Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[B35 via Church]

45 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

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

If they're going to do what it is they're doing with that QT17 (as far as Q12/Northern Blvd service), then I would simply run a shuttle/short route along Sanford that ends where the current Q12 short turns do.... Dub it the QT17a or w/e, IDRC what it's called....

Whether it runs from Skyview Center or Flushing IMO is moot, but nothing emanating from points south of Sanford should be serving almost all of Sanford.

2 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

 @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)

Sure, but from a pedestrian standpoint, that immediate area isn't too friendly though.... I want to see where they're going to physically put that SB QT62 bus stop at Rockaway/Farmers - it's something they're going to have to take a closer look at, because that's an accident waiting to happen.... I can see it now.... Putting a bus stop in the middle of a jughandle is beyond stupid & there are just too many vehicles turning off Rockaway expressway blvd. for airport access.... You can look at the google map & what not, but if you ever drove/drove by/walked around that immediate area, you'd see what I mean....

I'd terminate the thing at the current NB Q3 stop (175th/Farmers) & call it a day (as in, via Springfield → 147th → Farmers → [short right turn, to stand]).... From that stop, NB QT71's would go Farmers → Brewer → 147th, etc.

[FamousNYLover]

 

 

[B35 via Church]

19 minutes ago, FamousNYLover said:

** youtube clip **

They didn't listen to a word she said.

[checkmatechamp13]

@B35 via Church Bouncing some ideas off the wall, what do you think of having it take Springfield-Conduit and ending at Rockaway Blvd?

[checkmatechamp13]

Delete

Edited June 22, 2020 by checkmatechamp13
Double post

[B35 via Church]

2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church Bouncing some ideas off the wall, what do you think of having it take Springfield-Conduit and ending at Rockaway Blvd?

Once upon a time, it used to be a breeze taking the Conduits from Linden to get to Green Acres during the course of the day - but now, you couldn't pay me to do that.... You can make an argument that it's actually worse than taking the Belt itself at times.... Don't know wth happened in the past decade or so with traffic levels along the service road/Conduits, but I wouldn't subject something coming from Bay Terrace to utilizing the Conduits b/w Springfield & Rockaway..... Even outside of structuring the QT42/43 as commuter locals, I can understand extracting the Q85 (QT43) away from Green Acres....

I see the attempt at addressing that gap (that's even unfulfilled with the current network) btw, but I don't really see too many people around there really taking an easterly/westerly bus for a bus that'd run along Springfield (worth having the QT71 do what's being suggested/inquired)....

Going back to what I was saying about the QT43, even though it wouldn't run to Green Acres like the Q85, it's still rather pointless having it serve the fringe of Rosedale like that (at the LIRR station) though.... It'd serve much of nobody in that neighborhood.... What makes the Q85 useful for Rosedale residents, is that stint along 243rd (although I will admit, the Green Acres branch is used more, if we were to compare the two branches).... Nobody coming off the LIRR over there is thinking about the bus, so if it's a matter of simply turning the bus around, they may as well end the thing at S. Conduit/232nd (last dropoff/first pickup) & use Brookville to turnaround - Since they're doing the whole refraining from overlapping riderbases thing with the QT42/43/45....

Edited June 22, 2020 by B35 via Church

[Q43LTD]

6 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Once upon a time, it used to be a breeze taking the Conduits from Linden to get to Green Acres during the course of the day - but now, you couldn't pay me to do that.... You can make an argument that it's actually worse than taking the Belt itself at times.... Don't know wth happened in the past decade or so with traffic levels along the service road/Conduits, but I wouldn't subject something coming from Bay Terrace to utilizing the Conduits b/w Springfield & Rockaway..... Even outside of structuring the QT42/43 as commuter locals, I can understand extracting the Q85 (QT43) away from Green Acres....

I see the attempt at addressing that gap (that's even unfulfilled with the current network) btw, but I don't really see too many people around there really taking an easterly/westerly bus for a bus that'd run along Springfield (worth having the QT71 do what's being suggested/inquired)....

Going back to what I was saying about the QT43, even though it wouldn't run to Green Acres like the Q85, it's still rather pointless having it serve the fringe of Rosedale like that (at the LIRR station) though.... It'd serve much of nobody in that neighborhood.... What makes the Q85 useful for Rosedale residents, is that stint along 243rd (although I will admit, the Green Acres branch is used more, if we were to compare the two branches).... Nobody coming off the LIRR over there is thinking about the bus, so if it's a matter of simply turning the bus around, they may as well end the thing at S. Conduit/232nd (last dropoff/first pickup) & use Brookville to turnaround - Since they're doing the whole refraining from overlapping riderbases thing with the QT42/43/45....

About the QT43 (nee Q85), I would have just ran it down 243 and have a branch to Green Acres. I highly doubt the QT42 (nee Q5) will handle it by itself. Kind of kill 2 birds with one stone since Brewer and Merrick would have access to Green Acres

[B35 via Church]

2 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

About the QT43 (nee Q85), I would have just ran it down 243 and have a branch to Green Acres. I highly doubt the QT42 (nee Q5) will handle it by itself. Kind of kill 2 birds with one stone since Brewer and Merrick would have access to Green Acres

What they're doing in a lot of SE Queens is resorting to the commuter local model.... You wouldn't really need two commuter locals serving Green Acres.... Green Acres isn't like, say, Jersey Gardens, where they have some #115 trips helping out #111's to/from PABT.....

In a full-fledged fixed route network (like the way the current bus network is structured) however, I would agree with your sentiment....

Edited June 23, 2020 by B35 via Church

[SoSpectacular]

On 6/22/2020 at 2:27 PM, B35 via Church said:

Once upon a time, it used to be a breeze taking the Conduits from Linden to get to Green Acres during the course of the day - but now, you couldn't pay me to do that.... You can make an argument that it's actually worse than taking the Belt itself at times.... Don't know wth happened in the past decade or so with traffic levels along the service road/Conduits, but I wouldn't subject something coming from Bay Terrace to utilizing the Conduits b/w Springfield & Rockaway..... Even outside of structuring the QT42/43 as commuter locals, I can understand extracting the Q85 (QT43) away from Green Acres....

I see the attempt at addressing that gap (that's even unfulfilled with the current network) btw, but I don't really see too many people around there really taking an easterly/westerly bus for a bus that'd run along Springfield (worth having the QT71 do what's being suggested/inquired)....

Going back to what I was saying about the QT43, even though it wouldn't run to Green Acres like the Q85, it's still rather pointless having it serve the fringe of Rosedale like that (at the LIRR station) though.... It'd serve much of nobody in that neighborhood.... What makes the Q85 useful for Rosedale residents, is that stint along 243rd (although I will admit, the Green Acres branch is used more, if we were to compare the two branches).... Nobody coming off the LIRR over there is thinking about the bus, so if it's a matter of simply turning the bus around, they may as well end the thing at S. Conduit/232nd (last dropoff/first pickup) & use Brookville to turnaround - Since they're doing the whole refraining from overlapping riderbases thing with the QT42/43/45....

Vision Zero, speed cameras, reduced speed limits, intentionally mis-timed lights may have something to do with all that...

[B35 via Church]

3 minutes ago, SoSpectacular said:

Vision Zero, speed cameras, reduced speed limits, intentionally mis-timed lights may have something to do with all that...

While the phenomenon was ongoing along the Conduits before De Blasio introduced (NYC's version of) Vision Zero to this city, everything you mentioned most certainly exacerbated it......

[AlgorithmOfTruth]

@B35 via Church, can you explain the concept of having buses that originate south of Sanford Avenue having no business serving Sanford Avenue in it's entirety? The idea has some merit. I would opt out of the Q27 for the Q12 to QCC whenever there was some incident on Kissena Boulevard axeing my commute to the college. From what I know, that stint that the 12 has before reaching Northern picks up well.

[B35 via Church]

6 hours ago, AlgorithmOfTruth said:

@B35 via Church, can you explain the concept of having buses that originate south of Sanford Avenue having no business serving Sanford Avenue in it's entirety? The idea has some merit. I would opt out of the Q27 for the Q12 to QCC whenever there was some incident on Kissena Boulevard axeing my commute to the college. From what I know, that stint that the 12 has before reaching Northern picks up well.

The premise isn't one of low usage along the Q12's stint, short of Sanford/Northern (from the west).... Those are the very riders I'm defending.

Way I see it, the question is one of, how many of those riders in-particular are really seeking areas significantly south of Sanford, east of Sanford/Northern.... From what I've noticed over the years (of the ones that are still on Q12's past that juncture), they're gunning for the immediate areas around Northern Blvd, with a more northerly bias than a southerly one (in terms of walking distance)... In terms of distances further than walking distance, I don't see any significant masses (worth justifying a whole bus route) really seeking service past 46th.... So in regards to the point I was making with that statement, to directly & purposely connect a Sanford route to Francis Lewis from along Northern Blvd, comes off as being very random.... It's not demand based, it's forced network coverage (referring to the QT73), considering what they're doing with the QT17 & the QT84.....

With this draft of the redesign, they're trying too hard to connect areas (or "link neighborhoods") that IMO need not be.

[checkmatechamp13]

Tspent a few hours skimming through this thread from the beginning:

On 12/31/2019 at 10:39 AM, Lawrence St said:

"Every 300 minutes" lmao

 

On 12/31/2019 at 10:48 AM, RailRunRob said:

Yeah they need to update that. I'm sure we can assume that's 30mins.

Thinking about it again, it might be a typo for 30 minute service (as opposed to a 5 hour gap of no overnight service)

On 12/31/2019 at 11:38 AM, Future ENY OP said:

QT 34: Jamaica to Manhasset. The service is excellent and I could see that working for both Hospital workers and Queens patrons. I see the  trying to tap in slowly back into the Nassau network by providing service inside NSUH.  

Thinking about it again, I wonder how much coordination with NICE they planned on having (e.g. Have the QT34/36 take most of the n26 riders route and in exchange have the n20G cover riders east of Marathon Parkway)

On 12/31/2019 at 11:57 AM, danielhg121 said:

Another issue I see is they have the QT16 doing a Q20/25 variant running every 1,861 min...whatever lets just go with the 6 min peak. They do know the Q25 runs more frequently than that, right? They have the local's and limited's running together as scheduled but this 6 minute peak isn't going to hold its own. How do they even know riders will stay on the bus anyways? They haven't studied ridership patterns and only going solely off the numbers and that is not a way to redesign a bus network. Many former Q25 riders who stayed on the 25 for college point service now have to get off at Flushing and transfer to QT15, they basically mixed and matched the Q65 truncated and the Q25 together and hoped it works. Do they want a lot of people to transfer at Flushing? I foresee that happening. 

I think they're counting on north-south riders using the QT64 where possible and avoiding Flushing completely.

On 12/31/2019 at 12:13 PM, Future ENY OP said:

The QT62 is somewhat duplicate of the  train going to Far Rockaway. Akin, you have a Q111, Q113, Q114 variants that terminate or have service into Far Rock and cedarhurst.  From a Brooklyn perspective i see this dead on arrival to the fact that there’s too much Rockaway Boulevard service. Unless they trim the stops I don’t see this going to fruition. 

I think the route will be fine ridership-wise. Only really runs near the on the western end of the route.

On 12/31/2019 at 6:20 PM, Mtatransit said:

QT78(Q45)- There is a reason the Q45 turns onto Roosevelt to serve the 7. People want the QBL Express. By skipping that station and serving directly Broadway and Northern blvd station, many people will have to transfer twice, or take the local at Northern Bl. 

I can't help but wonder if that corrider between Flushing, and 108th St is overserved. Since they have the Q50, and the new QT11 serving that corrider, I don't find the need to reroute the Q19 (QT81) onto 108th St. 

QT65- I don't think that route needed to go to South Jamaica, there are plenty of alternatives nearby.

I think they actually prefer if people transfer to the locals, which generally have more available space than the express.

I wonder of they will have a bus lane on that part of Roosevelt (didn't check offhand)

The QT65 south of Hillside is a hald-assed replacement of the Q42.

On 1/1/2020 at 11:47 AM, BrooklynBus said:

As you know, I support extension of the Church Avenue route to the airport, but don’t see how they can end the B15 at the hospital. Politically, they have to keep airport service running from Bed Stuy even if they extend Church Avenue service. 

I don't think it's politically necessary. The route didn't go to JFK when it was the B10.

On 1/1/2020 at 4:58 PM, BrooklynBus said:

Of course you need data and feedback, but you also need clear criteria to measure success, which the MTA doesn't recognize because they intend to declare success no matter how badly the project fails, as they have done in Staten Island and with the Woodhaven SBS. 

Staten Island they eventually got to a point somewhat better than the old system. The success was definitely exaggerated but it is still an improvement. 

On 1/2/2020 at 12:14 PM, 7-express said:

The Q20A portion will get absorbed into the QT84 with garbage headways and lack of access to College Point/Linden Hill.  The Q20B portion will be served by the new QT64 with similar headways as to what it gets now but no direct access to Flushing.  The Union Street/Parsons Bvld portion of the Q20 will get absorbed into the QT16, which will still run to Jamaica but via a route similar to the existing Q65.  It doesn't make a ton of sense.

You mean the Q25 (on Kissena). 

On 1/3/2020 at 1:51 AM, NewFlyer 230 said:

I’m fine with the Q44 being removed off of Union Street and Parsons but only if there is another route that will also provide service along that stretch too. It would benefit Bronx riders a lot without having to detour through Whitestone. However I feel like with the MTA service is going to be reduced and the people over there are going to see less service than they do now which is what I don’t agree with. I wonder how many QT16’s will run the full route from Jamaica to Whitestone. We also have to keep in mind that it will be the only route on Parsons Blvd and Kissena Blvd with no help from the Q17, Q27 and Q34 as those routes are either completely eliminated or rerouted, so there will probably be a lot of buses turning around in Flushing presumably unless they run everything the full route. 

I think it's more likely they will just bump up the frequency down the whole corridor. Between the loss of the Q17 on Kissena and the Q44 on Parsons it's likely just easier to do that than to try and squeeze in short-turns.

On 1/16/2020 at 3:58 PM, N6 Limited said:

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

Actually with the GCP (and I believe also the Van Wyck) having exits at Jewel the area can get surprisingly congested at times (particularly towards QB)

On 1/16/2020 at 4:24 PM, Cait Sith said:

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.

The Q112 doesn't run to 165th. It ends with the Brewer routes by Parsons/Hillside, doesn't it?

On 1/16/2020 at 8:51 PM, 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 15-25 minutes with all of the traffic on Liberty Avenue.

No need to transfer to the Lefferts shuttle when the QT67 still connects at Rockaway Blvd.

On 1/17/2020 at 12:24 PM, B35 via Church said:

Yeah man, that section of Queens south of QB between Woodhaven Blvd & the western edge of Sunnyside would get hosed with this plan.... I'm sorry, but 65th place south of QB is more deserving of a through-route than 58th st.... And to take away the Q47 along & around Calamus (IMO, because you can't nicely fit it into a grid) is completely unjustified.... Too many older folks down in that portion of Queens.... I keep saying it & I'm going to keep saying it - this is just further evidence that the MTA does not know its own riderbase....

 

On 1/26/2020 at 8:04 PM, azspeedbullet said:

Back in the day (like around 2015/2016ish), the Q47 had an amazing re-route that went from 80th st->Grand Ave->69th St to resume regular route. this avoided the narrow Calamus Ave and 79th St. I wish the MTA continued with this route, it made the route seemed a bit more straight and avoided narrows roads

Chuckling at the opposing opinions here. (I'd be inclined to agree with azspeedbullet)

On 2/6/2020 at 7:03 AM, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

The total number of routes that even keep their numbers are the following:

Q30 - Kind of 

Q31 - Kind of

That's pushing it. The QT30 is a combination of the Q26 and Q17, and the QT31 is the Q26/27.

On 2/8/2020 at 8:27 AM, B35 via Church said:

So your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to explain this actuality of a balancement of coverage vs. ridership in Eastern Queens that the plan is offering, if coverage is essentially being maintained out there & frequency is being altered..... A balancement of sorts basically means that, for whatever frequency is being diminished, commensurate coverage is being added (or vice versa - for whatever coverage is being diminished, commensurate service is being added to those remaining fewer corridors).... Neither of the two is being suggested with this plan out there....

Agreed.... I'm quite sure those folks down there share that sentiment as well.

It doesn't qualify as frequency vs. coverage but one thing the MTA did appear to do is add a bit of service ro inner portions of some corridors (e.g. Merrick, Hillside, Union Turnpike, Brewer) but at the expense of less frequent service at the outer edge.

On 2/17/2020 at 7:14 PM, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

QT29 : Jackson Heights/Roosevelt Avenue - Glendale/Myrtle Avenue. One Flaw of MTA’s Queens Bus Redesign is that there is no bus access on 80th Street. The Q9 will run via 80th Street, Grand Avenue, and 69th Street in order to provide a viable replacement for the current Q47.

I'd be inclined to just run it up 80th-Grand-Broadway and end at Roosevelt that way. Gives people the option of getting off at Grand/Broadway.

Side note I remember the first time I drove through that area for work. We were down by 74th Street and the LIE and I had to drop a coworker off at the subway. After some confusion we eventually got to Grand & Broadway and I was shocked at how close it was to 80th & Grand.

On 2/22/2020 at 8:51 AM, Q43LTD said:

This redesign for Queens was botched. Why was the too lazy to do a route by route analysis instead of evaluating corridors like there's 10 routes running down a specific street. 

I agree (and I think part of the reason they did Brooklyn similar to The Bronx and did it route by route was because of my complaints)

On 2/23/2020 at 7:59 PM, P3F said:

In that case, wouldn't the B83 have issues as well? Or is its stint on the Belt Parkway too short to matter?

Funny enough when I drive on the Belt and it's free-flowing traffic you can always tell when a B83 entered the parkway because all the cars slow down behind it

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I'd be inclined to just run it up 80th-Grand-Broadway and end at Roosevelt that way. Gives people the option of getting off at Grand/Broadway.

Side note I remember the first time I drove through that area for work. We were down by 74th Street and the LIE and I had to drop a coworker off at the subway. After some confusion we eventually got to Grand & Broadway and I was shocked at how close it was to 80th & Grand.

The Q29, Q38, Q58, and Q59 already exist for riders who want to catch the QBL local trains. Under the new, system, it would be then be the QT6, QT58, QT59, and QT77. However, none of those buses offer a connection to Manhattan-bound  trains without it being a backtrack, nor do they give a connection to the QBL expresses. That's why the Q47 is used a lot and why it receives the ridership it does, but the planners ignored that. They're thinking that dumping them to the nearest subway is not going to significantly increase travel times, which is not true. Also, Broadway and 80th Street look close but they aren't as close as it seems. If you went by car, then of course it's going to feel close, but if you walk it, or even use the bus, it takes a while. While the current route looks like it backtracks, it is a faster way to connect to the  , and the QBL express trains. It would definitely be much faster than going up Broadway (and the current Q53 handles Broadway just fine).

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Chuckling at the opposing opinions here. (I'd be inclined to agree with azspeedbullet)

I personally would agree with B35 on this one. The Grand Avenue detour wasn't all that, as the only time where you could potentially have some time-savings was at night. The Grand Avenue portion of the route boggled down buses, and it was much more time-consuming than via Calamus Avenue. When it was the rush hour or when schools began/ended, it was sluggish. On most buses, a good chunk of the ridership comes from those Calamus Avenue stops, and from what I've seen, you have about an equal amount of people walking from both directions to catch the bus.

What made the detour worse was that there were two stops along the detour, and relatively random (+inconvenient) placing. There was a stop on Grand Ave & 73rd Street instead of at 74th Street, where the shopping center is located and where more people walking from the north down to Grand Avenue would come from. The east-west blocks between Calamus and Grand Avenues are also fragmented, and 73rd Street doesn't even make it to Calamus Avenue, so most people closer to Calamus Ave would get on at the 74th Street stop. It is a major inconvenience for those people, and it's not an insignificant portion of the route. About 1/2 to 1/3 of the people per bus headed to/from Jackson Heights on the Q47 portion south of Roosevelt Avenue use the Calamus Avenue stops. 

[Cait Sith]

2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The Q112 doesn't run to 165th. It ends with the Brewer routes by Parsons/Hillside, doesn't it?

No need to transfer to the Lefferts shuttle when the QT67 still connects at Rockaway Blvd.

1. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out considering that the Q112 is absorbing the Q36 and Q110 all at once. The Q112 runs to Parsons and Hillside, which connects to the (F). It also stops around within footsteps of the and as well.

2. No need to transfer to a lefferts shuttle?

No need?

With 60 minute headways coupled with a large chance of unreliability, there's no need!?





That Lefferts shuttle will be more reliable than this QT67 abomination(especially since it'll run more often than this disaster of a route). Bus service in that area is not particularly spectacular at that time of night, and 60 minute headways won't help much.....the only buses that actually ever run properly during the time the shuttle starts running are the Q10 and nowadays, the Q8. And with how they want to make the Q8 into that QT5 abomination, that's also looked at as a massive service cut because of all of the stops being cut......

Edited August 17, 2020 by Cait Sith

[B35 via Church]

5 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

It doesn't qualify as frequency vs. coverage but one thing the MTA did appear to do is add a bit of service ro inner portions of some corridors (e.g. Merrick, Hillside, Union Turnpike, Brewer) but at the expense of less frequent service at the outer edge.

Yeah, frequency redistribution... He was staunchly defending the position of frequency vs. coverage as part of his opinion about how great the overall plan is... This is something that should more be directed at N6.

3 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I personally would agree with B35 on this one. The Grand Avenue detour wasn't all that, as the only time where you could potentially have some time-savings was at night. The Grand Avenue portion of the route boggled down buses, and it was much more time-consuming than via Calamus Avenue. When it was the rush hour or when schools began/ended, it was sluggish. On most buses, a good chunk of the ridership comes from those Calamus Avenue stops, and from what I've seen, you have about an equal amount of people walking from both directions to catch the bus.

What made the detour worse was that there were two stops along the detour, and relatively random (+inconvenient) placing. There was a stop on Grand Ave & 73rd Street instead of at 74th Street, where the shopping center is located and where more people walking from the north down to Grand Avenue would come from. The east-west blocks between Calamus and Grand Avenues are also fragmented, and 73rd Street doesn't even make it to Calamus Avenue, so most people closer to Calamus Ave would get on at the 74th Street stop. It is a major inconvenience for those people, and it's not an insignificant portion of the route. About 1/2 to 1/3 of the people per bus headed to/from Jackson Heights on the Q47 portion south of Roosevelt Avenue use the Calamus Avenue stops. 

You went more into it, but I was going to point out that very part of it (in bold)...

As for that very last sentence... While I never thought about the percentage breakdown or anything, I do know that Calamus in general isn't exactly lightly used (or worth bypassing)... There isn't any real need for the Q47 to run along Grand....

5 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The Q112 doesn't run to 165th. It ends with the Brewer routes by Parsons/Hillside, doesn't it?

He wasn't talking about Q112 riders losing access to 165th...

He was referring to the Q8 (QT5 to Sutphin , on top of how few stops it serves along 101st), Q9 (QT47 to Parsons ), and Q41 (phased out) riders in saying that people west of Sutphin Blvd lost direct access to 165th... Pretty sure in that assessment (while not directly) he was referring to the Q24 cutback (QT24 to LIRR Jamaica) as well....

3 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

I'm not sure what you're trying to point out considering that the Q112 is absorbing the Q36 and Q110 all at once.....

See above.

Edited August 17, 2020 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

On 6/22/2020 at 2:27 PM, B35 via Church said:

I see the attempt at addressing that gap (that's even unfulfilled with the current network) btw, but I don't really see too many people around there really taking an easterly/westerly bus for a bus that'd run along Springfield (worth having the QT71 do what's being suggested/inquired)....

Another idea to make the transfer easier: How about if the QT62 ran Rockaway-Conduit-Brewer-Rockaway? That way, it connects directly to the Brewer routes (including the QT19) as well as having a safe connection to the QT68 & QT71.

On 8/16/2020 at 11:16 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The Q29, Q38, Q58, and Q59 already exist for riders who want to catch the QBL local trains. Under the new, system, it would be then be the QT6, QT58, QT59, and QT77. However, none of those buses offer a connection to Manhattan-bound  trains without it being a backtrack, nor do they give a connection to the QBL expresses. That's why the Q47 is used a lot and why it receives the ridership it does, but the planners ignored that. They're thinking that dumping them to the nearest subway is not going to significantly increase travel times, which is not true. Also, Broadway and 80th Street look close but they aren't as close as it seems. If you went by car, then of course it's going to feel close, but if you walk it, or even use the bus, it takes a while. While the current route looks like it backtracks, it is a faster way to connect to the  , and the QBL express trains. It would definitely be much faster than going up Broadway (and the current Q53 handles Broadway just fine).

I personally would agree with B35 on this one. The Grand Avenue detour wasn't all that, as the only time where you could potentially have some time-savings was at night. The Grand Avenue portion of the route boggled down buses, and it was much more time-consuming than via Calamus Avenue. When it was the rush hour or when schools began/ended, it was sluggish. On most buses, a good chunk of the ridership comes from those Calamus Avenue stops, and from what I've seen, you have about an equal amount of people walking from both directions to catch the bus.

What made the detour worse was that there were two stops along the detour, and relatively random (+inconvenient) placing. There was a stop on Grand Ave & 73rd Street instead of at 74th Street, where the shopping center is located and where more people walking from the north down to Grand Avenue would come from. The east-west blocks between Calamus and Grand Avenues are also fragmented, and 73rd Street doesn't even make it to Calamus Avenue, so most people closer to Calamus Ave would get on at the 74th Street stop. It is a major inconvenience for those people, and it's not an insignificant portion of the route. About 1/2 to 1/3 of the people per bus headed to/from Jackson Heights on the Q47 portion south of Roosevelt Avenue use the Calamus Avenue stops. 

The idea would be to supplement the QT63 along the busier portion of Broadway, and also that would be the Q29's connection to the QB line (at Grand instead of Woodhaven, with the option to continue to Jackson Heights for express service or the )

On 8/16/2020 at 11:19 PM, Cait Sith said:

1. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out considering that the Q112 is absorbing the Q36 and Q110 all at once. The Q112 runs to Parsons and Hillside, which connects to the (F). It also stops around within footsteps of the and as well.

2. No need to transfer to a lefferts shuttle?

No need?

With 60 minute headways coupled with a large chance of unreliability, there's no need!?





That Lefferts shuttle will be more reliable than this QT67 abomination(especially since it'll run more often than this disaster of a route). Bus service in that area is not particularly spectacular at that time of night, and 60 minute headways won't help much.....the only buses that actually ever run properly during the time the shuttle starts running are the Q10 and nowadays, the Q8. And with how they want to make the Q8 into that QT5 abomination, that's also looked at as a massive service cut because of all of the stops being cut......

The QT67 connects the Ozone Park area to most of the routes that served 165th Street. The Q1 (QT18), Q2 (QT38), Q3 (QT68), Q17 (QT33), and Q43 (QT34/36) would all stop by Jamaica & Merrick. The Q2 (QT38) can also be reached at 188th Street. At Francis Lewis Blvd you have the n6 & n24, as well as the QT73 (old Q76/77). So at that point you're really just missing the n22. 

And if he specifically wanted to take the to the QT67 to get to Jamaica at a time when the Lefferts shuttle operates, why would he waste time waiting for the shuttle to get off and (at best) catch the same QT67 he could've made at Rockaway Blvd (and at worse, miss the bus he would've otherwise made because he was waiting for the shuttle)?

23 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

He wasn't talking about Q112 riders losing access to 165th...

He was referring to the Q8 (QT5 to Sutphin , on top of how few stops it serves along 101st), Q9 (QT47 to Parsons ), and Q41 (phased out) riders in saying that people west of Sutphin Blvd lost direct access to 165th... Pretty sure in that assessment (while not directly) he was referring to the Q24 cutback (QT24 to LIRR Jamaica) as well....

Fair enough. 

Bouncing some ideas off the wall, I wonder if anymore routes could be through-routed through Jamaica similar to the QT67. It would solve the issue of layover space while also somewhat solving the issue of relatively empty buses circulating Downtown Jamaica between their first subway intersection point and their ultimate terminal. The issue of course is finding routes that are short enough to pull this off with, and have somewhat of a ridership base in common. For example, would the QT33 and QT47 work? (QT47 riders gain access to the connections at Merrick/Hillside, and QT33 riders gain the connections at Sutphin/Archer but I doubt many people are seeking service between South Ozone Park & Fresh Meadows/Oakland Gardens or vice versa)

Edited August 18, 2020 by checkmatechamp13

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

47 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The idea would be to supplement the QT63 along the busier portion of Broadway, and also that would be the Q29's connection to the QB line (at Grand instead of Woodhaven, with the option to continue to Jackson Heights for express service or the )

There's no need to supplement anything on Broadway. The current Q53 suffices. 

Also, such a route would fail to adequately meet both Q47 and Q29 riders' needs. In terms of Q47 riders, most would end up getting off at Grand Avenue anyway, because Broadway is very congested. A good portion of the delays on the Q53 are due to its Broadway segment. So the travel time would be similar, if not worse. The same thing goes for riders headed to the . Most people in Middle Village would just end up taking the QT77 to Woodhaven Boulevard, or the QT82 to 63rd Drive. 

A connection to Grand Avenue wouldn't provide time savings for Q29 riders along 80th Street (Dry Harbor Road riders further up are SOL), nor would it help the people going to Woodhaven Boulevard in particular. QCM is not a walk in the park from Grand Ave, and neither can you catch a Q88 (or under the proposed network, QT12) for NE Queens access. The Q29 as it exists is the best option for riders in that area. Riders that travel from Glendale and Middle Village to Jackson Heights would also lose out, because on top of a long trip through Middle Village, buses will get caught in traffic along Broadway.

Edited August 18, 2020 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[Cait Sith]

6 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The QT67 connects the Ozone Park area to most of the routes that served 165th Street. The Q1 (QT18), Q2 (QT38), Q3 (QT68), Q17 (QT33), and Q43 (QT34/36) would all stop by Jamaica & Merrick. The Q2 (QT38) can also be reached at 188th Street. At Francis Lewis Blvd

And if he specifically wanted to take the to the QT67 to get to Jamaica at a time when the Lefferts shuttle operates, why would he waste time waiting for the shuttle to get off and (at best) catch the same QT67 he could've made at Rockaway Blvd (and at worse, miss the bus he would've otherwise made because he was waiting for the shuttle)?

The problem is that you're immediately assuming that the QT67 will run perfectly overnight. If you've ever taken the Q112 during any time of the day(from the sounds of it, I doubt it), you'd understand how much of a nightmare it can be, especially during school season.

The lefferts shuttle runs every 20 minutes. The QT67 will run every 60 minutes. At best, the A to the QT5 will end up being much more reliable than the QT67.

And regardless of whether it connects to routes going to 165 or not, routes west of Sutphin got cut off of it unjustly when ridership from said routes are very high already. The Q8 and Q41 already get crushed in Jamaica. Forcing those riders to the QT67(especially with the planned structure of the QT5) is going to backfire, hard.

 

[B35 via Church]

16 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Another idea to make the transfer easier: How about if the QT62 ran Rockaway-Conduit-Brewer-Rockaway? That way, it connects directly to the Brewer routes (including the QT19) as well as having a safe connection to the QT68 & QT71.

Something tells me that they're just going to dump people off at the current SB Q6 stop at Rockaway blvd/Nassau Expwy. (well, what the MTA dubs as the Rockaway/147th stop) & have that stop as being considered the Rockaway/Farmers stop (instead of 147th, as they currently do)....

As to what you're saying, well they could do that also... Thing with that of course is, most folks south of the Belt along Rockaway would end up trekking over to Brewer for bus service... Don't see too many of those people being willing to making their way to/from 136th/137th to catch the bus along Rockaway on the other side of the Belt....

Re-routings aside / side note: Personally, I think they should leave that stop in front of the Burger King (N. Conduit/Rockaway) alone (or at most, push it closer to the near corner of 140th) & do away w/ the 137th stop.... The stop by the BK sees more usage on the Q6 than 137th does...

16 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The idea would be to supplement the QT63 along the busier portion of Broadway.....

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

There's no need to supplement anything on Broadway. The current Q53 suffices.

....which is a major reason why I've been arguing against a full-fledged Broadway route for about as long as I've been posting in this community.

Not necessarily accusing either of you two of this (to be quite honest, I don't remember if either of you advocated for such a route back then or not), but I do find it funny now that the MTA's proposing this QT63, everybody wanna be sentries for the Q53.... It's akin to a fair-weather fan of a sports team.... Addressing that gap along Broadway would not have the Q53 operating as is... Don't know why ppl. kept failing to consider that.... Those that were supporting a Broadway route of sorts know who they are....

16 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

....Bouncing some ideas off the wall, I wonder if anymore routes could be through-routed through Jamaica similar to the QT67. It would solve the issue of layover space while also somewhat solving the issue of relatively empty buses circulating Downtown Jamaica between their first subway intersection point and their ultimate terminal. The issue of course is finding routes that are short enough to pull this off with, and have somewhat of a ridership base in common. For example, would the QT33 and QT47 work? (QT47 riders gain access to the connections at Merrick/Hillside, and QT33 riders gain the connections at Sutphin/Archer but I doubt many people are seeking service between South Ozone Park & Fresh Meadows/Oakland Gardens or vice versa)

You mean, akin to what they're doing with the QT18? Nope.... Not with what they're doing with the rest of the network....

Edited August 18, 2020 by B35 via Church

[checkmatechamp13]

11 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

The problem is that you're immediately assuming that the QT67 will run perfectly overnight. If you've ever taken the Q112 during any time of the day(from the sounds of it, I doubt it), you'd understand how much of a nightmare it can be, especially during school season.

The lefferts shuttle runs every 20 minutes. The QT67 will run every 60 minutes. At best, the A to the QT5 will end up being much more reliable than the QT67.

And regardless of whether it connects to routes going to 165 or not, routes west of Sutphin got cut off of it unjustly when ridership from said routes are very high already. The Q8 and Q41 already get crushed in Jamaica. Forcing those riders to the QT67(especially with the planned structure of the QT5) is going to backfire, hard.

The  to the QT5 helps for Jamaica itself, but I think he was referring more to getting to/from Eastern Queens (though @N6 Limited can clarify himself). It gives you the option of avoiding both the  (and the Queens Blvd track work) and the  (with its all-local service and curves in Cypress Hills). Personally, I don't find the  that bad, but to each his own...

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Something tells me that they're just going to dump people off at the current SB Q6 stop at Rockaway blvd/Nassau Expwy. (well, what the MTA dubs as the Rockaway/147th stop) & have that stop as being considered the Rockaway/Farmers stop (instead of 147th, as they currently do)....

As to what you're saying, well they could do that also... Thing with that of course is, everyone south of the Belt would have to trek over to Brewer for bus service... I don't see too many of those people trekking down from 136th/137th to access Rockaway Blvd., south of the Belt....

Re-routings aside / side note: Personally, I think they should leave that stop in front of the Burger King (N. Conduit/Rockaway) alone (or at most, push it closer to the near corner of 140th) & do away w/ the 137th stop.... The stop by the BK sees more usage on the Q6 than 137th does...

I think the reason they kept 137th over North Conduit had to do with the idea of "137th is for those north of the Belt, 158th is for those south of the Belt". If they had buses run down Rockaway-Conduit-Brewer, then they'd probably just keep North Conduit and call it a day. 

Running Rockaway-Farmers-147th-Brewer would maintain coverage for the area south of the Belt, but I can't picture the MTA going for that. (What can I say, definitely not the worst lack of coverage in the plan).

On a side note, taking a closer look at the western end, I'm surprised they chose Crescent & Atlantic rather than Crescent & Fulton for the  . Maybe some traffic-related reason (I see on Google Maps that traffic looks a bit heavy in that immediate area...as a matter of fact, looking purely from a traffic point of view, it seems like you might as well just run it to Alabama Avenue or Broadway Junction lol). In any case, I think they should've just kept it on Rockaway Blvd instead of Liberty Avenue if their goal was to provide service to ENY/Cypress Hills/City Line. Just have the B14 down Sutter Avenue (to end at Liberty/Cross Bay), the Q7 down Rockaway Blvd, and the  along Pitkin/Liberty, and those are your Brooklyn-Queens connections for that immediate area.

[Bay Ridge Express]

This is actually kind of my first time taking a look at the proposed network, so I'll just comment a few things that a lot of you may have already discussed:

QT22: so they basically chose to deny service to Seagirt residents between B 35 and B 19? And how exactly, will that work? Also, why have it run all the way to West Broadway? Also, wouldn't be too happy about being forced to take a Nassau bus to the east of there...

QT44: Interestingly, they chose to extend the route to Fordham... considering that the bus is sometimes dead air in the Bronx, do they expect such an extension to create an increase in ridership? Regardless, I do not believe that extending the route and potentially exacerbating its reliability should be a good solution. I can sense many bunches emerging, especially for a route so long...

QT50: I don't necessarily understand what was wrong with the Q48 to warrant such a route. Why would people coming from LGA, not readily going into Manhattan, opt for the East Bronx... unless of course, the  decided they wanted to kill two birds with one stone and just combine the Q48 and Q50 together (which would likely be the more realistic scenario...)

QT52 (and elimination of the Q53): absolutely not happy about this. Not necessarily from the Rockaway point of view, but the fact that they chose to deny service to Jackson Heights in Queens... perhaps if Woodhaven Blvd (subway) was an express station, I'd be more tolerant but with the function that the Q53 has as a subway supplement, I'm not happy.

QT48: This, I actually like. Hopefully it will be a full-time service.

QT1: I guess same comment as the QT50 scenario.

 

 

[B35 via Church]

6 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The  to the QT5 helps for Jamaica itself, but I think he was referring more to getting to/from Eastern Queens (though @N6 Limited can clarify himself). It gives you the option of avoiding both the  (and the Queens Blvd track work) and the  (with its all-local service and curves in Cypress Hills). Personally, I don't find the  that bad, but to each his own...

The back & forth b/w them was never about how N6 would be affected by any of what's being proposed....

N6 was arguing the QT67 being more direct than the Q112 - basically trying to sell (what he deemed as) positives & how good the redesign is or whatever - which was the running theme of his replies throughout that entire discussion.... He asked Cait Sith something to the effect of, what problems would S. Ozone Park & Richmond Hill riders have, besides what was done with 101st - which I can see someone in Cait Sith's position taking offense to minimizing what the MTA did with bus service in his area like that..... The QT67 being more direct, isn't some grand positive for a general area that would have multiple routes taken away from them (that currently takes them deeper into Jamaica)... Practically forcing people to take that one route if they want service along Jamaica (av).... That's Cait's point.

Aside from all that, I don't have too much of a problem with the either.... Saved me many a time when the LIRR was all f***ed up on weekends (if I can't board the Q56 at the first stop over on 170th, forget it... I'm not standing all the way to at least Lefferts - where I gotta hope enough people get off so I have a better chance of getting a seat).... As a Brooklynite, the obviously does nothing for me... And of the times I'd take the from Jamaica, I'd disembark at 21st-QB & walk, to do my infamous B32-B46 combo....

6 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I think the reason they kept 137th over North Conduit had to do with the idea of "137th is for those north of the Belt, 158th is for those south of the Belt". If they had buses run down Rockaway-Conduit-Brewer, then they'd probably just keep North Conduit and call it a day. 

Running Rockaway-Farmers-147th-Brewer would maintain coverage for the area south of the Belt, but I can't picture the MTA going for that. (What can I say, definitely not the worst lack of coverage in the plan).

On a side note, taking a closer look at the western end, I'm surprised they chose Crescent & Atlantic rather than Crescent & Fulton for the  . Maybe some traffic-related reason (I see on Google Maps that traffic looks a bit heavy in that immediate area...as a matter of fact, looking purely from a traffic point of view, it seems like you might as well just run it to Alabama Avenue or Broadway Junction lol). In any case, I think they should've just kept it on Rockaway Blvd instead of Liberty Avenue if their goal was to provide service to ENY/Cypress Hills/City Line. Just have the B14 down Sutter Avenue (to end at Liberty/Cross Bay), the Q7 down Rockaway Blvd, and the  along Pitkin/Liberty, and those are your Brooklyn-Queens connections for that immediate area.

That much I got (about one stop being for north of the Belt vs. south of it)... At the same time, if they had buses doing the routing you inquired about earlier, I'm not so sure they wouldn't alter having a stop at 137th....

Anyway, I definitely understand ending it at Crescent/Atlantic over Crescent/Fulton.... The latter is a narrow, bi-directional, congested intersection... You don't want buses turning at that intersection & there's no way you're terminating a bus anywhere in that immediate area... At least you can have buses layover along Atlantic - but the question then becomes that of the turnaround scenario....

Now that you mention it, I'm not sure why it takes Liberty either... At Woodhaven Blvd, it's too much of a hassle to get from one side of Liberty to the other (especially EB)... If it were to continue along Rockaway, I'd try my hand at (eventually) running it up to Lane HS (over there by 75th st )... For some odd reason, I could see people in that area patronizing such a service...

2 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

This is actually kind of my first time taking a look at the proposed network, so I'll just comment a few things that a lot of you may have already discussed:

QT22: so they basically chose to deny service to Seagirt residents between B 35 and B 19? And how exactly, will that work? Also, why have it run all the way to West Broadway? Also, wouldn't be too happy about being forced to take a Nassau bus to the east of there...

QT44: Interestingly, they chose to extend the route to Fordham... considering that the bus is sometimes dead air in the Bronx, do they expect such an extension to create an increase in ridership? Regardless, I do not believe that extending the route and potentially exacerbating its reliability should be a good solution. I can sense many bunches emerging, especially for a route so long...

QT50: I don't necessarily understand what was wrong with the Q48 to warrant such a route. Why would people coming from LGA, not readily going into Manhattan, opt for the East Bronx... unless of course, the  decided they wanted to kill two birds with one stone and just combine the Q48 and Q50 together (which would likely be the more realistic scenario...)

QT22: I understand why they would go about doing that, but I don't agree with actually doing it.... The masses down over there at Wavecrest Gardens gun for the Q113/4 up towards Jamaica (which has it passing Mott ) more than people board WB Q22's around there, but that doesn't mean the Q22 is exactly useless in that area.... They're basically taking away coverage along Seagirt to supply coverage along Beach Channel dr., over there by Far Rockaway HS.... The idea wouldn't be *as* bad if they ran the QT13 over to B. 32nd/Seagirt....

QT44: A lot of the trips you see in the Bronx with dead air, has a lot to do with bunching, so I won't hold that against its usage... It's definitely no slouch in the Bronx.... I don't think that extension had anything to do with wanting to increase ridership - I think this is their "answer" for never having came out with that "Q94" way back when....

QT50: A route running back & forth between LGA & Flushing is wasteful (this IMO explains the proposed 15 min headways).... Too significant a majority of the Q48's riders is in-between Corona & Flushing....

The more I think about this combination, the more I'm starting to believe it largely has to do with the terminal situation in Flushing (lack of space)... They have the QT6 & the QT58 terminating on Roosevelt, short of Main.... Not sure where the first pickup for the QT84 is going to be at, but I can bet the QT66 is going to continue to make its first pickup along that same block... Notice they combined the Q19 & the Q15 with that QT81 (the Q19 also makes its first pickup on that same side of Roosevelt, short of Main)... They couldn't continue to have the Q50 making its first pickup & the Q48 making its last dropoff (with all of that I just mentioned) on that same side of the block....

Edited August 19, 2020 by B35 via Church

[NewFlyer 230]

3 hours ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

This is actually kind of my first time taking a look at the proposed network, so I'll just comment a few things that a lot of you may have already discussed:

QT22: so they basically chose to deny service to Seagirt residents between B 35 and B 19? And how exactly, will that work? Also, why have it run all the way to West Broadway? Also, wouldn't be too happy about being forced to take a Nassau bus to the east of there...

QT44: Interestingly, they chose to extend the route to Fordham... considering that the bus is sometimes dead air in the Bronx, do they expect such an extension to create an increase in ridership? Regardless, I do not believe that extending the route and potentially exacerbating its reliability should be a good solution. I can sense many bunches emerging, especially for a route so long...

QT50: I don't necessarily understand what was wrong with the Q48 to warrant such a route. Why would people coming from LGA, not readily going into Manhattan, opt for the East Bronx... unless of course, the  decided they wanted to kill two birds with one stone and just combine the Q48 and Q50 together (which would likely be the more realistic scenario...)

QT52 (and elimination of the Q53): absolutely not happy about this. Not necessarily from the Rockaway point of view, but the fact that they chose to deny service to Jackson Heights in Queens... perhaps if Woodhaven Blvd (subway) was an express station, I'd be more tolerant but with the function that the Q53 has as a subway supplement, I'm not happy.

QT48: This, I actually like. Hopefully it will be a full-time service.

QT1: I guess same comment as the QT50 scenario.

 

 

QT44: They are also removing little detour the Q44 makes through Whitestone which some speed up the route a little bit. I personally think this is something they should have done years ago especially when the route became a SBS route in 2015. It surprises me how many people actually ride the Q44 from Jamaica to the Bronx. I feel like the Q20 is good enough over there. If necessary I’d add more service between College Point and Roosevelt Ave and call it a day.

QT50: a majority of the Q48 riders ride between Astoria Blvd and Main Street. That’s why I’m glad they are making the QT81 (Q19) serve that portion as well even though that now slows up direct service to Astoria Blvd. I’m not too fond of the QT50, because it has to stop in Flushing before going to LGA. It is stupid and you might as well keep the Q48 around which will be more reliable than this proposed route.
In my opinion they should have a route from Fordham via the Cross Bronx Expressway serve LGA. This route would not make any stops in Queens until it hits the terminals. It is basically the Q44 route in the Bronx and then it’s non stop via the Whitestone Expressway and the Grand Central Parkway 

QT52: I find that a lot of people from Jackson Heights ride Q53’s along Woodhaven Blvd and vise versa. During the summer times Q53 buses are packed like sardine cans. I don’t know how the beach crowds on the Q52 are, but cutting the Q53 will now force many people to have to transfer at Queens Blvd. I say cut the Q52 and leave the Q53. If they want to cut Woodside service I’m fine with that only because buses traveling on Roosevelt Ave in addition to Broadway slows the Q53 down. The only issue is that there isn’t any space over there on 74th & Roosevelt. 
 

QT48: During rush hours I would keep the route as is, but all other times I would have it make stops along Union street as well. I don’t see buses being full at all outside of rush hour so it might as well be useful to those along Union Street.  

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

QT50: a majority of the Q48 riders ride between Astoria Blvd and Main Street. That’s why I’m glad they are making the QT81 (Q19) serve that portion as well even though that now slows up direct service to Astoria Blvd. I’m not too fond of the QT50, because it has to stop in Flushing before going to LGA. It is stupid and you might as well keep the Q48 around which will be more reliable than this proposed route.
In my opinion they should have a route from Fordham via the Cross Bronx Expressway serve LGA. This route would not make any stops in Queens until it hits the terminals. It is basically the Q44 route in the Bronx and then it’s non stop via the Whitestone Expressway and the Grand Central Parkway

What's equally as stupid is combining the Q15/Q19 to create that QT81... A grand total of nobody in Corona is trying to get to areas along the Q15 (and vice versa)... That move was done for the sake of being cheap.... They could've still had (whatever they wanted to call the) Astoria Blvd route take on the Q48 routing between Flushing & Astoria Blvd, without combining it with the Q15....

With the QT50 specifically, I think it's immaterial if it does or doesn't stop in Flushing to get to LGA... I don't believe Bronx patrons would be too willing to get to LGA via the Whitestone, regardless... The Q50/QT50 isn't all that feasible to get to for a lot of Bronxites..... Think about it - why do you think there were talks of a Bx50 Fordham Plaza-LGA route way back when? When that didn't happen, then the talk shifted to possibly having the (then) new Bx41 SBS running to LGA..... The west Bronx is denser than the east Bronx, so it simply makes more sense to have a direct Bronx - LGA route run from the western part of the borough....

To that last part, anything that'd have buses utilizing the Cross Bronx Expressway to get to LGA is D...OA (dead on arrival)....

Edited August 19, 2020 by B35 via Church