Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[Cain]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

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

Even as a public benefit corporation, that is a shame. Still, I respect what Andy B has been doing and pushing for better transit, even with all of the political BS he has to wade through and the MTA swamp he took over. I'll be honest - this Queens plan is fricken audacious and crazy. Who has the cajones to push forth a plan like that?

Now it's up to us riders to make it better and no better opportunity than the present.

[checkmatechamp13]

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

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.

And Winchester Blvd is so much higher-density and higher ridership?

[Uncle Floyd Fan]

22 hours ago, jaf0519 said:

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. 

Gotta disagree. There are many people who rely on seamless express bus service along the QM5 and QM6 east of 188th St. I've taken the first QM5 of the day on weekdays and Saturdays and there will already be 20-25 passengers onboard before getting to 188th St. In one instance, most of the boardings for the first Manhattan bound QM5 on a Saturday took place east of 188th St (then a few passengers boarded on 188th, with only 2 or 3 passengers boarding west of 188th while traveling along Union Tpke).

Also, in the rush for the MTA to try to claim efficiency by having full utilization of a given service, did it ever occur to them to have some redundancies in the event of bad weather, breakdowns, blackouts, etc (bad things happen - it's nice to know they're an alternative route)?

Case in point - In the new design, the Queens Blvd and 78th Ave ("Kew Gardens"...it's really Forest Hills) stop will no longer be served by Midtown express buses (unless I'm missing something). At present, there are a few buses that serve as a back-up when the E/F are having issues (I've used the X63, 64, 68 and QM18 when there were subway delays). It would be ashamed to lose some of what we already have.

Like many on here, if I really had to be somewhere, I'd rather drive or use Lyft than depend on the 'modern, cost-efficient' new design the MTA is giving us.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

35 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

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.

 

The Q77 does connect to the Q8, which does go to SW Queens and Brooklyn. It may not be as fast as the  , but it does go there. Also, the Q84 makes a connection to the  , so all those in Laurelton will lose that connection. Just like connections, service span increases does not mean net benefit. If the bus does not go where people need to go, then it's a waste of resources. And no, the  and  are not interchangeable like you think they are. Anybody going to the far west side is not taking the  for sure, and no one below 50th Street or so is taking the  for the east side. 

39 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

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

To a destination which is about a minute or two away. If they're not going to the subway or a making a bus connection, they're going somewhere within Jamaica. 

41 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

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

No, I don't see what correlation you're trying to make because it doesn't make sense. Buses will be emptier by the time they reach their terminals. Also, I don't buy this notion of buses being empty past Springfield Boulevard, because the MTA would have cut them these buses back then during the first opportunity they had (which was the 2010 cuts), but that wasn't the case. They most definitely wouldn't have had buses running overnight like that for decades. You are giving the MTA way too much credit with this one. 

47 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

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. 

No one said anything about people not walking to/from bus stops. It's the excessive walking that you seem to be okay with. You are the one who brought up that the Q77 route has route crossing it which are two minutes from each other, so I'm asking in which ones fit that under terms of walking distance. You can't answer that, because there are none. In terms of driving distance though, that's true. Another disingenuous talking point, and you are making the case about people walking. 

56 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I sure that volume is low, like the ridership. 

Under what metric are you basing this on?

57 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

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

That's not the reason why they weren't cut. Had the MTA had their way, those routes would have gone the way of the dinosaur. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

10 hours ago, QM1to6Ave said:

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?

The plan would be to not replace them as they retire for starters. This has been discussed and it would be one of the cost cutting measures. The fewer bus drivers you have to pay out for benefits, etc., the more money saved. That is  one of the ways that they are trying to cut costs by eliminating lines and cutting frequencies and spans.

[Interested Rider]

On 1/15/2020 at 2:26 PM, Interested Rider said:

The whole Queens redesign comes aross to me as a political hit to cover up something else. 

In this case it is the ferries which are far more wasteful than the existing system and by doing something as crazy as what we have here, the focus will be on the multitiude of changes and not on the issue that should be the focus. The New York Post had an article on the cost of ferry service and in my opinion the cost is far higher per passenger than for local and express bus service. When an agency takes a long time to respond to Freedom of Information Law requests on something like ferry service where the information was avaiable, it becomes clear since it did not fit the goals of the mayor's agenda, the responses were "conveniently delayed" as on purpose. The practice is usually commonplace when the information that the person requesting it will harm the political goals of the agency or the elected official.

The mayor has signaled to the agency and his appointees that he plans to cut funding to the MTA and MTA bus and the penny pinchers must have had a heart attack. This is the end result of something that should have been divided into at least two different parts with Union Turnpike being a line of separation done at two different times as based on such a lage number of changes, The orders went down to come up with something like this disaster. I am not saying that changes did not have to be made quite the opposite but that by not doing the enitre borough of Queens, at one shot, the changes that should be made could have been done.   

It is quite clear that those who came up with this "redesign" are counting on the public just plain accepting it. That is not getting together with others and using everything to stop these changes now. The MTA will still try to ram through these changes even with public opposition and I would be very wary of any proposal to implement these changes after November 2020.

It is that time when a bigger can of worms will open thanks to our elected officials in Albany and City Hall.

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.

 

The Mayor today stated that he will not contribute one more penny until the MTA receives a complete audit. That is what I call "chutzpah!"

The MTA knew about this before this garbage appeared and it is my opinion that this is the reason that the Queens redesign was issued in this form. 

The MTA is not the only agency that is impacted as the leaks have started and the inability of the elected officials both here and Albany to reduce spending in certain areas  has come back to haunt them

 

[N6 Limited]

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The Q77 does connect to the Q8, which does go to SW Queens and Brooklyn. It may not be as fast as the  , but it does go there. Also, the Q84 makes a connection to the  , so all those in Laurelton will lose that connection. Just like connections, service span increases does not mean net benefit. If the bus does not go where people need to go, then it's a waste of resources. And no, the  and  are not interchangeable like you think they are. Anybody going to the far west side is not taking the  for sure, and no one below 50th Street or so is taking the  for the east side. 

Yes the Q77 connects to the Q8 but you mentioned the  specifically.  If we're talking about bus connections. The QT71 will connect to numerous routes to Jamaica Center.

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

To a destination which is about a minute or two away. If they're not going to the subway or a making a bus connection, they're going somewhere within Jamaica. 

Many people are going to locations which are not just a minute or two away. Downtown Jamaica is very walkable. Most , once they're there, they walk because transferring just to sit in traffic is a waste of time.

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

No, I don't see what correlation you're trying to make because it doesn't make sense. Buses will be emptier by the time they reach their terminals. Also, I don't buy this notion of buses being empty past Springfield Boulevard, because the MTA would have cut them these buses back then during the first opportunity they had (which was the 2010 cuts), but that wasn't the case. They most definitely wouldn't have had buses running overnight like that for decades. You are giving the MTA way too much credit with this one. 

If they would have tried to shorturn late nite buses to Springfield people would complain, even if they're sleep at that time, they would complain. This way, they're two separate routes, so they're not "cutting" anything. 

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

No one said anything about people not walking to/from bus stops. It's the excessive walking that you seem to be okay with. You are the one who brought up that the Q77 route has route crossing it which are two minutes from each other, so I'm asking in which ones fit that under terms of walking distance. You can't answer that, because there are none. In terms of driving distance though, that's true. Another disingenuous talking point, and you are making the case about people walking. 

Yes driving distance, meaning while on the bus, you have numerous routes to transfer to, that will take you to Jamaica. As for walking, the walk from Hollis Ave to Jamaica Ave is like 10 mins. Murcoch to Linden is about the same.

1 hour ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

That's not the reason why they weren't cut. Had the MTA had their way, those routes would have gone the way of the dinosaur. 

I'm not saying that's the reason they weren't cut, because they were forced to keep them, but it's a valid reason for not getting rid of those routes.

[checkmatechamp13]

10 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. 

OK...and so does the MTA...which neighborhoods do you see that lost direct access to the subway (especially during rush hour)?

9 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

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...

Technically I think Astoria saw a span reduction in the compared to the (though the runs all night so that's a moot point)

And I'm still LMAO at the N15 story from the first time you mentioned it.

3 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

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

No more complicated than the "C" routes on the SIM network, or the local/limited-stop pattern on many lines throughout the city. I don't think you need a whole new network, just say which routes are extended to cover for other routes during off-peak hours.

2 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

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.

Not true, especially within the past few years.

1. To get to Downtown Manhattan from areas south of Liberty Avenue, it is quicker to go to the compared to going up to Jamaica for the and riding that all the way down.

2. Most of those routes that go to the 165th Street Bus Terminal are being extended to Jamaica Avenue & Merrick Blvd.

[N6 Limited]

2 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

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.

Not true, especially within the past few years.

1) if the  was easily accessible (No, the Q112 does not count), more people would try to get to it. I'd rather take the  to Lefferts (or Rockaway) then a bus to Jamaica than having to transfer to the  at Broadway Junction and crawl around Crescent street and Cypress Hills. Especially at late night headway.

Not everyone is trying to go to Manhattan, many are going to Brooklyn, when faster affordable opportunities open up, people use them. Atlantic Ticket is popular, especially between Jamaica and Brooklyn. Nostrand Ave's ridership has increased dramatically, guess which station is two blocks away from there?

2) Yes, walking doesn't solve everything for everyone but is it fair to limit improvements to the rest (99.9999%)of transit users? Should we stop using buses because some countries can't afford buses or paved roads?

 

Quote

checkmatechamp13 said:
No more complicated than the "C" routes on the SIM network, or the local/limited-stop pattern on many lines throughout the city. I don't think you need a whole new network, just say which routes are extended to cover for other routes during off-peak hours.

Ah., like the "N" buses in London

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by N6 Limited

[Via Garibaldi 8]

21 hours 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.

What you’re referring to is the  being required by State law to have a balanced budget annually. This article refers to it: https://cbcny.org/taxonomy/term/27?page=4

The redesigns are “cost neutral” so far (save Staten Island) because the  currently has not been given any more funding for them. HOWEVER, part of that is because lawmakers worked to create the lockbox, which will “lock funding” that can only be used for transportation for the (MTA). Between that and the monies that they will receive from congestion pricing, estimated to be in the BILLIONS every year, the thinking is that they will have ongoing, substantial funding sources that will allow them to run more service over time.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Cait Sith]

3 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

1) if the  was easily accessible (No, the Q112 does not count), more people would try to get to it. I'd rather take the  to Lefferts (or Rockaway) then a bus to Jamaica than having to transfer to the  at Broadway Junction and crawl around Crescent street and Cypress Hills. Especially at late night headway.

Not everyone is trying to go to Manhattan, many are going to Brooklyn, when faster affordable opportunities open up, people use them. Atlantic Ticket is popular, especially between Jamaica and Brooklyn. Nostrand Ave's ridership has increased dramatically, guess which station is two blocks away from there?

2) Yes, walking doesn't solve everything for everyone but is it fair to limit improvements to the rest (99.9999%)of transit users? Should we stop using buses because some countries can't afford buses or paved roads?

1. So we're just gonna ignore the fact that headways on the from Lefferts is every 20 minutes, and then turns into a shuttle during late nights? You would really take that over the ? You would seriously subject yourself to that? Hell, even I don't subject myself to that and I live near Lefferts Blvd. Also, how is the QT67 any faster? On a regular day, just to go from 111th to the Van Wyck can take about 15-25 minutes with all of the traffic on Liberty Avenue.
 

The whole route is estimated to be roughly 70 minutes long from end to end without traffic. The Q112 is roughly 32 minutes without traffic, with traffic, it can be upwards to 45-50 minutes. The Q110 doesn't see as much traffic as the Q112(at least from my experience), but I can guarantee that the majority of people will sit on a bus from Eastern Queens to Lefferts Blvd to go to Manhattan or Brooklyn will be minimal at best, especially since that in itself will end up being an hour-long trip on a regular day. You will still see more people from Jamaica heading to Liberty than anyone along the Eastern Queens portion of the route.

 

2. I'm not sure what you're trying to convey by pointing out the Nostrand Avenue and LIRR stations, but usage between the two isn't that high. More people make transfers to the subway(especially the 2/3/4/5)at Atlantic Terminal than at Nostrand.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Cait Sith

[N6 Limited]

3 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

And Winchester Blvd is so much higher-density and higher ridership?

It's the shortest link to the Douglaston Shopping Center, and hospital. Some of these purple routes look like they are a replacement to express routes.

[Lex]

7 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

2. I'm not sure what you're trying to convey by pointing out the Nostrand Avenue and LIRR stations, but usage between the two isn't that high. More people make transfers to the subway(especially the 2/3/4/5)at Atlantic Terminal than at Nostrand.

My guess is that it's supposed to merely be an increase in the station's mere use, not that it matters much.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

Yes the Q77 connects to the Q8 but you mentioned the  specifically.  If we're talking about bus connections. The QT71 will connect to numerous routes to Jamaica Center.

I mentioned the because that's the most used of the interborough options , but I never said it was the only option. 

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

Many people are going to locations which are not just a minute or two away. Downtown Jamaica is very walkable. Most , once they're there, they walk because transferring just to sit in traffic is a waste of time.

Downtown Jamaica is very walkable in the sense the places are close by to each other (and the bus routes). If people were really walking once the routes hit Jamaica, a lot more routes would be terminating near 165th Street, Jamaica Center, or Sutphin Boulevard, and there would be nothing traveling on Jamaica Avenue & Hillside Avenues. 

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

If they would have tried to shorturn late nite buses to Springfield people would complain, even if they're sleep at that time, they would complain. This way, they're two separate routes, so they're not "cutting" anything. 

Huh? So you're going from 'They don't need the service' to 'It is

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

 

not a service cut'. How do you explain the loss of overnight service on the Q2 and Q4 then? 

A service cut is a service cut. Those people east of Springfield will see a service cut. There's a loss in network coverage. Doesn't matter if you split it into five routes. 

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

Yes driving distance, meaning while on the bus, you have numerous routes to transfer to, that will take you to Jamaica. As for walking, the walk from Hollis Ave to Jamaica Ave is like 10 mins. Murcoch to Linden is about the same.

I'm not saying that's the reason they weren't cut, because they were forced to keep them, but it's a valid reason for not getting rid of those routes.

You're the one bringing up making a fuss about how people do all this walking to the bus and then use driving distance to make an argument about service being so close to each other, which again, comes off as disingenuous, and also says a lot.  Okay, so 10 minutes is not 2 minutes, and that's not even considering people who live further away from Francis Lewis Boulevard (which like you yourself mentioned, is the majority of people)

If the buses all go to Jamaica, what's the point of going to Francis Lewis Boulevard to catch the QT73 and waiting for a service passing every 20 minutes, just to go 2 minutes at max? Like, at least make a rational argument with this. Most of them will be forced to walk up to the avenue of the nearest bus, then walk to the bus stop on that avenue (because of the increased stop spacing).

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

I'm not saying that's the reason they weren't cut, because they were forced to keep them, but it's a valid reason for not getting rid of those routes.

It doesn't matter if it was valid, because they wouldn't have saved them under that justification. Again, you're looking at this through your own lens and you're refusing to look at the bigger picture. A lot of these changes are service cuts, and certain areas are hit pretty bad. The MTA doesn't care for a second about subway GOs, because subway shuttles cost less to operate during the year compared to a 24/7 bus line.

You're just going along with whatever the MTA proposal, figuring that they know what they're doing, and that they're justified in everything they're doing. You're using every MTA talking point and anything that sticks to defend the proposal and the agencies intentions as a good thing. That's definently not the case overall, and I'm not the only one who's expressing those statements. 

Edited January 17, 2020 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[Cain]

Dumb question(s):

• What does the Runtime metric on the Remix map of the redesign mean? Is that the entire round trip plus the layover time?
• Layover I assume means how long a bus would wait at the terminus before leaving?
• How is the Speed metric calculated? It seems really slow to be honest, even during rush hour - for some of the lines.

 

[checkmatechamp13]

1 hour ago, N6 Limited said:

It's the shortest link to the Douglaston Shopping Center, and hospital. Some of these purple routes look like they are a replacement to express routes.

It's physically shorter/quicker, but it bypasses so many residents. Even if ridership is relatively low on Little Neck Parkway, I'd say just spend the extra few minutes and go up LNP (also remember that you're also bypassing a densely populated area near Hillside Avenue in exchange for serving a more sparsely populated area near the HHE)

If it were a congested area then sure go ahead and bypass it, but those sections of Hillside Avenue & LNP are pretty free-flowing. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I just wanted to say that the response from Queens residents has been incredible. My advocacy group has received over 100 requests in the last few days alone from Queens express buses riders. The word is definitely getting around and I am hopeful that residents will demand that the  rescinds these proposed service cuts.

[Around the Horn]

7 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

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

Jewel Avenue is either perfect or a shit show and there's no in between LOL

The main issues with the QT14 are that peak frequencies have been halved (compared to the Q64) and the stop spacing

[N6 Limited]

2 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

1. So we're just gonna ignore the fact that headways on the from Lefferts is every 20 minutes, and then turns into a shuttle during late nights? You would really take that over the ? You would seriously subject yourself to that? Hell, even I don't subject myself to that and I live near Lefferts Blvd. Also, how is the QT67 any faster? On a regular day, just to go from 111th to the Van Wyck can take about 15-20 minutes with all of the traffic on Liberty Avenue.
 

The whole route is estimated to be roughly 70 minutes long from end to end without traffic. The Q112 is roughly 32 minutes without traffic, with traffic, it can be upwards to 45-50 minutes. The Q110 doesn't see as much traffic as the Q112(at least from my experience), but I can guarantee that the majority of people will sit on a bus from Eastern Queens to Lefferts Blvd to go to Manhattan or Brooklyn will be minimal at best, especially since that in itself will end up being an hour-long trip on a regular day. You will still see more people from Jamaica heading to Liberty than anyone along the Eastern Queens portion of the route.

It depends on the situation, I actively use Subway Time and Transit App which shows the location of buses, My trips are dynamic.  These days I Just use LIRR because it's quicker, 6 Mins between Jamaica and East New York. Others, who'd prefer the cheaper route may like the option. 

I'm not saying many during the day would ride from  Floral Park to Ozone, but there will be intermediate trips of that nature.  Especially in the evening as traffic clears up and the bus can make moves.  The QT67 trip should be shorter than the Q112 because' it wouldn't be doing some round about trip, there will be less buses in Jamaica as well.

2 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

2. I'm not sure what you're trying to convey by pointing out the Nostrand Avenue and LIRR stations, but usage between the two isn't that high. More people make transfers to the subway(especially the 2/3/4/5)at Atlantic Terminal than at Nostrand.

The point is ridership went up because the LIRR is an easy and quick connection

[Lex]

18 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

The point is ridership went up because the LIRR is an easy and quick connection

And how is that even remotely relevant?

[N6 Limited]

4 hours ago, Interested Rider said:

The Mayor today stated that he will not contribute one more penny until the MTA receives a complete audit. That is what I call "chutzpah!"

 

That would be nice if they could do that before enacting more and more taxes, fees and toll hikes

 

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

It's physically shorter/quicker, but it bypasses so many residents. Even if ridership is relatively low on Little Neck Parkway, I'd say just spend the extra few minutes and go up LNP (also remember that you're also bypassing a densely populated area near Hillside Avenue in exchange for serving a more sparsely populated area near the HHE)

If it were a congested area then sure go ahead and bypass it, but those sections of Hillside Avenue & LNP are pretty free-flowing. 

They wanted to minimize redundant routes so breaking it off Hillside ASAP is probably the result of that, also the Shopping Center is a source of jobs, the Remix app has that information.  By going past the shopping center and to the Hospital it increases the value of the network.

[Cait Sith]

29 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

It depends on the situation, I actively use Subway Time and Transit App which shows the location of buses, My trips are dynamic.  These days I Just use LIRR because it's quicker, 6 Mins between Jamaica and East New York. Others, who'd prefer the cheaper route may like the option. 

I'm not saying many during the day would ride from  Floral Park to Ozone, but there will be intermediate trips of that nature.  Especially in the evening as traffic clears up and the bus can make moves.  The QT67 trip should be shorter than the Q112 because' it wouldn't be doing some round about trip, there will be less buses in Jamaica as well.

The point is ridership went up because the LIRR is an easy and quick connection

"should be shorter", yeah, maybe by like 3-5 minutes, that won't matter once it hits traffic....Jamaica Avenue and Sutphin Blvd alone will slow that route down. Liberty Avenue traffic doesn't really clear up until like 8pm-ish, and that's being generous....

My advice to you is to actually check out the many routes and areas in question and stop looking at a map for the MTA's talking points about these changes. You're just coming off as a shill by defending the plans from head to toe without seeing any kind of faults whatsoever. Your lack of knowledge about many of the routes in question is quite evident.
 

With this draft plan, the cons definitely outweigh the pros.....

And no, ridership did not go up because of the connection....ridership primarily went up because more and more people moved into that general area. It has less to do with that particular connection.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Cait Sith

[N6 Limited]

5 minutes ago, Lex said:

And how is that even remotely relevant?

Everyone doesn't have money for the LIRR. People WILL go to the  train if was quick and convenient way to do so people DO want to go to Brooklyn, and not necessarily via the  train.

[N6 Limited]

1 minute ago, Cait Sith said:

"should be shorter", yeah, maybe by like 3-5 minutes, that won't matter once it hits traffic....Jamaica Avenue and Sutphin Blvd alone will slow that route down. Liberty Avenue traffic doesn't really cleared up until like 8pm-ish, and that's being generous....

My advice to you is to actually check out the many routes and areas in question and stop looking at a map for the MTA's talking points about these changes. You're just coming off as a shill by defending the plans from head to toe without seeing any kind of faults whatsoever. Your lack of knowledge about many of the routes in question is quite evident.
 

With this draft plan, the cons definitely outweigh the pros.....

And no, ridership did not go up because of the connection....ridership primarily went up because more and more people moved into that general area. It has less to do with that particular connection.

I'm probably the one that's least "just looking at a Map" of SE Queens routes as I literally see these buses in Jamaica every day. Conga lines of virtually empty buses swirling around Jamaica streets after dropping off at the subway or before picking up, which this redesign would reduce. Jamaica Ave and Archer Ave will see a reduction of traffic, there won't be as many buses swarming around the area.  The QT67 would be on Sutphin for 5-6 blocks, it won't be waiting to make a left turn from Jamaica Ave, with the Q6, Q6 Limited, Q8, Q9, Q41.   The new Sutphin routes would be coming from Hillside Ave and using the Bus lanes put in place for the Q44. You wont't have Q25 and Q65's looping around to go back. Etc. 

While buses have the ability carry a lot of people they also take a lot of room, these buses reduce vehicle throughput per light cycle, they block intersections, etc. So by having them on the "outskirts" , reducing the route redundancy in Jamaica and Flushing, together with enforced bus lanes,  the congestion would be reduced. 

[RR503]

4 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

What you’re referring to is the  being required by State law to have a balanced budget annually. This article refers to it: https://cbcny.org/taxonomy/term/27?page=4

The redesigns are “cost neutral” so far (save Staten Island) because the  currently has not been given any more funding for them. HOWEVER, part of that is because lawmakers worked to create the lockbox, which will “lock funding” that can only be used for transportation for the (MTA). Between that and the monies that they will receive from congestion pricing, estimated to be in the BILLIONS every year, the thinking is that they will have ongoing, substantial funding sources that will allow them to run more service over time.

$0 of congestion pricing revenues will go to the operating budget. It's being bonded to pay for the shiny new objects in the 50 billion dollar capital plan. The operating budget remains in tatters. 

As for the lockbox, the bill as written merely prevents funding from being removed from the MTA, it doesn't guarantee any adds. The long-term utility of just more money is questionable at any rate; MTA's operating costs on a per service-hour basis as well as in aggregate have been escalating wildly ahead of inflation over the past decade or so. Without adequate cost controls and resource prioritization, adding more would just amount to kicking the can down the road.