Staten Island Division: 2010 and beyond

[checkmatechamp13]

I just thought of this new idea:

 

The (S59) eliminated

 

 

And it's replacement:

 

The (S89) would be extended from Richmond Av/Hylan Blvd to Tottenville all day weekdays to supplement the (S78). As a result of the (S59) elimination, the (S89) would run daily from about Weekdays 5AM-11PM, Saturdays 6AM-10PM, and Sundays 7AM-9PM. The (S89) would make all stops between Hylan Blvd and Tottenville.

 

The (S78) would run between St. George and Hylan Blvd/Richmond Av during the day and would be extended to Tottenville during the late night hours while the (S89) is not operating. This would avoid duplication.

 

For passegers who need to go to Port Richmond, then can take the (S89) to Richmond Av near the Staten Island Mall and transfer to the (S44).

 

 

Comments?

 

There are 2 flaws with your plan:

 

1) There would no longer be a route that runs the entire length of Port Richmond Avenue. The (S57) could be rerouted from Decker Avenue to Port Richmond Avenue, but Port Richmond Avenue would then get less frequent service, and the service would be to less popular destinations (it wouldn't serve the SI Mall, or any shopping on Richmond Avenue).

 

2) As SIR North Shore said, all neighborhoods served by the (S59) would see shortened spans. The (S59) runs about 90 minutes later than the (S44) and 2 hours later than the (S79), as well as the (S57).

 

The thing about having only one local route along Richmond Avenue (the (S44) north of the SI Mall and the (S79) south of it) is that it is the major bus corridor for much of the West Shore. You would be giving the same 15-minute local frequency to Cary Avenue, where there are 3 alternative routes (the (S40), (S46), and (S48)) as you would to Richmond Avenue, where it is the only route in the area.

 

Not to mention that, because the (S89) stops are further apart, you will have uneven crowding on the routes.

 

I think the best solution is to base the (S89) out of Castleton and have it run off-peak from Forest Avenu/Richmond Avenue to the HBLR, unless you want to expand the (S89) into the West Shore by having it run down the WSE into the South Shore.

[S78 via Hylan]

Thanks guys for the helpful comments. I edited my idea and used the comments that you guys made. I should have been more clear earlier.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

As I've said before, the SIE service road could really use a local bus, at least during rush hours. I've mentioned extending the (S93) further west to South Avenue.

 

Which of the following seems like the most feasable plan?

 

Extend the (S93) to the West Shore Plaza via Richmond Avenue, Fahy Avenue/Goethals Road North, and South Avenue (so it would be next to the Meredith Depot)

 

Extend all (S48) buses that terminate at Forest Avenue/Richmond Avenue to South Avenue/Goethals Road North via Richmond Avenue and Fahy Avenue/Goethals Road North.

 

Extend all (S46) buses that terminate at Forest Avenue/South Avenue to Lamberts Lane/Richmond Avenue via South Avenue and Fahy Avenue/Goethals Road North.

 

Create a new route called the (S58) to run from SeaView Hospital to South Avenue/Richmond Terrace via Brielle Avenue, Rockland Avenue, Richmond Avenue, Fahy Avenue/Goethals Road North, and South Avenue.

 

*Obviously, I doubt this will happen anytime in the near future, but in maybe 5 years or so when they think up some new ideas, which do you think would be mot likely to be implemented?

 

 

 

The good thing about the hotels is that they are all have the capability to be served by some express routes (or are presently served). The soon-to-be Crowne Plaza Hotel is near the X10/X17, and the Hilton Garden Inn and Hampton Inn have the capability to be served directly by the X19 to Lower Manhattan and either the X22, X23, X24, or AE7 buses to Midtown Manhattan. The Comfort Inn in Travis is currently served by the X19/AE7, as well as the X11.

 

I'm sure that, business travelers would consider staying out in Staten Island if they rerouted some express routes to South Avenue, since they would have a direct ride to their place of business.

 

As far as rerouting the X19 to South Avenue, that might be a very worthy decision to make for another reason-the traffic on the West Shore Expressway can get pretty bad, and South Avenue bypasses a portion of that traffic. The MTA might realize that South Avenue can end up beig the quicker route, and decide to reroute the service. Then, they'll realize that there are potential customers in that corridor and my plan could potentially come to fruition in the near future.

 

I'm not really sure which plan is the most feasible. I'm undecided.

 

s58! LOL! :cool: Me too! But my 58's routing is radically different.

 

I like your x19 ideas:tup:

 

Shame the Travis UA shut down:(

[Santa Fe via Willow]

NJT just responded to my email. They said that I should contact Coach USA (which I aready did), so I'm still waiting for a response from Red and Tan (which is a subsidiary of Coach USA) and NYCT.

 

Sounds like (NJT)'s attitude hasn't changed much:(

[Santa Fe via Willow]

Richmond Avenue has NO bus service covering its entire length 24/7/365. That's a major eff-up on the part of TPTB. There is NO bus serving all of Richmond Avenue between ~2:am or so & `5:am or so.

 

The s44 & s59 aren't 24 hour routes. The 59 should be.

 

My solution is a new route, a Night Owl, which runs 365 nights a year, called the (s49n). Hours of operation could be 11pm-6am. That could be worked out.

 

In a nutshell the (49n) would be an even & equal mixture of the 44 & 59 bus routes, for the most part. It would follow the 44's route in between St. George & Forest Ave. Or Port Richmond Ave. Be good if it could cover tad 57 territory to boot. In between Forest Ave & Hylan Blvd it covers the 59's route. Except at the SI Mall area the (49n) would cover Richmond Hill Rd, Marsh Ave, Platinum Ave & Forest Hill Rd instead of Ring Rd, Platinum Ave, Richmond Ave, Yukon Ave, Forest Hill Rd.

 

Terminals would be the 44's Ramp position in St.George & the 54/59/(78)/(89) Turnaround Terminal at Hylan Blvd & Richmond Ave.

 

I like SIR North Shore's idea of extending the 54 to/from the Ferry via Richmond Terrace:tup:

[checkmatechamp13]

I don't think it is necessary for the route to go all the way to St. George. I think that running it along the current (S59) route (except with your idea of running down Marsh Avenue instead of Ring Road) should be sufficient. The (S44) doesn't run too far from the (S40)/(S46). I've walked those distances plenty of times and it is only about a 5-10 minute walk at most.

 

But I definitely agree that there should be 24/7 service on Richmond Avenue. A whole bunch of neighborhoods (most notably New Springville) are left without a single bus (in any direction) during the overnight hours, and none of those neighborhoods have a north-south bus (except for my own neighborhood which is fairly close to the (S46), but that doesn't even count because nobody lives on South Avenue south of the SIE, except for hotel guests)

[Santa Fe via Willow]

I don't think it is necessary for the route to go all the way to St. George. I think that running it along the current (S59) route (except with your idea of running down Marsh Avenue instead of Ring Road) should be sufficient. The (S44) doesn't run too far from the (S40)/(S46). I've walked those distances plenty of times and it is only about a 5-10 minute walk at most.

 

But I definitely agree that there should be 24/7 service on Richmond Avenue. A whole bunch of neighborhoods (most notably New Springville) are left without a single bus (in any direction) during the overnight hours, and none of those neighborhoods have a north-south bus (except for my own neighborhood which is fairly close to the (S46), but that doesn't even count because nobody lives on South Avenue south of the SIE, except for hotel guests)

 

Re: the 59-

I remember several years back a driver on the 56 telling me the 59 used to run 24/7. Its overnight terminals were Hylan Blvd/Richmond Ave & that park at the Forest Ave/Willowbrook Rd/Port Richmond Ave intersection across from Burger King.

 

And of course TPTB cut that. I remember when the 59 operated in between Tottenville & Port Richmond all day long & on the weekends. 15-16 years ago now. Those were probably the days of the 24 hour 59.

 

The funniest most ironic thing is that this Richmond Ave problem affects (NYCT) employees stationed at the Yukon Depot who are carless. You'd think between Yukon & the ETC (NYCT) SI Division's PTB would resurrect the overnight 59.

[checkmatechamp13]

Both the 24/7 Richmond Avenue service and 7-day service to Tottenville were eliminated in the service cuts of 1995.

 

I'm pretty sure I have a map from 1993 that shows the hours of the (S59).

[Santa Fe via Willow]

Both the 24/7 Richmond Avenue service and 7-day service to Tottenville were eliminated in the service cuts of 1995.

 

I'm pretty sure I have a map from 1993 that shows the hours of the (S59).

 

It was 1994 when I took the 59 to/from Hylan south of Richmond alot. I went a while without taking it then when I took it again I noticed the service disparity.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

Concerning CSI:

 

At the Victory Blvd gate, they should set it up so (NYCT) & other buses letting people off pull in on the west side in the Victory Blvd gate. The Loop Bus would be there in front ready & waiting. (NYCT) & other buses picking people up would do so where they do now, on the east side. The west side stop/shelter would be for 62s & (93)s heading to CSI & Travis. The east side stop/shelter would be for 62s & (93)s heading to the Ferry & Bay Ridge. The Loop Bus would do what it does now.

 

(62)s beginning/ending at CSI should go into/around the campus dropping off/picking up. Ditto for all (93)s.

 

I forget now, but do any (92)s come into CSI's Victory Blvd gate?

 

Some (44)s & (59)s should end/begin from CSI's Victory Blvd gate. Going in both directions. You'd then have part-time (44) & (59) stops along Victory Blvd in between CSI & Richmond Avenue, unless CSI was the only stop on Victory.

 

IIRC I used to see (59)s with signs saying SI College on them but NEVER, to this day, IRL or on a 59 map/schedule, actually seen one. Was (59) CSI service a proposal that for some reason was never implemented IRL but for some reason was in (NYCT) bus computers? And these (59)s I saw were really NOT IN SERVICE buses en route somewhere? All the times I've (Bx13)s on Forest Hill Rd by the Yukon garage.

 

There should be a bus stop/shelter built at, in the area of, CSI's Forest Hill Rd or back gate area as well. It should be set up like my idea for CSI's front gate.

 

Then you could have (61)s ending/starting from CSI, as well as the following routes I made up:

 

B5 - Replaces the (93). Much better IMO.

 

s27 -SI South Shore {south of Huguenot Ave} /CSI FH Rd terminal

 

s28 - SI's East Shore areas/CSI-FH Rd terminal

 

s37 - Bricktown(e)/CSI-Forest Hill Rd gate terminal

 

s38 -Oakwood|New Dorp/CSI-FH Rd

 

^ I'll explain these routes in more detail soon.

 

In a nutshell the VB gate would be served by the (44), (59), 62 & 2 routes I made up:

 

s47 -Western Ave/CSI-VB terminal

 

s82 -The only 2 stops on this would be CSI-VB & the Ferry. How necessary now with the school's Ferry shuttle bus? I'm happy to see they finally have that. I say have both.

 

...& the FH gate the B5, s27, 28, 37, 38 & (61).

 

I think buses ending/starting from CSI, (NYCT) or not, should go into/around the campus dropping-off &/or picking up.

 

I'll explain all the routes, route ideas & such in this post in a future post.

 

Re: 44 & 59-

I mean some (44)s & (59)s, not all of them.

[checkmatechamp13]

A couple of things:

 

The (S92) goes into CSI PM rush hours only.

 

Which direction would the (S44)/(S59) buses go once they hit Richmond Avenue? Towards the SI Mall/Eltingville or towards Port Richmond/St. George?

 

I don't think both the (S82) and CSI Shuttle are necessary.

 

Overall, I think you are overserving CSI a bit. What I would do would be to have the free shuttle to St. George run as the CSI loop bus. All of the passengers on the buses that feed into CSI would transfer to the free shuttle bus that would go around CSI. (Perhaps a stop can be added at Victory Blvd/Clove Road for passengers transferring from the (S53))

 

All of the resources saved would be used to expand the network coverage elsewhere.

 

By the way, if you want, you can use your Gmail account to create a map of all of these services (using "My Maps"). That way, everybody can visually see the way the bus routes interact.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

A couple of things:

 

The (S92) goes into CSI PM rush hours only.

 

I thought I saw (S92)s there all those years ago.

 

Which direction would the (S44)/(S59) buses go once they hit Richmond Avenue?

 

Towards the SI Mall/Eltingville or towards Port Richmond/St. George?

 

Both directions. Some would end/start from CSI-VB going toward Port Richmond/St. George. Others would end/start from CSI-VB going toward the Yukon Depot/Tottenville.

 

I'd prefer all (59)s starting/ending from CSI-VB go to/from Tottenville.

 

I don't think both the (S82) and CSI Shuttle are necessary.

 

Probably not. It is a tad redundant. Keep the 82 on reserve in case CUNY cuts CSI's Ferry Shuttle.

 

Overall, I think you are overserving CSI a bit.

 

Can't argue with that.

 

What I would do would be to have the free shuttle to St. George run as the CSI loop bus. All of the passengers on the buses that feed into CSI would transfer to the free shuttle bus that would go around CSI. (Perhaps a stop can be added at Victory Blvd/Clove Road for passengers transferring from the (S53))

 

That would work. Clove Rd probably a necessary stop due to all the CSI students from Bkln.

 

 

All of the resources saved would be used to expand the network coverage elsewhere.

 

Which is needed badly. Like restoring 24/7 (S59) service.

 

By the way, if you want, you can use your Gmail account to create a map of all of these services (using "My Maps"). That way, everybody can visually see the way the bus routes interact.

 

That's a great idea. I've been meaning to check that out more.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

Concerning SI X-buses:

 

x1 & x10 -

The x1 & x10 should have their schedules extended to 24 hours. During the late-night they should go right in front of the Whitehall Terminal, to give SI commuters another option for getting home, in the event they missed a boat. Overnight &/or non-rush hour x1s should end/start from either the Yukon Depot or from Marsh Ave behind Macy's. Non-rush hour & overnight x10s could {should?} start/end from the 57/59/66 Port Richmond Terminal on Richmond Terrace.

 

x17 -

The only "isotope" of the x17 which should be called the x17, is the x17C, as it is identified on the x17|x19 schedule/map. This would be more efficient, & erase confusion. The x17 should also be extended to 7-day service. 24 hour? Would be :cool:, but a fleet of 10,000 20 mile size cube shaped alien ships is more likely to come to Earth tomorrow morning.

 

x19 -

Might it run faster via the Bayonne Bridge & Holland Tunnel?

 

Do CoachUSA's 122 & 144 still exist?

They're apparently, technically (NJT) routes. Too bad they can't be MetroCardbox outfitted & the routes shared with (NYCT).

 

x21 -

The "isotope" of the x17 that operates between Annadale Rd & Lower Manhattan, called the x17A, should have its # changed to 21. It would be the nuX21 or x21 2.0. It could or should(?) go to/from Lower Manhattan via the Bayonne Bridge & Holland Tunnel. The x21's nickname should be the "Cermak Express".

 

x47 -

The x17J "isotope" of the x17 should have its # changed to 47.

 

More to come...

[checkmatechamp13]

I don't think it is necessary for the X10 to go to Richmond Terrace. I think most people who live near Richmond Terrace are more likely to take the (S40) at night from the ferry, because of how fast it is on Richmond Terrace. Jewett Avenue is right outside CAS.

As far as the X1 goes, I don't think it should terminate at Yukon off-peak, only overnight. The X17 provides sufficient service.

 

The 122 was cancelled and the 144 (I don't even know if that still exists) was/is run by a company called TransportAzumah.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

I don't think it is necessary for the X10 to go to Richmond Terrace. I think most people who live near Richmond Terrace are more likely to take the (S40) at night from the ferry, because of how fast it is on Richmond Terrace. Jewett Avenue is right outside CAS.

As far as the X1 goes, I don't think it should terminate at Yukon off-peak, only overnight. The X17 provides sufficient service.

 

The 122 was cancelled and the 144 (I don't even know if that still exists) was/is run by a company called TransportAzumah.

 

Oh him!

 

I know him from http://silive.com/forums/transit.

 

He's JAzumah on there.

 

:cool: dude.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

Park'n'Rides/Transit Centers:

 

There's the Eltingville Transit Center & the Pleasant Plains|Outerbridge Park'n'Ride.

 

Is there any room for Park'n'Rides/Transit Centers right at or near SI's other 3 bridges?

 

I'm picturing>

 

Goethals Bridge Park'n'Ride/Transit Center

 

Bayonne Bridge Transit Center/Park'n'Ride

 

Verrazano Narrows Bridge Park'n`Ride/Transit Center

 

Re: Dr.MLK Jr Expwy-

Could this highway, like the KWVM Pkwy, have Park'n'Rides/Transit Centers at both ends of it? One being the Bayonne Bridge P'n'R/TC already mentioned.

[SIR North Shore]

If this SI Advance article is any indication, the S79 SBS is dead in the water along with the current progress of rebuilding the North Shore Line.

 

Instead of rebuilding the North Shore Line, the MTA should have the Staten Island SBS route be a replacement of the rail line and also replace the limited for the S46.

 

The SBS stations would be:

 

-St George Terminal

-Richmond Terrace & Jersey Street (New Brighton)

-Richmond Terrace & Snug Harbor (Livingston/Snug Harbor)

-Richmond Terrace & North Burgher Avenue (West Brighton)

-Castleton Avenue & Broadway

-Castleton Avenue & Clove Road

-Castleton Avenue & Port Richmond Avenue (Port Richmond)

-Innis Street & Nicholas Ave (Elm Park/Tower Hill)

-Morningstar Road & Walker Street (Lake Avenue)

-Van Pelt Avenue (Mariner's Harbor)

-Brabant & Lockman Avenue (Harbor Road)

-South Avenue & Forest Avenue

-South Avenue & Gothaels Road North

-Teleport

-West Shore Plaza

 

Comments?

[checkmatechamp13]

I believe they modified the Hylan Blvd plan to to have island platforms in the median of the road. See this article: http://www.mta.info/mta/planning/sbs/images/hylan.pdf

 

As far as your (S40)/(S46) +SBS+ plan, it would only really be acceptable if the North Shore Rail Line were guaranteed to never receive funding (and there are still public meetings going on, so, at least the public support is there). The rail line doesn't get caught in traffic, and has a greater capacity than +SBS+ does.

Also, another problem is running the +SBS+ on some pretty narrow streets. When the (S46) gets west of Nicholas Avenue, it starts making a lot of turns on some really narrow streets, which is fine as long as you don't plan on putting down any bus lanes (I think the turns could accomodate artics).

[SIR North Shore]

That's the version that all the SI politicans and most residents opposed. The S79 just needs a limited, that's all. The SBS plan I came up with would be a tremendous help for the time being though, just like the SAS and the M15 SBS.

[checkmatechamp13]

I thought they opposed the version with curbside lanes because they felt it would reduce parking spaces. The revised plan would look like the image on page 49 on this website: http://nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/intro_to_brt_phase2.pdf

 

As far as your +SBS+ idea goes, that is what I was talking about-it should be a temporary plan until the North Shore Rail Line comes to fruition.

 

As far as the routing is concerned, I think it would just be better to take the current (S96) routing. Although Richmond Terrace is a lot less congested than Castleton Avenue, running the +SBS+ along the current (S96) route would make it more accessable for residents of the North Shore. This way, everybody achieves the maximum benefit-(S90) riders still have their fast service on Richmond Terrace, and riders along Castleton Avenue and nearby Forest Avenue have their trip times improved (what would be nice would be if their was signal prioritization, where the bus has the traffic lights change in its favor). I just don't think +SBS+ would really help along Richmond Terrace-the trip times are already fast and it is less accessable to North Shore residents.

 

By the way, I assume that, under your plan, the (S96) would operate 7-days per week and the (S46) would operate the full route.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

If this SI Advance article is any indication, the S79 SBS is dead in the water along with the current progress of rebuilding the North Shore Line.

 

Instead of rebuilding the North Shore Line, the MTA should have the Staten Island SBS route be a replacement of the rail line and also replace the limited for the S46.

 

The SBS stations would be:

 

-St George Terminal

-Richmond Terrace & Jersey Street (New Brighton)

-Richmond Terrace & Snug Harbor (Livingston/Snug Harbor)

-Richmond Terrace & North Burgher Avenue (West Brighton)

-Castleton Avenue & Broadway

-Castleton Avenue & Clove Road

-Castleton Avenue & Port Richmond Avenue (Port Richmond)

-Innis Street & Nicholas Ave (Elm Park/Tower Hill)

-Morningstar Road & Walker Street (Lake Avenue)

-Van Pelt Avenue (Mariner's Harbor)

-Brabant & Lockman Avenue (Harbor Road)

-South Avenue & Forest Avenue

-South Avenue & Gothaels Road North

-Teleport

-West Shore Plaza

 

Comments?

 

Well, this would be a great lead-in to, template for the North Shore SIR's Second Coming. Keep the Resurrected North Shore SIR a viable probability.

 

I like the (S78) SBS ideas.

 

SBS is actually a very cool idea, concept. Richmond Avenue seems viable as an SBS corridor possibility.

[checkmatechamp13]

It's the (S79) that would receive +SBS+, not the (S78). The SIR is alreay like a limited-stop (S78)

[Santa Fe via Willow]

It's the (S79) that would receive +SBS+, not the (S78). The SIR is alreay like a limited-stop (S78)

 

I never thought of the SIR in that context before. Also like a LTD stop "74" in certain locations. Better than the (84).

[checkmatechamp13]

That's why they have that second transfer from the Manhattan subway/bus to the SIR, and then from the SIR to a connecting bus. That way, riders headed for the South Shore have a very fast ride, assuming they make their connections.

The thing about the (S84) is that it empties out once it gets south of the SIE, and that is the portion where it is the slowest (St George-Narrows Road South), because of all of the traffic lights. And with the SIR being parallel between the SIE and New Dorp Lane, and with ridership in the South Shore being relatively low, I can see why ridership is so low.

 

The crazy part is that my roughly 5-mile trip from St. George to my home on the North/West Shore takes about the same time as a trip to the South Shore from St. George.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

FYI:

AE's cutting its AE 7 x-route December 31st.

 

In areas tenatively planned for light-rail, &/or good for light-rail candidacy, might +SBS+ on steroids be a good short-term solution?

 

Thinking of various highways & corridors on SI. It could work in other places too.