave, when the plan was to replace it with the  the whole time. 

Side story: I remember one evening rush there was a LIRR problem on the Long Beach line. On the news, there was this lady being interviewed saying shes trying to get home to Long beach and so she took the train to Mineola to get to Long Island and figure it out from there, but now she was "stranded", right as a N15 to Long Beach passes by in the background...

 

[B35 via Church]

17 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I like the idea of the 4 types of routes. It's a simple concept, what's complicated is the current Queens Map.

As for the Q84, there is low ridership east of Springfield Blvd, so they merged that portion with the Francis Lewis corridor, they already tried to cancel the Q84 previously.

I'm getting the feeling that people believe the MTA should have empty buses just rolling around for fun.

The Hillside and Merrick Corridor routes makes perfect sense. They're both high priority corridors with high ridership, bus lanes (Hillside Ave) and TSP. So they have the QT18 which will be very productive serving those corridors avoiding the heavy congestion of Jamaica and serving the F train as an alternative to the Jamaica Center routes and connecting to Union Turnpike. 

The Hillside and Merrick routes will be limited along the portion the QT18 runs so they won't be slowed down and those on the ends can get to and from Jamaica and Subway quickly. This should not be limited to rush hour, riders in eastern Queens want faster service.

With the QT18 being the local, all the other routes can zoom by like the N22 does, which means they need less buses to run the route which actually allows them to provide the quicker service.

The idea behind the 4 types of routes I generally don't have a problem with, I have a problem with basing an entire route solely on either of the 4 concepts.... That's complicating things for no real reason, regardless of how they're displayed on a map..... I don't necessarily care for a system-wide practice of sorts, but you can still go about eliminating intermediate stops (or whatever term you wish to use) along a route, without doing all this extra shit..... The stop spacing for the dark blue routes are way too sparse... The green routes are nothing special; even they state that these routes are similar to existing local service (except with increased stop spacing, or whatever verbiage they used).... The purple routes are basically commuter locals, and the red routes are basically LTD's.....

Low ridership east of Springfield on the Q84 is no justification to send that portion of the route away from Jamaica & up towards NE Queens, when those folks are still trying to get to Jamaica..... The QT41 should (IMO) remain along 120th like the Q84 does & if they want to short turn buses at Springfield (like what's done with the Q83), that could still be done....

I'm not sure where I'm exactly advocating for empty buses, but what I'm not advocating for is shortchanging riders when it comes to service - regardless of how fast they're transporting passengers along any given corridor.... To hell with the whole frequency vs. coverage dynamic, let's sacrifice frequency for speed too..... Way to maintain, lure, and spur ridership growth.....

[N6 Limited]

7 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

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. 

It looks like they swapped them so that the Hillside and Hollis QT38/QT39 routes can both go to the Bus Terminal and share stops and be limited on Hillside,  so that riders can have a choice between them. Both routes have another route within walking distance that go to Jamaica Center. (Linden Blvd and Jamaica Ave) QT40 and QT67.

The QT68 will be an inner semi-circle line, it will use Merrick/168th street to avoid the Archer Ave bus conga line congestion and serve Hillside Ave west, the  , connect to north-south routes west of the bus terminal,  the Hospital and Jamaica Van Wyck Station. 

7 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

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. 

I saw and zoomed right passed Q77s frequently as N6 rider, usually it was light, when I did see them SRO it was usually students.  

If you've seen it SRO on Hillside, was that the result of Francis Lewis , Springfield or Hillside Ridership? Can you recall the majority of boardings on the trip you were on? I've seen SRO N1s on Hillside where the majority of passengers boarded on Hempstead Turnpike.

Those riders may like the QT18 or the all day limited service of the QT34 and QT36.

8 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

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. 

You may not care but Little Neck And Auburndale users may it may make localized trips easier as well. There are also a lot of job locations which open up for people as the routes become connected. Some people are looking at end to end trips when these connections may make it easier for intermediate trips.

Some people complained about merging the  and the  saying "Who's going from Middle Village to Forest Hills" when that was not the point of the service change.

 

8 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

But who in Hollis and Saint Albans is going to Auburndale and Flushing for the  ? 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. 

The Francis Lewis route will provide connections to a lot of routes and connect a few schools and a nursing home, provide connection to downtown Flushing   etc. This isn't only about Queens, this plan provides inter-connectivity for those going to Nassau as well.  Some riders from Hollis, St Albans or Cambria Heights may need the N20G/N20H Great Neck or Colleges, Union Turnpike, QT87 to get to the Douglaston Shopping Center, Q12 to get to/from Queens Center when the subway is acting up, Northern Blvd or downtown Flushing for employment ,etc.  

Look at this as a network and not a one seat location to location personal chauffeur. 

[B35 via Church]

From the video BrooklynBus posted above:

Quote

"There is no way of sugarcoating this... We do not have some unlimited warchest"

- Andy Byford

Have enough Queens patrons stand unified & heavily armed in fighting against these proposals, you're gonna need it, Byford.....

Queens as a whole, tends to be docile when it comes to public transit concerns, so that turnout in Jackson Heights is rather telling.... Rest of Queens needs to follow suit.

Honestly now, you don't need unlimited funds not to suggest what's being proposed for the locals & the expresses with this plan here.... What would be appreciated is some competency (and a little something called a clue) - None of which will cost you a single schilling....

Now (like most, if not all of us that give a shit), I'm waiting to see how much of what's been proposed will be rescinded & how much of it will be retained in the final plan....

 

[Mtatransit]

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

1) I think people are just complaining at the idea of there being less service latenight or overnight when the buses are EMPTY anyway, it's really that simple. It's a waste of money, which is what the public always complains about the MTA doing.  They're having owl service on corridors being used and reducing service on buses carrying air. 

I counted 11 routes that are proposed to have 24 hr service in SE queens:

QT67, QT71, QT20, QT7, QT45, QT68, QT62, QT13, QT19, QT18, QT73

Some run at 60 min headway, some at 30 min headway. All are walkable from the routes that are not running overnight.

 

2) I was saying that metrocard data may show the majority transferring a 82nd street, and the remaining people you see may be headed to the  or .

I like the idea of the 4 types of routes. It's a simple concept, what's complicated is the current Queens Map.

As for the Q84, there is low ridership east of Springfield Blvd, so they merged that portion with the Francis Lewis corridor, they already tried to cancel the Q84 previously.

I'm getting the feeling that people believe the MTA should have empty buses just rolling around for fun.

The Hillside and Merrick Corridor routes makes perfect sense. They're both high priority corridors with high ridership, bus lanes (Hillside Ave) and TSP. So they have the QT18 which will be very productive serving those corridors avoiding the heavy congestion of Jamaica and serving the F train as an alternative to the Jamaica Center routes and connecting to Union Turnpike. 

The Hillside and Merrick routes will be limited along the portion the QT18 runs so they won't be slowed down and those on the ends can get to and from Jamaica and Subway quickly. This should not be limited to rush hour, riders in eastern Queens want faster service.

With the QT18 being the local, all the other routes can zoom by like the N22 does, which means they need less buses to run the route which actually allows them to provide the quicker service.

Be sure to tell us everything. What issues would Richmond Hill/Ozone park have besides the 101 Ave route?

Good Questions. Yes many people who complain, complain about everything. They want better bus service but don't change anything, they want better train service but don't work on the tracks. (Closing the line is one thing, but keeping them open and having severe service delays because of flagging and dumb service patterns like Local E and F service with R trains still terminating at 71st Ave is horrible, that's completely different. it should not take an hour+ to get to Jamaica from midtown and vice versa) Something they don't like in general "offends" them so they use other people to broaden their reach. 

When I hear things like "the whole redesign should be stopped, it's hurting all 700,00 Queens bus riders" it's a little too much. A lot of these changes are based on public feedback of wanting faster buses, more connections, more reliable service. 

Faster buses need to stop less, avoid left turns etc.

More connections , routes need to be re-done

More reliable service, they have to avoid congested areas.

There are 2 million people in Queens, can't please everyone.

Most criticisms I've seen are based on the old network, the new network is supposed to work a whole. They should look at it as a whole. The MTA needs to hurry up and put the trip planner on the site so people can see how their trips change. People are complaining about routes being removed like the Q32 like there's no bus with 98% of the same routing. Complaining about no bus on Northern west of the the Northern Blvd station, when there IS one.

People should know the bus system anyway so they can get around by alternative routes if necessary, this will actually make the whole map simpler,look less like a bunch of tangled wires and allow easy 'detours'.  

 

The problem I have is that the MTA seems to be completely ignoring current ridership patterns. 

You don’t create new riders by throwing away your entire old ridership.

some examples

Those Jackson Height route-

Ok fair enough, now there’s a bus north of Roosevelt that goes to QCM. It could’ve been done by extending the current Q47 south. But they decided to extend that route to Columbus Circle.

Q49- That new Q74 will carry air when people realize it’s faster to walk to 90th than wait 20 min for a bus. That’s the time it takes to walk from Astoria Bl! One of the busiest and most efficient route, gone, just like that. 

Q33- No one gets on/off at 82/Roosevelt. Most people want the E/F, like the 49 example, people are simply going to walk to 82nd if they can’t get a bus direct to E/F. If they have to take the 7 anyways, might as well walk it. 

People in that area takes the bus because of laziness. They could and will walk to the 7 if things goes awry. By taking away the direct option to 74th, I would estimate that 80% of the current ridership will be gone. Could you get that back at QCM?

Those Flushing Routes

They talk about having a grid system like we are in the middle of nowhere and no one takes the bus. All of hose zoned express runs Rush hours only which means, during other time, to get to Flushing, passengers will have to transfer to QT85/84/17. That and the new Q65 will no longer go to Flushing, I think QT17 will get completely slammed with passengers. There ain’t no way those three routes are able to handle the current load of passengers, at least not at the frequency they are proposing.

Im not complaining about change, I’m complaining about the complete disregard of the present travel patterns, and telling commuters to suck it and deal with it. 

I’m all for change, but I think some of this plan is completely flawed.

sticking strictly to theory is not how to design a bus system.

[B35 via Church]

4 minutes ago, Mtatransit said:

The problem I have is that the MTA seems to be completely ignoring current ridership patterns. 

You don’t create new riders by throwing away your entire old ridership.

You certainly induce more motorists on the roads & passengers utilizing for-hire vehicles though

Who cares about current ridership patterns (that they have no real knowledge of in the first place), when it's simply easier to re-draw the whole network...

[BrooklynBus]

53 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

From the video BrooklynBus posted above:

Have enough Queens patrons stand unified & heavily armed in fighting against these proposals, you're gonna need it, Byford.....

Queens as a whole, tends to be docile when it comes to public transit concerns, so that turnout in Jackson Heights is rather telling.... Rest of Queens needs to follow suit.

Honestly now, you don't need unlimited funds not to suggest what's being proposed for the locals & the expresses with this plan here.... What would be appreciated is some competency (and a little something called a clue) - None of which will cost you a single schilling....

Now (like most, if not all of us that give a shit), I'm waiting to see how much of what's been proposed will be rescinded & how much of it will be retained in the final plan....

 

I predict they will take back about six of the proposals, and to pay for that, they will claim they need to remove a few good parts of the plan that people like. As far as bus stops, they will put back about 50 they intend to remove, but in the end, about 80 percent of the plan will remain in tact, and half the bus stops will be removed and it will be a bad plan for the majority of riders.

The politicians will claim victory saying that compromise was a good thing. The MTA will claim the process worked. The riders will suffer. Ridership will decline.

The MTA will declare success proclaiming the buses are operating 25 percent faster and resources were allocated more efficiently. They will dismiss the ridership losses claiming it was caused by the necessary fare increase, saying without the redesign, ridership would have declined further, also proving the redesign was a success.

Meanwhile traffic will increase and Uber will flourish causing the MTA to yell they need more bus lanes at $6 million a mile. And that's how the money from congestion pricing will be wasted, but the city will be happy because revenue from fines will be greater from more drivers violating the bus lanes. The MTA will then make  further service cuts because of the reduced ridership. Remember these words. 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

4 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

1) I think people are just complaining at the idea of there being less service latenight or overnight when the buses are EMPTY anyway, it's really that simple. It's a waste of money, which is what the public always complains about the MTA doing.  They're having owl service on corridors being used and reducing service on buses carrying air. 

I counted 11 routes that are proposed to have 24 hr service in SE queens:

QT67, QT71, QT20, QT7, QT45, QT68, QT62, QT13, QT19, QT18, QT73

Some run at 60 min headway, some at 30 min headway. All are walkable from the routes that are not running overnight.

 

2) I was saying that metrocard data may show the majority transferring a 82nd street, and the remaining people you see may be headed to the  or .

 

1) Buses during late night are not going to fill up the way daytime buses do. That's consistent throughout the entire system, and not just limited to SE Queens.

I'm pretty sure wouldn't be advocating for subway cuts during overnight hours, because some subway lines currently have considerably low ridership during late night hours. Sure, there might be less people going to the outer neighborhoods, but does it make sense to completely strand them if the existing system can get them to where they need to go and they carry other passengers as well? It's one thing to suggest eliminating one route, but it's another thing when Cambria Heights, Laurelton, and parts of Bellrose, Floral Park, and Rosedale would all lose overnight bus service, because the QT18 does not go past Springfield Boulevard or 231st Street. 

The QT7 would only have 24 hr service on weekdays, and it and the QT73 do not go to Jamaica. Out of the routes you mentioned, only the QT45 serves one of the outermost neighborhoods in SE Queens, and even then parts of that neighborhood is still far from that bus. Not necessarily an issue of the QT45, but it's an issue of the outright slashing of service to those neighborhoods. 

Also, do you realize that for some you would need to make additional transfers and go out your way, even if you make a walk to/from an overnight bus? You cannot tell me areas east of Francis Lewis Boulevard (in Laurelton) to Springfield Blvd is any easy walk. Springfield to Francis Lewis Boulevard is far enough to begin with, especially during overnight hours when you have to time yourself the bus. This doesn't even take into consideration any safety issues at night. If you make night service unusable or non-existent at night, you will lose your ridership base because many are just not going to walk in fear of their safety. 

2) Well, that's false. Like I said, there's many more people going to 74th Street. 

 

3 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

I saw and zoomed right passed Q77s frequently as N6 rider, usually it was light, when I did see them SRO it was usually students.  

If you've seen it SRO on Hillside, was that the result of Francis Lewis , Springfield or Hillside Ridership? Can you recall the majority of boardings on the trip you were on? I've seen SRO N1s on Hillside where the majority of passengers boarded on Hempstead Turnpike.

Those riders may like the QT18 or the all day limited service of the QT34 and QT36. 

The QT18 or the LTD service on Hillside would be useless for those people, because the buses I've been on (with standees on and everything) use the bus along Francis Lewis Boulevard (and to be more specific, places south of Jamaica Avenue). 

3 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

You may not care but Little Neck And Auburndale users may it may make localized trips easier as well. There are also a lot of job locations which open up for people as the routes become connected. Some people are looking at end to end trips when these connections may make it easier for intermediate trips.

Some people complained about merging the  and the  saying "Who's going from Middle Village to Forest Hills" when that was not the point of the service change.

I don't see many people in Little Neck and Auburndale caring about going to location in Queens east of Main Street. You can't say that job locations are more accessible just because new routes are redrawn, that's a rather disingenuous point. Those job locations along the new route are now accessible, but if most people have jobs elsewhere and the new system takes them longer to get to their place of work because it doesn't take them to the necessary connections they need, then you just made all those job locations less accessible. You're playing with people's livelihoods just to experiment on a new route structure. 

Well those people complaining about the and  combo using that point either do not know what they are talking about, or (with respect to railfans) doing for more selfish reasons and using any talking point they think sticks. The major complaint I've heard regarding that route was whether to use  or . Others didn't mind the new route, but like Ridgewood in particular, wasn't with the  designation. 

3 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

The Francis Lewis route will provide connections to a lot of routes and connect a few schools and a nursing home, provide connection to downtown Flushing   etc. This isn't only about Queens, this plan provides inter-connectivity for those going to Nassau as well.  Some riders from Hollis, St Albans or Cambria Heights may need the N20G/N20H Great Neck or Colleges, Union Turnpike, QT87 to get to the Douglaston Shopping Center, Q12 to get to/from Queens Center when the subway is acting up, Northern Blvd or downtown Flushing for employment ,etc.  

Look at this as a network and not a one seat location to location personal chauffeur. 

Yes, and of those using the Q77 (which would be replaced with the QT71 and QT73) and the Q84 west of Springfield, how many would now need to walk even longer to one of the east-west routes going to Jamaica, for connections to SW Queens, Brooklyn. How many would have a longer bus ride to the  for Manhattan, which outside of the rush, is all local, and only serves a portion of Midtown, compared to the existing ride to the , which runs express in Queens and serves much more of Manhattan than the  does. 

You're reaching with the connectivity argument. Just because you have multiple connections available and more connections accessible, doesn't necessarily mean anything, because if most people do not want those connections, they're useless. Literally no one in SE Queens is seeking Douglaston Shopping Center. Queens Center Mall can still be reached under one fare under the existing system, since the Q88 goes to Springfield, and if the route doesn't connect with the Q88, they would be able to take the subway. The only difference that in some cases, the transfer location changes, and for others, the trip is done with two buses instead of bus + subway combo. Similar thing with locations along Union Turnpike (Some have direct access already and will continue to have it). When the benefits of the new connections provided are significantly outweighed by the difficult in other major connections, the bus is essentially a personal chauffeur. 

Again, if the Q77 existed in some form (and the Q84 as it does today, for the most part), and the QT73 also existed together, I would not have so much of a problem with this whole thing. But having the QT73 essentially replace the Q77 and the easternmost part of the Q84 (and make it harder for those getting to Jamaica) is simply something I can't agree with. 

Edited January 16, 2020 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[Cait Sith]

5 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

Be sure to tell us everything. What issues would Richmond Hill/Ozone park have besides the 101 Ave route?

The most vocal points within my area in particular(other than 101, that entire stretch is literally PISSED about the QT5) I've been hearing are these.

-Being forced to make extra, unnecessary transfers just to get to 165th Street Bus Terminal, which is big considering the ridership to/from that terminal on various lines such as the current Q8 & Q41...a clear example of them not taking ridership patterns into account.

-Merging & extending routes(QT67) without addressing the underlying problems as to why the current routes(Q112 & Q110) have problems to begin with.

-Q10 via 130 customers being forced to take the Q37 to get access to the train, along with airport workers living along that section losing access to the airport and having to make yet, another unnecessary transfer.
-Current Q10 riders worried about the Electchester extension screwing them over and reducing the overall reliability of the route.

If you compare my neck of the woods(from Atlantic Avenue going South) to western and northern Queens, we got screwed over pretty badly.....

 

4 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

 

The QT68 will be an inner semi-circle line, it will use Merrick/168th street to avoid the Archer Ave bus conga line congestion and serve Hillside Ave west, the  , connect to north-south routes west of the bus terminal,  the Hospital and Jamaica Van Wyck Station.

Speaking as someone who lives within walking distance of where the QT68 will start and end....that line will be completely useless west of Merrick.

For one, most hospital passengers are looking for areas more westward than eastward, which will resort to people taking the QT56 or the to the instead. The way that the QT68 is structured, it has no business going to the hospital whatsoever....

5 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

2) I was saying that metrocard data may show the majority transferring a 82nd street, and the remaining people you see may be headed to the  or .

That in itself is still inherently not true. There's far more people boarding/departing buses at 74th than at 82nd. I'm in full agreement with BM5 via Woodhaven on that notion.

Also, the way you speak about the redesign shows a clear lack of knowledge of how a lot of the current day Queens routes function along with their ridership patterns. Just saying that so-and-so redesign route will provide connections and such won't help matters when a lot of areas are seeing pretty significant reductions of service or no service at all after a certain time.....

Edited January 16, 2020 by Cait Sith

[N6 Limited]

3 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

The problem I have is that the MTA seems to be completely ignoring current ridership patterns. 

Don't they have metrocard data to see ridership patterns?

6 hours ago, NY1635 said:

I saw the Q77 bound for Springfield Gardens fully seated on Francis Lewis Blvd while heading to Jamaica on the n24 heading to Jamaica. I'm guessing that it's ridership is growing because less people are cramming themselves on to the Q85 at Springfield and Conduit Avenue or using that stop as a major transfer point. 

There's a few Schools on that route, could that be it?

6 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I agree with the need for gridlike north south service, but during rush hours they need to maintain one-bus access to the subway. 

They have rush hour subway access, but to have two networks for Rush and non-rush would make it complicated, no?

3 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

The problem I have is that the MTA seems to be completely ignoring current ridership patterns. 

You don’t create new riders by throwing away your entire old ridership.

some examples

Those Jackson Height route-

Ok fair enough, now there’s a bus north of Roosevelt that goes to QCM. It could’ve been done by extending the current Q47 south. But they decided to extend that route to Columbus Circle.

Q49- That new Q74 will carry air when people realize it’s faster to walk to 90th than wait 20 min for a bus. That’s the time it takes to walk from Astoria Bl! One of the busiest and most efficient route, gone, just like that. 

Q33- No one gets on/off at 82/Roosevelt. Most people want the E/F, like the 49 example, people are simply going to walk to 82nd if they can’t get a bus direct to E/F. If they have to take the 7 anyways, might as well walk it. 

People in that area takes the bus because of laziness. They could and will walk to the 7 if things goes awry. By taking away the direct option to 74th, I would estimate that 80% of the current ridership will be gone. Could you get that back at QCM?

Those Flushing Routes

They talk about having a grid system like we are in the middle of nowhere and no one takes the bus. All of hose zoned express runs Rush hours only which means, during other time, to get to Flushing, passengers will have to transfer to QT85/84/17. That and the new Q65 will no longer go to Flushing, I think QT17 will get completely slammed with passengers. There ain’t no way those three routes are able to handle the current load of passengers, at least not at the frequency they are proposing.

Im not complaining about change, I’m complaining about the complete disregard of the present travel patterns, and telling commuters to suck it and deal with it. 

I’m all for change, but I think some of this plan is completely flawed.

sticking strictly to theory is not how to design a bus system.

There it is, they're taking the bus because of laziness and could walk to the  the MTA probably knows this and thinks it's a waste of resources.

As for Flushing, keep in mind that the current network forces riders to use certain routes to get to certain places, the new network will have more blalanced

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

1) Buses during late night are not going to fill up the way daytime buses do. That's consistent throughout the entire system, and not just limited to SE Queens.

I'm pretty sure wouldn't be advocating for subway cuts during overnight hours, because some subway lines currently have considerably low ridership during late night hours. Sure, there might be less people going to the outer neighborhoods, but does it make sense to completely strand them if the existing system can get them to where they need to go and they carry other passengers as well? It's one thing to suggest eliminating one route, but it's another thing when Cambria Heights, Laurelton, and parts of Bellrose, Floral Park, and Rosedale would all lose overnight bus service, because the QT18 does not go past Springfield Boulevard or 231st Street. 

The QT7 would only have 24 hr service on weekdays, and it and the QT73 do not go to Jamaica. Out of the routes you mentioned, only the QT45 serves one of the outermost neighborhoods in SE Queens, and even then parts of that neighborhood is still far from that bus. Not necessarily an issue of the QT45, but it's an issue of the outright slashing of service to those neighborhoods. 

Also, do you realize that for some you would need to make additional transfers and go out your way, even if you make a walk to/from an overnight bus? You cannot tell me areas east of Francis Lewis Boulevard (in Laurelton) to Springfield Blvd is any easy walk. Springfield to Francis Lewis Boulevard is far enough to begin with, especially during overnight hours when you have to time yourself the bus. This doesn't even take into consideration any safety issues at night. If you make night service unusable or non-existent at night, you will lose your ridership base because many are just not going to walk in fear of their safety. 

 I've gotten off the  at 179th plenty of times at night, if a bus is coming some will board, others will get right in the cabs in the cab stand. I'ts not as serious as everyone is making it out to be. On many of those trips the bus empties out before Springfield Blvd anyway.

The QT73 does not go to Jamaica, maybe those riders would opt for the  at night, they can't do trackwork on els at night so it should be a nice and quick ride. We can track buses now, options can be made on the fly. 

How would walking from Springfield or Francis Lewis be much different than walking from Murdoch or Hollis? 

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The QT18 or the LTD service on Hillside would be useless for those people, because the buses I've been on (with standees on and everything) use the bus along Francis Lewis Boulevard (and to be more specific, places south of Jamaica Avenue). 

They'll have the Francis Lewis Rt, and alternatives. IF they're going to Springfield they may take the QT18, or the Farmers route.

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I don't see many people in Little Neck and Auburndale caring about going to location in Queens east of Main Street. You can't say that job locations are more accessible just because new routes are redrawn, that's a rather disingenuous point. Those job locations along the new route are now accessible, but if most people have jobs elsewhere and the new system takes them longer to get to their place of work because it doesn't take them to the necessary connections they need, then you just made all those job locations less accessible. You're playing with people's livelihoods just to experiment on a new route structure. 

Ideally everyone's trips should speed up, the buses. Less congestion, more collaboration with NYCDOT, etc.

 

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The only difference that in some cases, the transfer location changes, and for others, the trip is done with two buses instead of bus + subway combo. Similar thing with locations along Union Turnpike (Some have direct access already and will continue to have it). When the benefits of the new connections provided are significantly outweighed by the difficult in other major connections, the bus is essentially a personal chauffeur. 

Essentially most of this plan just moves some transfer locations and provides alternative transfer locations.

 

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Again, if the Q77 existed in some form (and the Q84 as it does today, for the most part), and the QT73 also existed together, I would not have so much of a problem with this whole thing. But having the QT73 essentially replace the Q77 and the easternmost part of the Q84 (and make it harder for those getting to Jamaica) is simply something I can't agree with. 

The Q77 has a cross route going to Jamaica like every 2 minutes, is it as much of a problem as you're making it out to be?

The outer portion of the Q84 is a light route which is walking distance to the Q4, 3 blocks, literally. Though, what they could do is just have alternate QT40s turn right on Francis Lewis and follow the QT73 routing. But then again that would be over servicing the area, they almost got the whole route canceled a few years ago.

57 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

The most vocal points within my area in particular(other than 101, that entire stretch is literally PISSED about the QT5) I've been hearing are these.

-Being forced to make extra, unnecessary transfers just to get to 165th Street Bus Terminal, which is big considering the ridership to/from that terminal on various lines such as the current Q8 & Q41...a clear example of them not taking ridership patterns into account.

-Merging & extending routes(QT67) without addressing the underlying problems as to why the current routes(Q112 & Q110) have problems to begin with.

-Q10 via 130 customers being forced to take the Q37 to get access to the train, along with airport workers living along that section losing access to the airport and having to make yet, another unnecessary transfer.
-Current Q10 riders worried about the Electchester extension screwing them over and reducing the overall reliability of the route.

I've been on the Q8 and it was a sardine can, but it stopped like every 5 seconds. They have to do something about that.

The QT67 gets them to the Bus terminal and directly serves the  LIRR and Jamaica Ave. Are they taking the positives into account? 

The Electchester extension isn't that much of a congested area right? No more than Lefferts.

Edited January 16, 2020 by N6 Limited

[Cait Sith]

39 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I've been on the Q8 and it was a sardine can, but it stopped like every 5 seconds. They have to do something about that.

The QT67 gets them to the Bus terminal and directly serves the  LIRR and Jamaica Ave. Are they taking the positives into account? 

The Electchester extension isn't that much of a congested area right? No more than Lefferts.

1. Every 5 seconds is quite a reach.....

2. The problem with your QT67 argument is that you don't consider that the Q112 already connects with the & (J), I left out the LIRR on purpose because literally no one from Liberty Avenue is looking for the LIRR. So that in general is not much of a positive when it's going to literally do the same exact thing as the Q112, just with a slight route change. It's more of a negative because they're inherently merging two already inconsistent routes to make the entire route even MORE inconsistent and possibly even more unreliable. On top of that, folks who currently take the Q41(especially to/from Rockaway Blvd) avoid the Q112 because of its problems along Liberty Avenue, even though it's a straighter line.

Yes, the QT67 gets them within walking distance to the terminal, which isn't exactly ideal especially if you're trying to make connections(as you are praising to the core) to routes at that terminal along with NICE Bus. People west of Sutphin Blvd lost direct access to 165th, and that's a big deal.

3. Electchester in itself isn't much of a big problem, congestion does happen, but between Electchester and Kew Gardens is where the worries begin. Not only will it lump riders west of Union Turnpike onto the line, but there's also crowding concerns between the two areas, and with 7 minute headways, it will not address the crowding concerns UNLESS they short turn buses at Kew Gardens and send every other bus to Electchester.....the way they planned out that extension, they essentially screwed over both the Q64 riders, and the Q10 riders.

Again, the way you and a few others speak about this plan shows a clear lack of knowledge of the majority of the current day Queens routes.

 

Edited January 16, 2020 by Cait Sith

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

56 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I've gotten off the  at 179th plenty of times at night, if a bus is coming some will board, others will get right in the cabs in the cab stand. I'ts not as serious as everyone is making it out to be. On many of those trips the bus empties out before Springfield Blvd anyway.

The QT73 does not go to Jamaica, maybe those riders would opt for the  at night, they can't do trackwork on els at night so it should be a nice and quick ride. We can track buses now, options can be made on the fly. 

Explain how someone coming from SW Queens or Brooklyn is supposed to use the . You're refusing to see the bigger picture with this entire thing, and are only viewing stuff from your lens. The  isn't the only train from Jamaica. People are also using the  and  to make connections to the buses as well. 

Whether the bus terminates at Springfield Blvd or further along the route, the bus operator is still paid for layover time. So if the same cycle time can be achieved by sending the buses further out, then it makes no sense to eliminate those portions of the route. However, with the combination of the Hillside Ave and Merrick Boulevard local, it's clearly a cost-cutting measure. 

56 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

How would walking from Springfield or Francis Lewis be much different than walking from Murdoch or Hollis? 

There's literally no service past Springfield towards Jamaica on the Hillside and Merrick route during the overnight hours, and no between those corridors going to Jamaica except for the QT67. Do you really think having people walk up to 2.5 miles or so to catch a bus to Jamaica is appropriate? Like come on now. Most people needing a bus between Merrick and Hillside would need to do a walk between 1-2 miles to either the QT18, or QT67, or QT68. 

56 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

Ideally everyone's trips should speed up, the buses. Less congestion, more collaboration with NYCDOT, etc.

Which is not happening if you're reducing Jamaica access. Once again, people are not just going to Jamaica for the subway, and more specifically, for subway access to Manhattan. People are actually going to Jamaica (for destinations along Hillside Ave and Jamaica Ave), or are connecting for subway service to Brooklyn. 

56 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

The Q77 has a cross route going to Jamaica like every 2 minutes, is it as much of a problem as you're making it out to be?

What two cross routes in that area are within 2 minutes of walking distance from each other? 

56 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

The outer portion of the Q84 is a light route which is walking distance to the Q4, 3 blocks, literally. Though, what they could do is just have alternate QT40s turn right on Francis Lewis and follow the QT73 routing. But then again that would be over servicing the area, they almost got the whole route canceled a few years ago.

Three avenue blocks, which are approximately two street blocks wide. So that makes 6 street blocks. Plus, this doesn't account for people who come from south of 120th Avenue.  

The MTA considered cutting the B25 and Q56 back back in 2009. They've proposed cutting the Q53 outright and partially replacing it with the Q52 and another Broadway route in this redesign "draft" plan. These are all literally cost cutting measures, because all three of those routes carry riders. You can't just assume that a service cut means that the route performs poorly, especially with this agency, which is eliminating service from where they can, even on the workhorses. Look at what they're trying to do with the Q44 in terms of service levels. 

Edited January 16, 2020 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[Cain]

Hi - new here from Eastern Queens subway desert. The Queens redesign has created a bit of a stir around these parts but unfortunately MTA will not host a community meeting out here... closest one is in Flushing, which is unfortunate.

I reckon the main driver for the cuts in service is more of MTA knowing this will be a long bargaining session with all stakeholders. The reductions are glaring but it is understandable why they mentioned "X minutes or better" for bus frequency. For all riders, folks need to come out in force to make it known - Andy B, along with the MTA seem to be engaged so we should be too.

It is a long shot but the only way I see this new grid working is if bus connections are made within <5 minutes. Drivers and riders alike need to have information screens in the bus to know connection times at busy bus intersections - if we are forced to transfer more, then drivers/dispatchers need to work smarter to make the connections work. NYC DOT needs to work even more closely with transit to get this bang on right so buses can make schedule. If folks need to wait for a transfer for over 20 minutes if they just missed the connection - that just isn't going to fly. Here's to hoping they'll listen to our concerns rather than hoping all the planets align.

One other concern is this one size fit all time of day frequency. I did not find any passage in the draft plan that expand on this. They do not account for shock loads like seasonal events and school arrival/dismissal days. For example, kids get dismissed before 3pm where bus frequency ramps up but they all get dismissed at once...

On a positive note: 

• I do like the new purple lines which speed up access to the main subway hubs - its not perfect but it is a good idea
• The grid looks much cleaner but again connections need to have reliability and consistency
• Spaced out bus stops should've been done much sooner but better late than never

Things MTA Bus should consider:

• Make into law a "Yield to Bus" rule for buses re-entering traffic flow
• Work with NYC DOT to make more parking restrictions (No Standing) during rush hour times and direction on more streets - parking is a luxury, not a right

There are some things that MTA got right but still much work to do from management, planners to riders. For those in the forum that have been to European cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen, they just have amazing transit, bus service is not an afterthought. Also having a more subdued car culture also helps...

[B35 via Church]

22 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

On top of that, folks who currently take the Q41(especially to/from Rockaway Blvd) avoid the Q112 because of its problems along Liberty Avenue, even though it's a straighter line.

Liberty is always an adventure (lol), but I don't bother with the Q112 because the Q41 is simply more accessible in more (key areas) of Jamaica..... I almost always take it out of 165th & yesterday was no exception (used it to catch the Q53).... The Q41 has its problems, but (for me at least), it deceptively gets you to Cross Bay from Jamaica faster than expected....

7 minutes ago, Cain said:

The reductions are glaring but it is understandable why they mentioned "X minutes or better" for bus frequency.

 Yeah, because they're snake oil salesmen....

(Welcome to the forums, by the way)

Edited January 16, 2020 by B35 via Church

[bobtehpanda]

4 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

What about the elimination of the Little Neck Parkway extension of the Q36?

To be quite honest, it carries air, and the Q79 before it carried air.

The majority of LNP is a wide broad street with little traffic and only very-low density housing. It probably needs a bike lane rather than a bus for the purposes of local transportation.

[EastFlatbushLarry]

2 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The Q41 has its problems, but (for me at least), it deceptively gets you to Cross Bay from Jamaica faster than expected....

agreed. the 41 absolutely has it's problems... being based out of Far Rockaway Depot doesn't help matters at all (at least when based out of JFK Depot, there was significant scheduling flexibility) but over the years I've noticed that 41's are preferred over the Q112 & to a certain extent, the Q8 during rush hours (especially am) 

[N6 Limited]

2 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

2. The problem with your QT67 argument is that you don't consider that the Q112 already connects with the & (J), I left out the LIRR on purpose because literally no one from Liberty Avenue is looking for the LIRR. So that in general is not much of a positive when it's going to literally do the same exact thing as the Q112, just with a slight route change. It's more of a negative because they're inherently merging two already inconsistent routes to make the entire route even MORE inconsistent and possibly even more unreliable. On top of that, folks who currently take the Q41(especially to/from Rockaway Blvd) avoid the Q112 because of its problems along Liberty Avenue, even though it's a straighter line.

Yes, the QT67 gets them within walking distance to the terminal, which isn't exactly ideal especially if you're trying to make connections(as you are praising to the core) to routes at that terminal along with NICE Bus. People west of Sutphin Blvd lost direct access to 165th, and that's a big deal.

I know the Q112 already does connect to the  and but it does it in a round about way. The QT67 is more direct, and connects eastern Queens to the  train., connects to the LIRR for some Atlantic Ticket and City Ticket access.

If you're trying to make connections at the bus terminal with NICE, walking from Jamaica Ave is usually better than waiting for the bus to loop around 168th street and 89th Ave (unless it's raining or something). I've done it numerous times. Three signals, 3 (left) turns, then Front door only Terminal annoyance, the buses bypass the NICE area, for all of that the NICE bus is already pulling out and leaving.

5 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Explain how someone coming from Brooklyn is supposed to use the . You're refusing to see the bigger picture with this entire thing, and are only viewing stuff from your lens. The  isn't the only train from Jamaica. People are also using the  and  to make connections to the buses as well. 

I see the bigger picture, I've had to navigate SE Queens by bus numerous times, and had to decide if I want to wait for "my" bus or take an alternative and walk. How is someone coming from Brooklyn getting to the Q77? The  and the  go the same way essentially. The Q77 does not connect to the  you need to walk or take another bus to the  . Also, the last Q77 is at 9:30PM,  Francis Lewis would get a service span increase.

21 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Which is not happening if you're reducing Jamaica access. Once again, people are not just going to Jamaica for the subway, and more specifically, for subway access to Manhattan. People are actually going to Jamaica (for destinations along Hillside Ave and Jamaica Ave), or are connecting for subway service to Brooklyn. 

When these passengers who are not going to the subway get off the bus in Jamaica, what do they do? They walk...

26 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

There's literally no service past Springfield towards Jamaica on the Hillside and Merrick route during the overnight hours, and no between those corridors going to Jamaica except for the QT67. Do you really think having people walk up to 2.5 miles or so to catch a bus to Jamaica is appropriate? Like come on now. Most people needing a bus between Merrick and Hillside would need to do a walk between 1-2 miles to either the QT18, or QT67, or QT68. 

And many times there's literally no people on these buses past Springfield on these routes, see the correlation?

27 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

What two cross routes in that area are within 2 minutes of walking distance from each other? 

 

Not walking distance. This fake aversion to walking is crazy. These people walk to the bus stop., (how many people live in front of the stop?), they walk at their destinations, when they take the subway to Manhattan they are NOT using Manhattan buses, they are walking all over the place. 

30 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Plus, this doesn't account for people who come from south of 120th Avenue.  

I sure that volume is low, like the ridership. 

33 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The MTA considered cutting the B25 and Q56 back back in 2009. They've proposed cutting the Q53 outright and partially replacing it with the Q52 and another Broadway route in this redesign "draft" plan. These are all literally cost cutting measures, because all three of those routes carry riders. You can't just assume that a service cut means that the route performs poorly, especially with this agency, which is eliminating service from where they can, even on the workhorses. Look at what they're trying to do with the Q44 in terms of service levels. 

That's true, they can't cut service based on subway duplication when they always have track work and issues like that to address.

 

[Cait Sith]

31 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I know the Q112 already does connect to the  and but it does it in a round about way. The QT67 is more direct, and connects eastern Queens to the  train., connects to the LIRR for some Atlantic Ticket and City Ticket access.

If you're trying to make connections at the bus terminal with NICE, walking from Jamaica Ave is usually better than waiting for the bus to loop around 168th street and 89th Ave (unless it's raining or something). I've done it numerous times. Three signals, 3 (left) turns, then Front door only Terminal annoyance, the buses bypass the NICE area, for all of that the NICE bus is already pulling out and leaving.

1....but who in Eastern Queens is looking for the train, when the masses already take the and the (J)(and in most cases the (F)!? There is literally zero demand for train access from anywhere east of 168, and those folks who need Downtown Brooklyn service already take the LIRR.....the merger is nothing more than a cost-cutting excuse. Also, logically speaking, going from that part of Queens to the (E)/(J) will get you to Manhattan far more faster than going all the way to Lefferts for the (A), so I don't see the logic as to why they did this.....

2. That's still not the point. Riders west of Sutphin had at least two routes that directly serves the terminals. With this plan, there will be none. That will adversely affect the vast amount of elderly and disabled riders that use both the Q8 and Q41 to make connections at 165th. Walking doesn't solve everything for everyone.

31 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

And many times there's literally no people on these buses past Springfield on these routes, see the correlation?

Not true, especially within the past few years.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Cait Sith