Relocation of the Jamaica-165th Street Bus Terminal

[Mpn4179]

The current terminal has been recently sold to a developer and is anticipated to become a mixed use facility.

The lease for the current terminal expires in September 2023.

An alternative location is required in order to ensure bus operations can continue uninterrupted once the current lease expires.

 

Pages 28-30 of the MTA Board Action Items Book, located on the MTA website.

https://new.mta.info/document/104706

This and other action items will be discussed at the board meeting on January 30.

[GojiMet86]

They are looking at 90-01 168th Street for the new site, which is the parking lot between 90th and 91st Avenues, and 168th and 169th Streets. This is right behind Marshalls and Reymour Flannigan. This will actually be closer to the train that 165th Street was.

Looks like Jamaica Avenue and Hillside buses will come up 168th and go down 169th.

[Lex]

I couldn't help but notice they mentioned the Q82 on that diagram. I also couldn't help but notice the lack of the Q54, Q55 (same reason as the aforementioned Q82), and Q56 on it.

[N6 Limited]

On 1/28/2023 at 12:00 AM, Mpn4179 said:

The current terminal has been recently sold to a developer and is anticipated to become a mixed use facility.

The lease for the current terminal expires in September 2023.

An alternative location is required in order to ensure bus operations can continue uninterrupted once the current lease expires.

 

Pages 28-30 of the MTA Board Action Items Book, located on the MTA website.

https://new.mta.info/document/104706

This and other action items will be discussed at the board meeting on January 30.

Looks like the Proposed Q1(Q1/Q6 merge) would have to loop around to continue in the same direction, the diagram indicates that they may use artics on the line.

[IAlam]

Yeah it's too bad they're not working on getting the remining buses in the area into the new terminal, having the Q17, Q20, Q24, Q54, Q56, and Q44 going into the terminal could vastly help improve east to west connections. I wonder if it's possible to get the lot across the street as well but I can see the NYPD throwing a fit over losing their parking.

[MysteriousBtrain]

21 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

Looks like the Proposed Q1(Q1/Q6 merge) would have to loop around to continue in the same direction, the diagram indicates that they may use artics on the line.

I had to double check on this because I was thinking "Wait, is the Q1 really gonna be based out of QV or would the merger actually have it based out of JFK, making this an MTA bus route with an NYCT label?"

Edited January 31, 2023 by MysteriousBtrain
QV is not modified to have artics, while JFK already houses artics, possibly using pieces of the future MTA Bus artic order.

[EastFlatbushLarry]

2 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

I had to double check on this because I was thinking "Wait, is the Q1 really gonna be based out of QV or would the merger actually have it based out of JFK, making this an MTA bus route with an NYCT label?"

firstly, any Bus Company/TA/OA merger will take MANY years to come to fruition. won't happen anytime soon. based on history alone, the TA/OA "merger" took about 40+ years (1962-2002(ish))

as far as the Queens Bus Redesign & these line combinations involving TA Queens (ATU1056) and Bus Company (insert union Local here) it's clear in this scenario that the Q1/6 combo will be a JFK Depot line using artics on runs (btw it's my humble opinion they've been wanting artics on Sutphin ever since D60 Galaxies showed up at JFK on the Q10... but anyway)

it's also apparent Queens Village won't have any part of the Q1/6 combination, which could create a union issue, however seeing as it's hella early in the process for lines/runs to receive depot assignments, who knows? maybe local 1056 won't give AF about losing work on the Q1, as those runs may be reallocated elsewhere in the boro redesign. only time will tell, and imo it's in the best interest of all locals involved to pay close attention, because i firmly believe that these redesigns are being orchestrated in part to thin out the workforce, specifically on the Bus Company (non civil service) side of the coin. from what I've seen and pieced together in regards to potential depot assignments, it seems like Bus Co. will lose more than it gains. i hope I'm wrong. 

Edited January 31, 2023 by EastFlatbushLarry
APOLOGIES for veering off topic, in a sense. just wanted to add my 2 cents. ✌🏾✌🏾

[checkmatechamp13]

On 1/30/2023 at 11:36 AM, N6 Limited said:

Looks like the Proposed Q1(Q1/Q6 merge) would have to loop around to continue in the same direction, the diagram indicates that they may use artics on the line.

Do the buses that pass by the terminal but don't actually terminate there actually have to use the terminal? It defeats the purpose of combining them to create a one-seat ride if the bus has to pull into the bay and back out just to come around the block. 

[NewFlyer 230]

On 1/31/2023 at 11:28 AM, EastFlatbushLarry said:

firstly, any Bus Company/TA/OA merger will take MANY years to come to fruition. won't happen anytime soon. based on history alone, the TA/OA "merger" took about 40+ years (1962-2002(ish))

as far as the Queens Bus Redesign & these line combinations involving TA Queens (ATU1056) and Bus Company (insert union Local here) it's clear in this scenario that the Q1/6 combo will be a JFK Depot line using artics on runs (btw it's my humble opinion they've been wanting artics on Sutphin ever since D60 Galaxies showed up at JFK on the Q10... but anyway)

it's also apparent Queens Village won't have any part of the Q1/6 combination, which could create a union issue, however seeing as it's hella early in the process for lines/runs to receive depot assignments, who knows? maybe local 1056 won't give AF about losing work on the Q1, as those runs may be reallocated elsewhere in the boro redesign. only time will tell, and imo it's in the best interest of all locals involved to pay close attention, because i firmly believe that these redesigns are being orchestrated in part to thin out the workforce, specifically on the Bus Company (non civil service) side of the coin. from what I've seen and pieced together in regards to potential depot assignments, it seems like Bus Co. will lose more than it gains. i hope I'm wrong. 

Maybe you have the answer to this question but why did it take many decades for the TA/OA merger to be completed? That’s like half a persons lifespan right there. At this point it would be safe to say that the NYCT/MTA bus merger wouldn’t be fully complete until the 2040’s, that’s another 20+ years. 

You suspect that the MTA is trying to thin out the workforce for MTA bus. I’ve noticed they have been doing that for years on the express bus side of things. The QM4 for example had double the service back in 2005/2006 than it does now and it is sad that it will be reduced to a weekday rush hour route if the redesign plans for this route go into affect. I remember when that route used to have lines at its stops in Queens and nowadays you can see buses skip those same stops because of the lack of demand. I think the QM4 could use some type of extension but the MTA doesn’t see it that way. I’m quite disappointed to be honest with the express bus redesign for Queens. I don’t have much knowledge of how things work, but is it expensive for the MTA to run MTA bus and that’s why they would want to cut as much service as possible? 

[EastFlatbushLarry]

10 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

why did it take many decades for the TA/OA merger to be completed?

the way things were explained to me (and it could be incorrect) is that employees who were hired before the creation of MaBSTOA (prior to 1962) and were then absorbed into MaBSTOA had to retire before any consolidated seniority list could be truly cultivated with NYCTA. IINM the acquisition of the Avenue B & East Broadway company by NY State (via MaBSTOA) also caused the merger process to be delayed (strictly from a workforce standpoint in regards to a "super" seniority list) 

i say all of that to highlight the uniqueness of the PBL/MTA Bus situation. there are current employees who were hired before the takeover whose contracts must be honored, and any new contracts procured by their union potentially may not be retroactive (hourly wage not included) as to create an easier avenue toward full TA/OA/Bus Co. consolidation. for example, the union contract Local 100 had with the city of New York in regards to Queens Surface Corp. & Liberty Lines Express were marginally different from each other AND from than the Local 100 contracts procured for Jamaica Buses, Triboro & NY Bus Service. there are certain nuances, practices & language that cause that to be the case. currently, the TA/OA/Bus Company contracts are supposed to be full parity across all brands, however they are non retroactive to my understanding. and furthermore, there are bus operators who worked for PBL's who shouldn't be penalized by losing seniority just for being employed by PBL's rather than NYCTA or MaBSTOA.

10 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

You suspect that the MTA is trying to thin out the workforce for MTA bus

100%. you (and others such as VG8 via the Express Bus Advocacy Group) highlight exactly what I'm saying. it's been spoken about ad nauseum in regards to Spring Creek Depot and the atrocities going on at that yard from the BM's standpoint. i was deeply angered by the allowance of part time employment practices to be conducted at SC by ATU1181, simultaneously selling out their members and killing off-peak services (even on the B100 & 103... moreso the BM's & the 100) even tho management offers SC part timers full time employment at JFK/Far Rock after a years' time or whatever, that's beyond the point. you're reallocating resources because you intend on killing (or critically injuring) whatever SC provided. admittedly, they didn't need part timers to kill SC as a depot (definitely helped) all they needed were deviously concocted network redesigns. and if don't believe me, the brooklyn & queens redesigns spell it out imo. there are several depots (College Point for example) and neighborhoods (central/eastern Queens) that will be severely hit by losses to currently provided services, and it's deliberate. and what happens when you have more bus operators than you have work? forced relocations/retirements or layoffs/terminations. 

10 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

is it expensive for the MTA to run MTA bus and that’s why they would want to cut as much service as possible? 

relatively speaking, it's not "expensive" for MTA to run Bus Company, since they're not footing the entire bill. however, they know (and knew back in 2005) that if there wasn't this "blank check" policy they have worked out with the city of New York, there wouldn't have been any takeover. if the state took over the PBL's outright, the service (and labor) cuts would've been (eventually) catastrophic. the state knows damn well that eventually this blank check policy with the city WILL end. that was the whole point in the first place: public transportation in NYC to be completely managed & funded by NY State. so, management has been (slowly) preparing for the inevitable: whittling down ALL services provided to a "manageable" financial number (labor costs, equipment, etc)

the goal since the takeover has been to cut as much service as they can legally get away with. the network redesigns are absolutely a part of that goal.

Edited February 2, 2023 by EastFlatbushLarry

[Nova Fly Guy]

39 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

the way things were explained to me (and it could be incorrect) is that employees who were hired before the creation of MaBSTOA (prior to 1962) and were then absorbed into MaBSTOA had to retire before any consolidated seniority list could be truly cultivated with NYCTA. IINM the acquisition of the Avenue B & East Broadway company by NY State (via MaBSTOA) also caused the merger process to be delayed (strictly from a workforce standpoint in regards to a "super" seniority list) 

i say all of that to highlight the uniqueness of the PBL/MTA Bus situation. there are current employees who were hired before the takeover whose contracts must be honored, and any new contracts procured by their union potentially may not be retroactive (hourly wage not included) as to create an easier avenue toward full TA/OA/Bus Co. consolidation. for example, the union contract Local 100 had with the city of New York in regards to Queens Surface Corp. & Liberty Lines Express were marginally different from each other AND from than the Local 100 contracts procured for Jamaica Buses, Triboro & NY Bus Service. there are certain nuances, practices & language that cause that to be the case. currently, the TA/OA/Bus Company contracts are supposed to be full parity across all brands, however they are non retroactive to my understanding. and furthermore, there are bus operators who worked for PBL's who shouldn't be penalized by losing seniority just for being employed by PBL's rather than NYCTA or MaBSTOA.

100%. you (and others such as VG8 via the Express Bus Advocacy Group) highlight exactly what I'm saying. it's been spoken about ad nauseum in regards to Spring Creek Depot and the atrocities going on at that yard from the BM's standpoint. i was deeply angered by the allowance of part time employment practices to be conducted at SC by ATU1181, simultaneously selling out their members and killing off-peak services (even on the B100 & 103... moreso the BM's & the 100) even tho management offers SC part timers full time employment at JFK/Far Rock after a years' time or whatever, that's beyond the point. you're reallocating resources because you intend on killing (or critically injuring) whatever SC provided. admittedly, they didn't need part timers to kill SC as a depot (definitely helped) all they needed were deviously concocted network redesigns. and if don't believe me, the brooklyn & queens redesigns spell it out imo. there are several depots (College Point for example) and neighborhoods (central/eastern Queens) that will be severely hit by losses to currently provided services, and it's deliberate. and what happens when you have more bus operators than you have work? forced relocations/retirements or layoffs/terminations. 

relatively speaking, it's not "expensive" for MTA to run Bus Company, since they're not footing the entire bill. however, they know (and knew back in 2005) that if there wasn't this "blank check" policy they have worked out with the city of New York, there wouldn't have been any takeover. if the state took over the PBL's outright, the service (and labor) cuts would've been (eventually) catastrophic. the state knows damn well that eventually this blank check policy with the city WILL end. that was the whole point in the first place: public transportation in NYC to be completely managed & funded by NY State. so, management has been (slowly) preparing for the inevitable: whittling down ALL services provided to a "manageable" financial number (labor costs, equipment, etc)

the goal since the takeover has been to cut as much service as they can legally get away with. the network redesigns are absolutely a part of that goal.

I’m tier 6 as of right now it’s a little bit of movement but still a ways to go. MTA Bus still can’t pick out but they have the same benefits package now and there multiplier are going up.

[B35 via Church]

On 1/31/2023 at 9:15 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Do the buses that pass by the terminal but don't actually terminate there actually have to use the terminal? It defeats the purpose of combining them to create a one-seat ride if the bus has to pull into the bay and back out just to come around the block. 

Sounds akin to the N35/N37 combination out in Nassau County that formed today's n35, that has buses looping in/out of HTC....

[GojiMet86]

Northern route buses will head south on 169th Street, pull into the terminal at their respective shelters, run west, and exit unto 168th Street.

 

Southern route buses will head north on 168th Street, pull into the terminal at their respective shelters, run east, and exit unto 169th Street.

 

 

The bus lanes from north to south (90th Avenue to 91st Avenue):

The first platform with about 7 bus shelters for NICE buses. Looks like there will be one dedicated shelter for articulated buses.

One westbound bypass lane for NICE buses, with a little layover.

The second platform, for MTA, will be shorter, with a stand for NICE dispatchers, a couple of shelters, and drop-off points.

This will be followed by one westbound bypass for north routes, and one eastbound bypass for south routes.

Next is the third platform, which will have MTA buses on both sides. South routes will board on the northern side, while northern routes board on the southern side of this platform.

This will be followed by one westbound bypass for north routes, and one eastbound bypass for south routes.

Finally is the fourth platform, also for MTA, which will serve southern routes.

 

 

https://new.mta.info/document/104706

 

 

[Gotham Bus Co.]

5 hours ago, GojiMet86 said:

Northern route buses will head south on 169th Street, pull into the terminal at their respective shelters, run west, and exit unto 168th Street.

 

Southern route buses will head north on 168th Street, pull into the terminal at their respective shelters, run east, and exit unto 169th Street.

 

 

The bus lanes from north to south (90th Avenue to 91st Avenue):

The first platform with about 7 bus shelters for NICE buses. Looks like there will be one dedicated shelter for articulated buses.

One westbound bypass lane for NICE buses, with a little layover.

The second platform, for MTA, will be shorter, with a stand for NICE dispatchers, a couple of shelters, and drop-off points.

This will be followed by one westbound bypass for north routes, and one eastbound bypass for south routes.

Next is the third platform, which will have MTA buses on both sides. South routes will board on the northern side, while northern routes board on the southern side of this platform.

This will be followed by one westbound bypass for north routes, and one eastbound bypass for south routes.

Finally is the fourth platform, also for MTA, which will serve southern routes.

 

 

https://new.mta.info/document/104706

 

 

 

Why is Q3 shown as arriving from the south?

[NewFlyer 230]

This plan doesn’t look too bad. I figured they would design the new terminal like this to avoid buses backing up.

Honestly they should just throw the Q17 in there as well since it got displaced from its old terminal when the Q44 became articulated. 

[TheMTAEmprie]

On 2/2/2023 at 5:32 AM, EastFlatbushLarry said:

the way things were explained to me (and it could be incorrect) is that employees who were hired before the creation of MaBSTOA (prior to 1962) and were then absorbed into MaBSTOA had to retire before any consolidated seniority list could be truly cultivated with NYCTA. IINM the acquisition of the Avenue B & East Broadway company by NY State (via MaBSTOA) also caused the merger process to be delayed (strictly from a workforce standpoint in regards to a "super" seniority list) 

i say all of that to highlight the uniqueness of the PBL/MTA Bus situation. there are current employees who were hired before the takeover whose contracts must be honored, and any new contracts procured by their union potentially may not be retroactive (hourly wage not included) as to create an easier avenue toward full TA/OA/Bus Co. consolidation. for example, the union contract Local 100 had with the city of New York in regards to Queens Surface Corp. & Liberty Lines Express were marginally different from each other AND from than the Local 100 contracts procured for Jamaica Buses, Triboro & NY Bus Service. there are certain nuances, practices & language that cause that to be the case. currently, the TA/OA/Bus Company contracts are supposed to be full parity across all brands, however they are non retroactive to my understanding. and furthermore, there are bus operators who worked for PBL's who shouldn't be penalized by losing seniority just for being employed by PBL's rather than NYCTA or MaBSTOA.

100%. you (and others such as VG8 via the Express Bus Advocacy Group) highlight exactly what I'm saying. it's been spoken about ad nauseum in regards to Spring Creek Depot and the atrocities going on at that yard from the BM's standpoint. i was deeply angered by the allowance of part time employment practices to be conducted at SC by ATU1181, simultaneously selling out their members and killing off-peak services (even on the B100 & 103... moreso the BM's & the 100) even tho management offers SC part timers full time employment at JFK/Far Rock after a years' time or whatever, that's beyond the point. you're reallocating resources because you intend on killing (or critically injuring) whatever SC provided. admittedly, they didn't need part timers to kill SC as a depot (definitely helped) all they needed were deviously concocted network redesigns. and if don't believe me, the brooklyn & queens redesigns spell it out imo. there are several depots (College Point for example) and neighborhoods (central/eastern Queens) that will be severely hit by losses to currently provided services, and it's deliberate. and what happens when you have more bus operators than you have work? forced relocations/retirements or layoffs/terminations. 

relatively speaking, it's not "expensive" for MTA to run Bus Company, since they're not footing the entire bill. however, they know (and knew back in 2005) that if there wasn't this "blank check" policy they have worked out with the city of New York, there wouldn't have been any takeover. if the state took over the PBL's outright, the service (and labor) cuts would've been (eventually) catastrophic. the state knows damn well that eventually this blank check policy with the city WILL end. that was the whole point in the first place: public transportation in NYC to be completely managed & funded by NY State. so, management has been (slowly) preparing for the inevitable: whittling down ALL services provided to a "manageable" financial number (labor costs, equipment, etc)

the goal since the takeover has been to cut as much service as they can legally get away with. the network redesigns are absolutely a part of that goal.

Sounds kinda like what NICE bus was doing back in 2012-2017 right before the 2017 service cuts.

[B35 via Church]

Considering the final draft of the Queens redesign, which routes would even be left to terminating inside this new terminal?

[Q43LTD]

The terminal layout gives me St George Ferry vibes

[LexAveExp5]

https://www.qchron.com/editions/queenswide/jamaica-bus-terminal-relocation-delayed/article_bd990e95-0426-5f75-8273-35298efd00be.html

[The TransitMan]

13 hours ago, LexAveExp5 said:

https://www.qchron.com/editions/queenswide/jamaica-bus-terminal-relocation-delayed/article_bd990e95-0426-5f75-8273-35298efd00be.html

...and no surprise here.