Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[Gotham Bus Co.]

6 hours ago, NY1635 said:

A lot of bus drivers admit that the MTA is not coming back because they hate Nassau County Residents.

 

MTA is not returning to the bus business in Nassau County because the County doesn't like to pay its bills. (The contractor is expected to subsidize the client.)

[NY1635]

The MTA isn't acknowledging that the commutes on buses are getting shorter because the trip times are getting longer. In Flushing, there's more usage along Kissena Blvd and around Flushing Hospital from the Subway at Main Street for the or people using the stop at Kissena and Main for points East. They seem unwilling to move buses over to Union Street or Bowne Street when the road was narrowed in Main between Roosevelt and Northern Blvd. The only routes I see for the long lines are the Q17/27 for Fresh Meadows, n20G at Sanford and Kissena for Little Neck Residents. The Q12's ridership is coming from Northern right after Bell and Before Marathon Parkway. The Q13 scoop up those people. 

The Q44/20 is now used by people who want direct service from Jamaica to Flushing. The Q60 nowadays is used by people between QCM and Queens Plaza, while the Q32's usage is increasing between 59th and 60th and Broadway-74th Street on Roosevelt Avenue. 

On the Express Bus Service Side, the Dutch Broadway and Elmont Road route into Manhattan isn't going to get any riders. Those Elmont and North Valley Stream residents are upfront about being clueless about the n1 and prefer to just walk over to Linden for the Q4 or north on the Elmont Road avoiding the side of the Cemetery for the n6 at Hempstead Turnpike. Elmont and North Valley Stream is merely 20-30 minutes away from the  at Hillside Avenue and 179th Street, 30-40 Minutes away from the stop Subway at Archer Avenue. 

Edited June 8, 2020 by NY1635

[B35 via Church]

On 6/7/2020 at 10:10 AM, NY1635 said:

A lot of bus drivers admit that the MTA is not coming back because they hate Nassau County Residents.

....and said residents like yourself made it all too easy, I suppose

On 6/8/2020 at 9:26 AM, NY1635 said:

The only routes I see for the long lines are the Q17/27 for Fresh Meadows, n20G at Sanford and Kissena for Little Neck Residents. The Q12's ridership is coming from Northern right after Bell and Before Marathon Parkway. The Q13 scoop up those people.

Right, because the long line for eastbound passengers along Roosevelt (across the street from the New World Mall entrance) just evaporated & shifted over to Sanford/Kissena....

More fiction brewing, spewing, and oozing from the likes of you..... So you're gonna seriously implicate that the Q13 is picking up the grunt of the ridership between Downtown Flushing & Bell, while the Q12's ridership is merely coming from Northern between (right after) Bell & (before) Marathon Pkwy..... So there aren't long lines for the Q12 along Roosevelt av?

Man, GTFOH with the bohshit.

[Lex]

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

....and said residents like yourself made it all too easy, I suppose

Right, because the long line for eastbound passengers along Roosevelt (across the street from the New World Mall entrance) just evaporated & shifted over to Sanford/Kissena....

More fiction brewing, spewing, and oozing from the likes of you..... So you're gonna seriously implicate that the Q13 is picking up the grunt of the ridership between Downtown Flushing & Bell, while the Q12's ridership is merely coming from Northern between (right after) Bell & (before) Marathon Pkwy..... So there aren't long lines for the Q12 along Roosevelt av?

Man, GTFOH with the bohshit.

Agree with the move or not, it's not as if the shift to artics was complete BS...

[B35 via Church]

25 minutes ago, Lex said:

Agree with the move or not, it's not as if the shift to artics was complete BS...

Yeah, as with anything with this guy, who knows wtf he's talking about......

The Q13 is clearly secondary to the Q12 along Northern....

[Future ENY OP]

On 6/7/2020 at 10:10 AM, NY1635 said:

 A lot of bus drivers admit that the MTA is not coming back because they hate Nassau County Residents.

You just answered your own question.

[bobtehpanda]

Nassau is full of people who think the products of everyone else's labor is worth less than the asking price and then they have the nerve to get all snippety about things that don't matter because they make a meh salary and pay an expensive ass mortgage on a meh house. Literally the textbook definition of "bougie."

[bwwnyc123]

That is how County Suburban people act vs. City people.

[Trainmaster5]

9 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Nassau is full of people who think the products of everyone else's labor is worth less than the asking price and then they have the nerve to get all snippety about things that don't matter because they make a meh salary and pay an expensive ass mortgage on a meh house. Literally the textbook definition of "bougie."

When I feel like jerking around the Nassau resident who looks down on the City residents I ask them a simple question. History books name 3 original counties on Long Island. “ How come Nassau isn’t on the list “ ? They get angry and defensive when I tell them that their precious Nassau is Queens-East. I usually smile when I tell people that the  Queens County government center was at Mineola before Nassau county was created by the state when the five boroughs became New York City. They really get bent out of shape when I tell them that I learned the history when I was in the fourth grade in Brooklyn. So much for their “ better “ school systems. I just wanted to add to your spot on post. Carry on.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

18 hours ago, Trainmaster5 said:

When I feel like jerking around the Nassau resident who looks down on the City residents I ask them a simple question. History books name 3 original counties on Long Island. “ How come Nassau isn’t on the list “ ? They get angry and defensive when I tell them that their precious Nassau is Queens-East. I usually smile when I tell people that the  Queens County government center was at Mineola before Nassau county was created by the state when the five boroughs became New York City. They really get bent out of shape when I tell them that I learned the history when I was in the fourth grade in Brooklyn. So much for their “ better “ school systems. I just wanted to add to your spot on post. Carry on.

They don't like to admit that Nassau County used to be the eastern two-thirds of Queens. (If it still were, then street numbers would be insanely high.) 

[B35 via Church]

On 6/14/2020 at 5:02 PM, bobtehpanda said:

Nassau is full of people who think the products of everyone else's labor is worth less than the asking price and then they have the nerve to get all snippety about things that don't matter because they make a meh salary and pay an expensive ass mortgage on a meh house.....

So that's Nassau County's motto....

Truly do learn something everyday!

On 6/15/2020 at 2:35 AM, Trainmaster5 said:

When I feel like jerking around the Nassau resident who looks down on the City residents I ask them a simple question. History books name 3 original counties on Long Island. “ How come Nassau isn’t on the list “ ? They get angry and defensive when I tell them that their precious Nassau is Queens-East. I usually smile when I tell people that the  Queens County government center was at Mineola before Nassau county was created by the state when the five boroughs became New York City. They really get bent out of shape when I tell them that I learned the history when I was in the fourth grade in Brooklyn. So much for their “ better “ school systems. I just wanted to add to your spot on post. Carry on.

You mean the same Nassau residents whimpering about county-wide overdevelopment & city folks on "their" trains?

Wanna talk to me about overdevelopment? Take a walk down a couple side streets in Midtown Manhattan & have fun walking under all the goddamn scaffoldings..... It's almost to the point where you don't even need an umbrella in a downpour to go from point A to point damn B.... Lol.....

On 6/15/2020 at 9:20 PM, Gotham Bus Co. said:

They don't like to admit that Nassau County used to be the eastern two-thirds of Queens. (If it still were, then street numbers would be insanely high.) 

Yeah, it'd be well into the (daytona) 500's.....

Edited June 17, 2020 by B35 via Church

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet, but the proposed Q65 is possibly one of the worst ideas I've ever seen. The real Q65 isn't without its weaknesses, but the whole "straighten it out" and "convert to LTD" philosophy as some magical potion to solving all problems has bothered me the most about this whole "draft" crap. Neutering the Q65 in Jamaica by having it serve just one measly station along the  for it's entirety, severing it's access to Flushing, and abandoning College Point, for WHAT? Just to have the whole thing die by serving residential neighborhoods in Queens that are not dependent on public transportation at all which have close to 0 potential in promoting ridership growth??? F*** out of here with that nonsense.

[B35 via Church]

20 minutes ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet, but the proposed Q65 is possibly one of the worst ideas I've ever seen. The real Q65 isn't without its weaknesses, but the whole "straighten it out" and "convert to LTD" philosophy as some magical potion to solving all problems has bothered me the most about this whole "draft" crap. Neutering the Q65 in Jamaica by having it serve just one measly station along the  for it's entirety, severing it's access to Flushing, and abandoning College Point, for WHAT? Just to have the whole thing die by serving residential neighborhoods in Queens that are not dependent on public transportation at all which have close to 0 potential in promoting ridership growth??? F*** out of here with that nonsense.

Yeah, we've (heavily) criticized that QT65 proposal already, on a couple occasions... It's just one of many of the downright awful proposals featured in this first draft (or whatever) of this redesign.....

[LGA Link N Train]

1 hour ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet, but the proposed Q65 is possibly one of the worst ideas I've ever seen. The real Q65 isn't without its weaknesses, but the whole "straighten it out" and "convert to LTD" philosophy as some magical potion to solving all problems has bothered me the most about this whole "draft" crap. Neutering the Q65 in Jamaica by having it serve just one measly station along the  for it's entirety, severing it's access to Flushing, and abandoning College Point, for WHAT? Just to have the whole thing die by serving residential neighborhoods in Queens that are not dependent on public transportation at all which have close to 0 potential in promoting ridership growth??? F*** out of here with that nonsense.

You can say that again! [The part I put in bold] To be honest, I wonder where the incentive for the QT65 proposal came from. 

[Q43LTD]

I'm just wondering who in St Albans/Addisleigh Park is trying to get to Beechhurst

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

32 minutes ago, Q43LTD said:

I'm just wondering who in St Albans/Addisleigh Park is trying to get to Beechhurst

I don't necessarily think that a southward extension to Saint Albans is necessarily a problem, but it's more of how it does it. It'll serve the 165th Street bus terminal, but would now miss Jamaica Center (which more people are headed towards). Also, using Merrick/174th leaves quite a lot of that area between Merrick and the railroad tracks far away from a bus. It might make travel to Queens Hospital Center, and areas north of Hillside a little easier.

The main issue (as was pointed out) is rerouting service away from Flushing (gutting service to Flushing Hospital and Downtown Flushing) and Jamaica Center, which would tank ridership. All those buses would be carrying loads of air north of Horace Harding (I would even go as far as saying north of Union Turnpike in some instances). I'm not oppose to taking the Q65 away from serving Jamaica LIRR station, since the Q25 can keep serving that. 

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Yeah, we've (heavily) criticized that QT65 proposal already, on a couple occasions... It's just one of many of the downright awful proposals featured in this first draft (or whatever) of this redesign.....

What are some of your thoughts in fixing that mess? Also, I can't picture an Addisleigh Park resident needing anything north of Union Turnpike. Demographics and ridership patterns just don't support that.

[checkmatechamp13]

 

3 hours ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

You can say that again! [The part I put in bold] To be honest, I wonder where the incentive for the QT65 proposal came from. 

Simple: The overall lack of "crosstown" service. Most of the routes in NE Queens feed into Flushing and most trips from SE Queens to other portions of Queens involve a transfer in Jamaica. So this is a way of avoiding giving some people an option that doesn't involve transferring in those 2 hubs. (As I mentioned, generally speaking I'd prefer to transfer at a relatively simple intersection instead of one of these hubs where the routes are all over the place)

I'm not saying they did the right thing with this route, but I can see the general logic of what they were trying to accomplish.

Me personally I think they got it right (as far as crosstown service goes) with the QT71 & QT73, but the QT64 & QT65 definitely need some work.

Edited June 21, 2020 by checkmatechamp13

[jaf0519]

18 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

 

Simple: The overall lack of "crosstown" service. Most of the routes in NE Queens feed into Flushing and most trips from SE Queens to other portions of Queens involve a transfer in Jamaica. So this is a way of avoiding giving some people an option that doesn't involve transferring in those 2 hubs. (As I mentioned, generally speaking I'd prefer to transfer at a relatively simple intersection instead of one of these hubs where the routes are all over the place)

I'm not saying they did the right thing with this route, but I can see the general logic of what they were trying to accomplish.

Me personally I think they got it right (as far as crosstown service goes) with the QT71 & QT73, but the QT64 & QT65 definitely need some work.

The crosstown service point is the key. There are several ideas that I think the MTA should have gone with regarding service.

• The main routes that are north south corridors east of Kissena Blvd should not be required to serve any subway stations. Only LIRR Stations. These routes include the QT65 (164 St), QT64 (Utopia Pkwy), QT73 (Francis Lewis Blvd) and QT71 (Springfield Blvd). They are too far east from Flushing or Jamaica and for the most part serve too large of a corridor to warrant a large diversion to a subway station.
• Though I say these routes shouldn’t be required to serve any subway stations, I propose that the QT64 and QT65 do serve only the 169 St  as they both run down streets close to it.
•  The QT73 should not serve Main St  but instead operate the full length of Francis Lewis Blvd. I would reroute it to operate via Francis Lewis to the Cross Island, then follow the current Q15 route to Beechurst. On the southern end I would have it operate the full length of Francis Lewis to Rosedale. There it could either terminate with the QT45 or operate via the Q111 part time rout to Mill Rd, then head north towards Green Acres Mall. Nothing will replace the QT73 on Sanford Ave. I would recommend the MTA allow the N20G be open door since it will no longer duplicate the Q12 to Little Neck and Sanford is within walking distance to the QT81 on Roosevelt or QT17 on Northern.

As a general point: an infrequent bus that is on time is much better to me than a frequent bus that is always late. Because of Flushing and Jamaica, the Q65 is extremely unreliable. During the Spring semester of 2019, because the bus was so unreliable I Kept track of how many times it was on time. Out of the 65 days of class I had, the Q65 was on time, or less than 10 minutes late, only SEVEN TIMES. This meant I would walk over 3/4 of a mile to my second bus so I wouldn’t be stuck waiting, and almost always would be on the second bus before the Q65 showed up. The amount of times that I would get downstairs to my stop and check BusTime to see three or four southbound buses north of Northern Blvd, and the nearest southbound bus almost at Hillside Ave, was way too many. The QT65 would fix that.

As a Q65 rider currently, this is how I feel about the QT65.

• The current proposed QT65 will not come anywhere close to retaining the same ridership the current Q65 has. Therefore, if implemented exactly like they proposed with the same frequencies, it would be a massive failure. Ignoring the MTA’s requirements of a bus stop roughly every 0.25 miles, if I were to run a bus from Beechurst to St. Alban’s via 164 St, I would have it be weekdays only. Even with all the current ridership on the Q65, the QT65 would carry far less people to warrant frequent service at any time.
• However, implementing the QT65 how the MTA proposes with weekend service, would still give some areas the short end of the stick. These would be places like 164 St north of Booth Memorial Ave and south of 46 Ave, closer to Kissena Park, as well as areas east of 164 St that are south of Horace Harding Expwy that are too far from Kissena Blvd. While I agree with the elimination of the Q17 on Horace Harding and Kissena, the area still needs a bus to Flushing.
• To deal with this i propose an alternative to the current plan. 
• Create a QT29 from Electchester-164 St/Jewel Ave to Flushing-Main St. It will run daily. Service would operate slightly less frequent than the proposed QT65, in order to keep some service on the crosstown, to keep the QT65 as a coverage route that avoids the traffic in Downtown Flushing.
• QT29 would operate anywhere from every 15 to every 30 minutes depending on day and time of day.
• QT65 would run every every 30 minutes during the rush hour and every 60 minutes during weekday middays, evenings, and  weekends, with late evening service only operating between Beechurst and Jamaica Bus Terminal. By having low frequency, it would match the low ridership with providing good coverage where needed, and complementing areas that are already well served, such as Queens Hospital, which already will have frequency service via the QT16.

I also propose some route changes for the QT65 for better connections and better road width:

Northern terminal: Beechurst-166 St/Powells Cove Blvd

Route via:

• Powells Cove Blvd to 154 St instead of 160 St
• Cross Island Pkwy/Francis Lewis Blvd to 160 St
• 160 St to Clintonville St
• Clintonville St to 163 St
• 163 St to 32 Ave
• 32 Ave to 162 St
• Follow QT65 route via 162 St/Pidegon Meadow Rd/164 St to Grand Central Pkwy
• Grand Central Parkway to Homelawn St (provides connection to St. John’s University)
• Homelawn St to Hillside Ave (provides better connection to 169 St 
• Follows QT65 route to 174 St and 111 Ave
• Southbound route changed to operate via 111 Ave/Sayres Ave/178 St/112 Ave/177 St to Linden Blvd
• Northbound from Linden to 111 Ave changed to via 176 St/Murdock Ave/178 St/112 Ave/177 St/111 Ave
• Instead of heading west on Linden back to Merrick, the bus should head east to the St. Albans LIRR Station. The bus would turn around via Everett Pl/Baisley Blvd/Farmers Blvd/Linden Blvd.

This plan would give people on areas of 164 St that would lose easy access to the Flushing via the QT16 with access, plus providing the 164 St corridor with a more reliable route up and down the corridor. Time spent in traffic prone areas like Jamaica would be minimized even with these reroutes. And better and new connections would be available. Southbound riders would have a direct connection to the  and the southern terminal change would give connections to the Babylon Branch and West Hempstead Branch, since the LIRR connection at Jamaica was lost. Yes, 164 St south of Jewel Ave would suffer a massive service reduction, but there is easy access to both the QT16 and QT64.

Service on these crosstown routes, unless the corridors can be expected to have significant ridership or have no alternatives at all, should be reduced to coverage levels. Not MTA/NYCTA coverage levels of half hourly, but to 45 to 60 minutes if that is what ridership warrants. Trips should be run on purple route that serve the subway and connect to the routes, as the MTA did say that second transfers would be given to trips that require it. Therefore there should be a problem that the QT71 and QT73 don’t serve the subway, or that the QT64 and QT65 only serve it near one end of the route. With this, service would be added to routes like they QT48 (weekdays only instead of just rush hours), QT49 (weekdays only instead of just rush hours), and QT51 (weekdays and Saturdays only, instead of just rush hours).

 

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

42 minutes ago, jaf0519 said:

The crosstown service point is the key. There are several ideas that I think the MTA should have gone with regarding service.

• *"The main routes that are north south corridors east of Kissena Blvd should not be required to serve any subway stations. Only LIRR Stations." These routes include the QT65 (164 St), QT64 (Utopia Pkwy), QT73 (Francis Lewis Blvd) and QT71 (Springfield Blvd). They are too far east from Flushing or Jamaica and for the most part serve too large of a corridor to warrant a large diversion to a subway station.
• Though I say these routes shouldn’t be required to serve any subway stations, **"I propose that the QT64 and QT65 do serve only the 169 St  as they both run down streets close to it."
•  ***"The QT73 should not serve Main St  but instead operate the full length of Francis Lewis Blvd." I would reroute it to operate via Francis Lewis to the Cross Island, then follow the current Q15 route to Beechurst. On the southern end I would have it operate the full length of Francis Lewis to Rosedale. There it could either terminate with the QT45 or operate via the Q111 part time rout to Mill Rd, then head north towards Green Acres Mall. Nothing will replace the QT73 on Sanford Ave. I would recommend the MTA allow the N20G be open door since it will no longer duplicate the Q12 to Little Neck and Sanford is within walking distance to the QT81 on Roosevelt or QT17 on Northern.

As a general point: an infrequent bus that is on time is much better to me than a frequent bus that is always late. Because of Flushing and Jamaica, the Q65 is extremely unreliable. During the Spring semester of 2019, because the bus was so unreliable I Kept track of how many times it was on time. Out of the 65 days of class I had, the Q65 was on time, or less than 10 minutes late, only SEVEN TIMES. This meant I would walk over 3/4 of a mile to my second bus so I wouldn’t be stuck waiting, and almost always would be on the second bus before the Q65 showed up. The amount of times that I would get downstairs to my stop and check BusTime to see three or four southbound buses north of Northern Blvd, and the nearest southbound bus almost at Hillside Ave, was way too many. The QT65 would fix that.

As a Q65 rider currently, this is how I feel about the QT65.

• The current proposed QT65 will not come anywhere close to retaining the same ridership the current Q65 has. Therefore, if implemented exactly like they proposed with the same frequencies, it would be a massive failure. Ignoring the MTA’s requirements of a bus stop roughly every 0.25 miles, if I were to run a bus from Beechurst to St. Alban’s via 164 St, I would have it be weekdays only. Even with all the current ridership on the Q65, the QT65 would carry far less people to warrant frequent service at any time.
• However, implementing the QT65 how the MTA proposes with weekend service, would still give some areas the short end of the stick. These would be places like 164 St north of Booth Memorial Ave and south of 46 Ave, closer to Kissena Park, as well as areas east of 164 St that are south of Horace Harding Expwy that are too far from Kissena Blvd. While I agree with the elimination of the Q17 on Horace Harding and Kissena, the area still needs a bus to Flushing.
• To deal with this i propose an alternative to the current plan. 
• Create a QT29 from Electchester-164 St/Jewel Ave to Flushing-Main St. It will run daily. Service would operate slightly less frequent than the proposed QT65, in order to keep some service on the crosstown, to keep the QT65 as a coverage route that avoids the traffic in Downtown Flushing.
• QT29 would operate anywhere from every 15 to every 30 minutes depending on day and time of day.
• QT65 would run every every 30 minutes during the rush hour and every 60 minutes during weekday middays, evenings, and  weekends, with late evening service only operating between Beechurst and Jamaica Bus Terminal. By having low frequency, it would match the low ridership with providing good coverage where needed, and complementing areas that are already well served, such as Queens Hospital, which already will have frequency service via the QT16.

I also propose some route changes for the QT65 for better connections and better road width:

Northern terminal: Beechurst-166 St/Powells Cove Blvd

Route via:

• Powells Cove Blvd to 154 St instead of 160 St
• Cross Island Pkwy/Francis Lewis Blvd to 160 St
• 160 St to Clintonville St
• Clintonville St to 163 St
• 163 St to 32 Ave
• 32 Ave to 162 St
• Follow QT65 route via 162 St/Pidegon Meadow Rd/164 St to Grand Central Pkwy
• Grand Central Parkway to Homelawn St (provides connection to St. John’s University)
• Homelawn St to Hillside Ave (provides better connection to 169 St 
• Follows QT65 route to 174 St and 111 Ave
• Southbound route changed to operate via 111 Ave/Sayres Ave/178 St/112 Ave/177 St to Linden Blvd
• Northbound from Linden to 111 Ave changed to via 176 St/Murdock Ave/178 St/112 Ave/177 St/111 Ave
• Instead of heading west on Linden back to Merrick, the bus should head east to the St. Albans LIRR Station. The bus would turn around via Everett Pl/Baisley Blvd/Farmers Blvd/Linden Blvd.

This plan would give people on areas of 164 St that would lose easy access to the Flushing via the QT16 with access, plus providing the 164 St corridor with a more reliable route up and down the corridor. Time spent in traffic prone areas like Jamaica would be minimized even with these reroutes. And better and new connections would be available. Southbound riders would have a direct connection to the  and the southern terminal change would give connections to the Babylon Branch and West Hempstead Branch, since the LIRR connection at Jamaica was lost. Yes, 164 St south of Jewel Ave would suffer a massive service reduction, but there is easy access to both the QT16 and QT64.

Service on these crosstown routes, unless the corridors can be expected to have significant ridership or have no alternatives at all, should be reduced to coverage levels. Not MTA/NYCTA coverage levels of half hourly, but to 45 to 60 minutes if that is what ridership warrants. Trips should be run on purple route that serve the subway and connect to the routes, as the MTA did say that second transfers would be given to trips that require it. Therefore there should be a problem that the QT71 and QT73 don’t serve the subway, or that the QT64 and QT65 only serve it near one end of the route. With this, service would be added to routes like they QT48 (weekdays only instead of just rush hours), QT49 (weekdays only instead of just rush hours), and QT51 (weekdays and Saturdays only, instead of just rush hours).

Reread what I've emboldened aside the asterisks and do some long, hard thinking. I couldn't bare to read more.

[checkmatechamp13]

@jaf0519 I definitely don't see the need for the QT49, QT65, and QT73 to all serve Beechhurst. Even though it's a dense pocket at the "top" of NE Queens, it's not going to generate that much demand to have routes running in all directions from there.

As I mentioned before, I'd have the QT64 run up Utopia-Northern-Francis Lewis and that would be the main crosstown route in that part of NE Queens. (With the way you have the QT65 running down Clintonville, 163rd, etc, it's basically covering the same area I'm proposing to cover with the QT64). 

Since the QT64 is moved off Utopia, the QT49 can become a 7-day route (maintaining service for current Q16 Utopia Parkway riders and Q15 Beechhurst riders). Off-peak I would try to coordinate it with the QT51 (which would also run 7 days a week) to provide 15 minute headways (or better) on Crocheron Avenue. 

I agree with having the QT73 run to Flushing. For riders on Francis Lewis Blvd I think there's more demand for Flushing than for areas north of Northern Blvd. (Plus with the QT64 covering the northern portion you basically have the connections to the same east-west routes, the connection to Jamaica, plus you might get a bit of ridership from College Point)

For the QT65, I see no need to run it south of the 165th Street Bus Terminal. I believe Addesleigh Park would be much better-served by a route running down Brinkerhoff Avenue to Sutphin Blvd and ending at the LIRR/subway station. On the northern end, I'd either run it to Flushing or stop it right at the Broadway LIRR station. 

[jaf0519]

• *"The main routes that are north south corridors east of Kissena Blvd should not be required to serve any subway stations. Only LIRR Stations." 
  • The purple and red routes in the area should do enough to get people to the subway that these corridors should not need to divert to far away subway stations
  • In the draft plan it was said that a second free transfer would be given if needed. The second transfer could be used on these routes if a person who takes any of them now doesn’t have easy access to a purple or red line.
  • Alternatives to all 4 routes already exist, the only areas that lose out are near Kissena Park away from the QT16, and the Whitestone area near the Q16 and Q34 are today, which currently have some of the lowest ridership in Queens, which is why the MTA does have every route in the area with weekend service in the plan.
• **"I propose that the QT64 and QT65 do serve only the 169 St  as they both run down streets close to it."
  • I’m not changing anything with these two routes. They currently serve the 169 St  and I would keep it that way.
• ***"The QT73 should not serve Main St  but instead operate the full length of Francis Lewis Blvd."
  • The problem I have with the current Q76 and Q77 is that they turn off to serve Jamaica and on the other ends of their routes have a turn that brings them back past the turn off (Ex: Q76 heads all the way east from 165 St to FL Blvd, but heads back west past 165 St to 132 St on the northern end)
  • Having the new Francis Lewis Blvd route turn off on Northern Blvd splits the FL Corridor just like Hillside does today. I feel that the new FL bus should serve the entire corridor, or just keep the Q76 and Q77. Hillside is a much better place to split than Northern is.
  • If you need to get to Main St  just take a purple or red line using the second free transfer. The green routes are neighborhood connectors that focus on reliable service. If you have them serve Jamaica and Flushing, they fail on that part of their purpose.

[B35 via Church]

14 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

I'm just wondering who in St Albans/Addisleigh Park is trying to get to Beechhurst

To hell with Beechhurst, this QT65 wouldn't even connect those folks (Addisleigh Park residents) to the ... They would end up walking over to Merrick for bus service.... If you're not going to adequately serve the neighborhood, it's like what's the point...

12 hours ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

What are some of your thoughts in fixing that mess? Also, I can't picture an Addisleigh Park resident needing anything north of Union Turnpike. Demographics and ridership patterns just don't support that.

In short, run it b/w 165th bus terminal & Flushing ...

From 164th, buses would continue on Pidgeon Meadow, to 46th av, to Parsons, to Roosevelt (to end mid-block b/w Main & Union)...

12 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Me personally I think they got it right (as far as crosstown service goes) with the QT71 & QT73, but the QT64 & QT65 definitely need some work.

Even if you wanted to do away with the Q77, I couldn't concur with severing 120th av. service like that, to justify a Francis Lewis route (QT73) running to Flushing (esp. via Sanford)..... IDC for the QT73 concept altogether, but I would have slightly *less* of a problem with it if the QT41 served the current Q84 portion east of Springfield & the QT73 stopped dead at Springfield (being that you have a Springfield route (QT71)).... Of course, that would expose how much, much of no one north of Hillside is really seeking Francis Lewis south of Hillside (and vice versa)

To have the QT73 take over the Q84 portion east of Springfield (to me) reeks of a ridership grab out of spite.... You aren't going to have near as much people xferring from other routes in Jamaica (i.e. the Hillside routes, or the QT67) to connect to the QT73 for the purpose of accessing Francis Lewis (b/w Hillside & Springfield) - in comparison to having the Q77 continuing to take people from points along Hillside, down that same part of Francis Lewis.... I would say that the MTA's going to learn that the hard way, but of course, that would assume benevolency...

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

Of the 4 routes you mention, the QT71 is easily the better of them (although I still think Rockaway/Farmers is a shit terminal)..... I suppose some of those warehouse workers may appreciate it, IDK..... Same goes for anyone needing to get to the DMV out there...

[Gotham Bus Co.]

4 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

In short, run it b/w 165th bus terminal & Flushing ...

From 164th, buses would continue on Pidgeon Meadow, to 46th av, to Parsons, to Roosevelt (to end mid-block b/w Main & Union)...

 

I would have it go up 162nd and left on Sanford to help out the QT73.

[checkmatechamp13]

@jaf0519 The difference between the current Q76/77 split at Hillside and my proposed split at Northern is that with the Q76/77 you must transfer at Hillside if you want to continue north-south, period. With my proposed split at Northern, you only have to transfer at Northern if you are trying to travel specifically within the Francis Lewis corridor. If you want general north-south travel, you can use the QT64. 

The problem with transferring to/from those coverage crosstown routes is that the headways are very high (frequencies are low). Coming from the residential neighborhood (where you can time yourself for the bus) is one thing, but outbound is completely different. (Transferring from an infrequent route to a frequent route is much easier than the reverse)

@B35 via Church Yes, I forgot about that. I would also switch the QT41 & QT73 terminals, definitely. The QT73 is long enough as-is. (Slightly shorter than the present-day Q27 but much less frequent)

I think the QT71 terminal is decent. It allows the route to connect to the QT13 (to Far Rockaway) as well as the QT62 (in both directions). Makes it a little bit easier to get towards South Ozone Park/Ozone Park for those who aren't near the QT7 (not that I really think that there's too much demand, but it does help "complete" the connectivity). Plus it's by JFK Depot so it makes for easy pull-ins/pull-outs (plus helps whatever B/Os live along the route)

@Gotham Bus Co I would tend to agree. You get a connection (via a short walk) to the QT17/49/51 running eastbound, as well as the LIRR.