Staten Island Division: 2010 and beyond

[S78 via Hylan]

I just got another one. It may not be the best ideas so bare with me:

 

S76 ans S78 swap routes between Bay Street and Tompkins Av. After that, they run their normal routes.

 

These may be some benefits:

 

S76: Since this route is in danger of losing weekend service, the S52 and S74 will have more riders. Making it run on Tompkins Av could help it get to Vanderbilt Av faster.

 

S78: have this route run on bay street will reduce waiting time for the S51 on weekends or passengers can take the (SIR)

 

Comments?

[checkmatechamp13]

Sorry to post so much later, but wanted to comment on some of the posts and wanted to add on some ideas.

 

 

X7- Runs on Richmond Av instead of Nelson Av, Giffords La & Arthur Kill Rd therfore replacing the X6.

 

Or to make it simpler, you could just say to cut the X7 instead of the X6.

 

Judging by the map:

 

• Make S78 and S79 +select+.
  
• Make a new S3 with the following routing:
  Starts at S46 terminal (West Shore Plaza).
  Then, goes via Travis Avenue across Victory Blvd and to Richmond Av.
  Turn on Richmond Avenue and go to Richmond Hill Road.
  Turn on Richmond Hill Road and go to Richmond Road.
  From Richmond Rd & Richmond Hill Rd, follow X15 to Amboy Rd. & Guyon Av.
  From there, follow S57 to Hylan Blvd and Guyon Av.
  From there, follow X8 route to Seaview Avenue & Father Capodanno Blvd.
  From there, follow S52 route to SI University Hospital North.
  
• The S84 stays on Arthur Kill Road between Rossville and Bloomingdale Rd.
  
• New S4 from St. George to Bay Ridge via Bay Street and the bridge. Maybe +select+.
  

 

 

I think only the S79 needs to be made +select+ bus service, since the S78 parallels the SIR,while the S79 serves its own destinations.

 

I can't really see that S3 getting a lot of ridership. I don't think that there is a real demand for east-west service in that section of SI. A lot of the route you would spend going through the Greenbelt and other parts would be spent overlapping more popular routes or going to places where there is little demand to go between (I don’t think that many people will come from the East Shore to the West Shore Plaza when they pass by the SI Mall on the way, and I can’t picture residents in New Springville going to the West Shore Plaza when the SI Mall is closer and has more frequent service.

 

I think that that AM S84 service should run the same route as the S74, with the S74 starting at Eltingville Transit Center. The ridership on South Shore local bus routes is relatively light, even during the rush hour, and the section along Bloomingdale Road/Woodrow Road/Rossville Avenue has a fair amount of people, since very few people live along that section of Arthur Kill Road.

 

The S4 sounds like a good idea, but it should start out as a rush hour service, since most of the people would’ve transferred to the S53 before they could get to the S4. (All the buses that come from either the south or west intersected the S53 at some point)

 

 

I have just one objection:

 

Anyways, the only idea I have is +Select Bus Service to the S79. Daytime SBS service operates its current route; the +SBS zone will be between Hylan Boulevard/Narrows Road and Richmond Avenue/Hylan Boulevard; local service elsewhere. Late night service will now operate, via local.

 

Rush hour local service will not operate; instead, the S78 replaces the S79 local in its SBS zone during this time. Non-rush hour local service operates between Brooklyn and Richmond Avenue; some weekend local service will serve the mall. Late night service operates every 40-50 minutes, and will terminate at Yukon Avenue and Forest Hill Road (outside of the Yukon Depot) and does not complete the full trip to the rest of the mall.

 

You might as well terminate it at the Eltingville Transit Center, since that is an extremely awkward place to terminate the bus. Sure, it can go into the depot, but it is in the middle of nowhere.

A better idea would be to bring back S59 late night service (as was mentioned before). Then that would serve all of the areas along Richmond Avenue. It would be better if there were unlimited transfers so somebody could take the S59 to the S78 to the S53 and the MTA would save the cost of running the S79 at night (though a person could take the free SIR to Grasmere for the S53)

 

 

2)Reduce overnight headways on the S53 to every 30 minutes. Also increase headways particuarly on weekday evenings to every 10-12 minutes until 11pm and Saturday/Sunday evening headways every 15 minutes until midnight.

 

3)Run the X1 24/7 with overnight hourly headways from 11pm-4am Manhattan Bound and SI Bound 1am-6am daily.

 

4)Run 12-15 minute headways on the S44, S46, S48, S59 S61, S62, S74 and S78 until 10pm Monday-Saturdays. Not everyone is going to the Ferry.:confused:

 

5)Run the S98 weekday middays from 10am-2pm with 30 minute headways and hourly between 7-10pm last bus to/from Bayonne. If ridership increases then operate hourly Saturday service from 6am-9pm.

 

6)Reroute and Send both the S54 and S57 to terminate at Port Richmond TC on Richmond Terrarce/Port Rich Ave.

 

7)Operate all S74/84's weekdays appx. 7am-8pm in both direction limited along Richmond Road/Arthur Kill between New Drop Road and St George's. The S76 continues to make all stops. "S74' ends at Bloomingdale Road Rossville weekdays while the S84 operates the full route between Tottenville and the Ferry.

 

More to come.

 

2) I don’t know if the S53 needs the increase in service. Usually when I see it on Broadway at Forest Avenue, it is usually pretty empty at that hour. (about 9PM) Maybe the MTA could bring back a few of those buses that short-turn at Victory Blvd, since it gets more crowded the closer it is to Brooklyn.

 

3) The cost would be high, since you have to pay night differential, but the X1 is the most used express route in the city, so I guess it could be justified. It would save commuters the trouble of having to run to the ferry and risk missing it, or run for the bus at the other end.

 

4) The buses are also lightly used at that time. Usually at Forest Avenue/Richmond Avenue, the S44s and S59s that pull in have no more than about 10-15 people. The S46 and S48 can get knid of crowded at that time. Not crushloaded crowded but with maybe 8 or 9 standees.

 

5) I could see running the S89 middays. If nothing else, it provides limited-stop service on Richmond Avenue. We’ll have to see how the ridership grows. If it shows decent growth, it should be considered for midday service.

 

6) How would you do that? Would you run the S54 west on Richmond Terrace from Broadway to Port Richmond Avenue, or do some kind of combination?

7) The S84 could probably handle the crowding west of Richmond Avenue if the S74 were cut back there. I don’t know if it warrants midday service, but the S84 should at least run AM rush hours. Could picture something like 6AM - 1PM to St George and 12PM - 8 PM to Tottenville, since reverse peak ridership isn’t that good.

 

Any ideas for the S60? I've never seen it before, but I know it's the lowest-ridership route in the NYCT Bus system.

 

I know that this was written before the final proposed service changes came out, but I think it was a great idea that they decided to combine it with the S66.

 

That true Hylan. My guess why the got rid of those 'short turn' S53 weekday trips was that it could used those extra buses for the S93.

 

FYI. When the recession is over, i think the S93 should run all day weekdays until 8pm(last bus to Brooklyn) and 9pm(last bus to SI)with 30-40 minute headways middays from 10am-2pm. College of SI students come from all over the 5 boros now including a high # from Brooklyn. Also i would extend and terminate the S93 SI Terminal at Victory/Richmond Ave for access to the S44, S59 and most important the S98 to get to Bayonne, NJ.

 

I agree with that. As far as the place to terminate, near Richmond Avenue, there are streets near there that are wide enough to accommodate a bus turning around (I’m not talking about making a U-turn, I’m talking about like what the S44/S94 and S61/S91 do at the SI Mall). For example, it could continue down to Arlene Street, turn right, then turn right at Merrill Avenue, and turn right onto Richmond Avenue and go back on Victory Blvd. (See google.com/maps)

I think that the S93 could be extended to the Teleport when more development comes there. From there, it could go up South Avenue and into Graniteville/Mariners Harbor (It could terminate on Holland Avenue with the S48/S98) and relieve some of the pressure of routes like the S46 and S48 transferring to the S53.

 

B35, I think the idea to terminate a possible extended S93 at the West Shore DMV on West Shore Expressway and Victory maybe a good alternative to end/start at Richmond Ave. Plus, correct me if i am wrong but does not Short Trip S61 locals already end/start at Victory/Richmond Ave during rush hours when the Victory Blvd S91 limited operates? I disagree with your comments as taking the S79 to connect to the S89 at the Mall area is much longer for Brooklyn riders who want to go to NJ via Bayone.

 

Plus the DMV office in both Coney Island and Downtown Brooklyn are always busy and crowded as well so those customers going to DMV can if they have time go to the West Shore/SI DMV as well. So your replies?

 

I think he is referring to the S62 local/S92 limited-stop buses. Those S62s terminate at CSI. They have an asterisk on the schedule.

I don’t think that many Brooklynites are looking to go to Bayonne. Maybe riders from the East Shore of Staten Island, which was what an express route (I think it was the 122) used to do.

 

 

Basically, my ideas for SI these ideas in addition to the restructuring of some SI routes:

 

* Expanded limited-stop service on the S89 and S93 bus routes

* Extend S89 to Tottenville in place of S59 to improve efficiency and attract more riders to the limited-stop service on Richmond Avenue, and direct service to Bayonne

* Run the ‘’new’’ S66 weekends from Arlo Road/Howard Avenue to Port Richmond 7 AM - 9 PM to compensate for loss of north-south S54 service and the loss of the S60 (ridership on the Grymes Hill segment should get more riders, since the new route would be more than just a shuttle and would go to a destination where people would want to go.

* Reroute the S61/S91 to Manor Road between Harold Street and Victory Blvd to serve to Todt Hill Houses on weekends. (Bradley Avenue is already served by the S57, so for simplicity’s sake, it would be better to run the route all times down Manor Road to avoid confusion between weekday/weekend service. That’s why I mentioned the S91)

* Extend the S93 to Victory Blvd/Richmond Avenue, the Teleport, or Holland Avenue/Richmond Terrace to indirectly help relieve the crowding on the S53

* Add AM limited-stop service to the S81, S84, and S86

* Add limited-stop S79 service rush hours and then eventually expand to all day. (To test out ridership for SBS)

* Maintain weekend S76 service

[S78 via Hylan]

Sorry to post so much later, but wanted to comment on some of the posts and wanted to add on some ideas.

 

 

 

Or to make it simpler, you could just say to cut the X7 instead of the X6.

 

 

 

I think only the S79 needs to be made +select+ bus service, since the S78 parallels the SIR,while the S79 serves its own destinations.

 

I can't really see that S3 getting a lot of ridership. I don't think that there is a real demand for east-west service in that section of SI. A lot of the route you would spend going through the Greenbelt and other parts would be spent overlapping more popular routes or going to places where there is little demand to go between (I don’t think that many people will come from the East Shore to the West Shore Plaza when they pass by the SI Mall on the way, and I can’t picture residents in New Springville going to the West Shore Plaza when the SI Mall is closer and has more frequent service.

 

I think that that AM S84 service should run the same route as the S74, with the S74 starting at Eltingville Transit Center. The ridership on South Shore local bus routes is relatively light, even during the rush hour, and the section along Bloomingdale Road/Woodrow Road/Rossville Avenue has a fair amount of people, since very few people live along that section of Arthur Kill Road.

 

The S4 sounds like a good idea, but it should start out as a rush hour service, since most of the people would’ve transferred to the S53 before they could get to the S4. (All the buses that come from either the south or west intersected the S53 at some point)

 

 

 

 

You might as well terminate it at the Eltingville Transit Center, since that is an extremely awkward place to terminate the bus. Sure, it can go into the depot, but it is in the middle of nowhere.

A better idea would be to bring back S59 late night service (as was mentioned before). Then that would serve all of the areas along Richmond Avenue. It would be better if there were unlimited transfers so somebody could take the S59 to the S78 to the S53 and the MTA would save the cost of running the S79 at night (though a person could take the free SIR to Grasmere for the S53)

 

 

 

2) I don’t know if the S53 needs the increase in service. Usually when I see it on Broadway at Forest Avenue, it is usually pretty empty at that hour. (about 9PM) Maybe the MTA could bring back a few of those buses that short-turn at Victory Blvd, since it gets more crowded the closer it is to Brooklyn.

 

3) The cost would be high, since you have to pay night differential, but the X1 is the most used express route in the city, so I guess it could be justified. It would save commuters the trouble of having to run to the ferry and risk missing it, or run for the bus at the other end.

 

4) The buses are also lightly used at that time. Usually at Forest Avenue/Richmond Avenue, the S44s and S59s that pull in have no more than about 10-15 people. The S46 and S48 can get knid of crowded at that time. Not crushloaded crowded but with maybe 8 or 9 standees.

 

5) I could see running the S89 middays. If nothing else, it provides limited-stop service on Richmond Avenue. We’ll have to see how the ridership grows. If it shows decent growth, it should be considered for midday service.

 

6) How would you do that? Would you run the S54 west on Richmond Terrace from Broadway to Port Richmond Avenue, or do some kind of combination?

7) The S84 could probably handle the crowding west of Richmond Avenue if the S74 were cut back there. I don’t know if it warrants midday service, but the S84 should at least run AM rush hours. Could picture something like 6AM - 1PM to St George and 12PM - 8 PM to Tottenville, since reverse peak ridership isn’t that good.

 

 

 

I know that this was written before the final proposed service changes came out, but I think it was a great idea that they decided to combine it with the S66.

 

 

 

I agree with that. As far as the place to terminate, near Richmond Avenue, there are streets near there that are wide enough to accommodate a bus turning around (I’m not talking about making a U-turn, I’m talking about like what the S44/S94 and S61/S91 do at the SI Mall). For example, it could continue down to Arlene Street, turn right, then turn right at Merrill Avenue, and turn right onto Richmond Avenue and go back on Victory Blvd. (See google.com/maps)

I think that the S93 could be extended to the Teleport when more development comes there. From there, it could go up South Avenue and into Graniteville/Mariners Harbor (It could terminate on Holland Avenue with the S48/S98) and relieve some of the pressure of routes like the S46 and S48 transferring to the S53.

 

 

 

I think he is referring to the S62 local/S92 limited-stop buses. Those S62s terminate at CSI. They have an asterisk on the schedule.

I don’t think that many Brooklynites are looking to go to Bayonne. Maybe riders from the East Shore of Staten Island, which was what an express route (I think it was the 122) used to do.

 

 

Basically, my ideas for SI these ideas in addition to the restructuring of some SI routes:

 

* Expanded limited-stop service on the S89 and S93 bus routes

* Extend S89 to Tottenville in place of S59 to improve efficiency and attract more riders to the limited-stop service on Richmond Avenue, and direct service to Bayonne

* Run the ‘’new’’ S66 weekends from Arlo Road/Howard Avenue to Port Richmond 7 AM - 9 PM to compensate for loss of north-south S54 service and the loss of the S60 (ridership on the Grymes Hill segment should get more riders, since the new route would be more than just a shuttle and would go to a destination where people would want to go.

* Reroute the S61/S91 to Manor Road between Harold Street and Victory Blvd to serve to Todt Hill Houses on weekends. (Bradley Avenue is already served by the S57, so for simplicity’s sake, it would be better to run the route all times down Manor Road to avoid confusion between weekday/weekend service. That’s why I mentioned the S91)

* Extend the S93 to Victory Blvd/Richmond Avenue, the Teleport, or Holland Avenue/Richmond Terrace to indirectly help relieve the crowding on the S53

* Add AM limited-stop service to the S81, S84, and S86

* Add limited-stop S79 service rush hours and then eventually expand to all day. (To test out ridership for SBS)

* Maintain weekend S76 service

 

I agree with maintaining weekend service on the S76 and the S79 limited stop service idea.

 

However, about the S81, S84, S86 AM service ideas:

 

The S74 and S76 do get crowded, but not until a certain point of the route. for example, the S74 gets packed around Stapleton and park Hill, but rarely beyond Richmond Rd.

 

The S89 extension to Tottenville, I don't know about that because both the S59 and S78 go to down there during rush hours and ridership isn't that high. I do like the idea of having the S89 run during middays though.

 

About the S93, many have said before that it cannot terminate at Victory Blvd/Richmond Av.

[checkmatechamp13]

I agree with maintaining weekend service on the S76 and the S79 limited stop service idea.

 

However, about the S81, S84, S86 AM service ideas:

 

The S74 and S76 do get crowded, but not until a certain point of the route. for example, the S74 gets packed around Stapleton and park Hill, but rarely beyond Richmond Rd.

 

The S89 extension to Tottenville, I don't know about that because both the S59 and S78 go to down there during rush hours and ridership isn't that high. I do like the idea of having the S89 run during middays though.

 

About the S93, many have said before that it cannot terminate at Victory Blvd/Richmond Av.

 

Now that you mention it, the S51 sort of goes near the S52, and Father Capodanno Blvd has a lot of express buses, but could the S81 be justified to run in the AM rush? The train goes near the part on Bay Street where it could be useful, so probably not.

 

The S89 extension was supposed to replace the S59 in that area. Since there are fewer S89 runs than S59 runs to Tottenville, you would have to run fewer buses along Hylan Blvd. That's why I said the cost would go down, since riders could go to Bayonne, and have limited-stop service, instead of local service to Port Richmond.

 

That seems like an alright way to terminate it at Victory Blvd. Obviously, you can't turn the bus in the intersection, but it can be turned on neighborhood streets.

[S78 via Hylan]

Now that you mention it, the S51 sort of goes near the S52, and Father Capodanno Blvd has a lot of express buses, but could the S81 be justified to run in the AM rush? The train goes near the part on Bay Street where it could be useful, so probably not.

 

The S89 extension was supposed to replace the S59 in that area. Since there are fewer S89 runs than S59 runs to Tottenville, you would have to run fewer buses along Hylan Blvd. That's why I said the cost would go down, since riders could go to Bayonne, and have limited-stop service, instead of local service to Port Richmond.

 

That seems like an alright way to terminate it at Victory Blvd. Obviously, you can't turn the bus in the intersection, but it can be turned on neighborhood streets.

I understand your idea for the S89, but again, there isn't much ridership south of Richmond Av and plus riders already have the S78 to go down to Tottenville.

 

As for the S93, I think turning it in Bulls Head could work.

[LRG]

I understand your idea for the S89, but again, there isn't much ridership south of Richmond Av and plus riders already have the S78 to go down to Tottenville.

 

IAWTP. I rode the S59 from Port Richmond to Eltingville end-to-end last Friday and then skated along Hylan Boulevard until I reached Luten Avenue near where the high school is...nothing but long stretches of road and trees and what not. No wonder why some S78s short turn at Richmond Avenue; if no one is west of that portion, it's a waste of money to have frequent buses there outside of rush hours!

 

As for the S93, I think turning it in Bulls Head could work.

 

Unfortunately I really don't think the S93's route should be tampered with since its primary target is for the college students who need Brooklyn, like, well, myself...he he. But if anything the service should be expanded outside rush hours to midday hours, even if it means that buses run every 25 minutes or so. Remember how the S93 started? It ran every TWO hours lol. Gradually its headways became better because the TA realized that people like it and use it. I'm debating weekend service but if you ask me the TA should give an additional transfer between the S53 and S62 after those who paid their fare to get on the train from wherever they are use their transfer for the 53 in Brooklyn. You'd be surprised as to how long the line for the S62 is at Clove Road and Victory Boulevard is as early as 7 in the morning, even on Saturday mornings, because those are the ones who come from Brooklyn most likely and are heading...to the college.

[S78 via Hylan]

IAWTP. I rode the S59 from Port Richmond to Eltingville end-to-end last Friday and then skated along Hylan Boulevard until I reached Luten Avenue near where the high school is...nothing but long stretches of road and trees and what not. No wonder why some S78s short turn at Richmond Avenue; if no one is west of that portion, it's a waste of money to have frequent buses there outside of rush hours!

 

 

 

Unfortunately I really don't think the S93's route should be tampered with since its primary target is for the college students who need Brooklyn, like, well, myself...he he. But if anything the service should be expanded outside rush hours to midday hours, even if it means that buses run every 25 minutes or so. Remember how the S93 started? It ran every TWO hours lol. Gradually its headways became better because the TA realized that people like it and use it. I'm debating weekend service but if you ask me the TA should give an additional transfer between the S53 and S62 after those who paid their fare to get on the train from wherever they are use their transfer for the 53 in Brooklyn. You'd be surprised as to how long the line for the S62 is at Clove Road and Victory Boulevard is as early as 7 in the morning, even on Saturday mornings, because those are the ones who come from Brooklyn most likely and are heading...to the college.

 

I like. I also think that the S93 should have midday service.

[checkmatechamp13]

I understand your idea for the S89, but again, there isn't much ridership south of Richmond Av and plus riders already have the S78 to go down to Tottenville.

 

As for the S93, I think turning it in Bulls Head could work.

 

So neither the S59 or S89 should go down to Tottenville. I don't know if the costs would decrease and/or the ridership would increase enough to justify keeping service in that area. You're right, the MTA would probably be better of eliminating all service from Tottenville to the places along Richmond Avenue.

 

I guess that wouldn't be too bad, since there is the S78 to connect to the S59. The few times I went down there, the roads seemed empty and there didn't seem to be anything of real interest along Hylan Blvd. (There are a few schools there, but they probably have their own ''special'' S59 buses.

 

I was surprised at the costs of the routes on the South Shore since they are among the highest in the city. I didn't think they were that underutilized.

 

If the extension to Richmond Avenue works, do you think eventually the S93 could be extended to the Teleport and later on, up South Aveue into Mariners' Harbor. This would probably take off some riders from the S53, since people in Mariners' Harbor wouldn't have to take the S46 or S48 to the S53.

 

The S93 is a good example of routes that started out small and eventually grew a healthy ridership. It started out in 2001 as a route with 3 trips during rush hours in the peak direction and eventually grew to fairly frequent, bidirectional service during rush hour.

 

The extensions (to Richmond Avenue, the Teleport, and Mariners' Harbor) would be steps towards expanding service like the MTA did on the B103.

[S78 via Hylan]

So neither the S59 or S89 should go down to Tottenville. I don't know if the costs would decrease and/or the ridership would increase enough to justify keeping service in that area. You're right, the MTA would probably be better of eliminating all service from Tottenville to the places along Richmond Avenue.

 

I guess that wouldn't be too bad, since there is the S78 to connect to the S59. The few times I went down there, the roads seemed empty and there didn't seem to be anything of real interest along Hylan Blvd. (There are a few schools there, but they probably have their own ''special'' S59 buses.

 

I was surprised at the costs of the routes on the South Shore since they are among the highest in the city. I didn't think they were that underutilized.

 

If the extension to Richmond Avenue works, do you think eventually the S93 could be extended to the Teleport and later on, up South Aveue into Mariners' Harbor. This would probably take off some riders from the S53, since people in Mariners' Harbor wouldn't have to take the S46 or S48 to the S53.

 

The S93 is a good example of routes that started out small and eventually grew a healthy ridership. It started out in 2001 as a route with 3 trips during rush hours in the peak direction and eventually grew to fairly frequent, bidirectional service during rush hour.

 

The extensions (to Richmond Avenue, the Teleport, and Mariners' Harbor) would be steps towards expanding service like the MTA did on the B103.

That could work although the S93 would have to be rerouted to either Forest or Castleton Avs if it were to go into Mariners Harbor.

[BJC]

I rather combine the S 42/60...Have that bus run from St-marks/ferry to the colleges.people will have one seat ride.I think is ridiculous have the 66 go up and the down the hill and waste it time that part of route when you're not going to pick up anybody.Drivers will see how dumb that is....so,that means the 66 and 52 will keep their old route.

[LRG]

I rather combine the S 42/60...Have that bus run from St-marks/ferry to the colleges.people will have one seat ride.I think is ridiculous have the 66 go up and the down the hill and waste it time that part of route when you're not going to pick up anybody.Drivers will see how dumb that is....so,that means the 66 and 52 will keep their old route.

 

Now that you mention it, that doesn't seem like a bad idea at all, especially with the discontinuation of the S67...if anything the S60 could be killed, the S42 could be killed, and rebrand the line as the...S67! The only thing is, the S67 is a peak direction route but I could see it becoming a weekday only route. The upside is that Watchogue Road service will remain intact.

[checkmatechamp13]

That could work although the S93 would have to be rerouted to either Forest or Castleton Avs if it were to go into Mariners Harbor.

 

 

It would go through the Teleport area. For example, the simplest way would be to go down Victory Blvd to Travis Avenue, take Travis Avenue to South Avenue, and then turn around the same way the S48/S98 turn around in Arlington.

[checkmatechamp13]

I rather combine the S 42/60...Have that bus run from St-marks/ferry to the colleges.people will have one seat ride.I think is ridiculous have the 66 go up and the down the hill and waste it time that part of route when you're not going to pick up anybody.Drivers will see how dumb that is....so,that means the 66 and 52 will keep their old route.

 

People will have a one-seat ride on the new S66, and it will be much more direct, as it won't go all around New Brighton, it would go straight to Grymes Hill. That would be enough to attract new riders.

Also, the fact that the new S66 goes up Jewett Avenue and into Port Richmond means that people from Wagner College have that many more options. They could transfer to buses on Forest Avenue, Post Avenue, Castleton Avenue, and Richmond Terrace, and Port Richmond Avenue, instead of just terminating at Clove Road.

I think that this new S66 serves Grymes Hill better than the S60, and better than an extended S42 would. The MTA would save money and gain riders in the process (though Grymes Hill would still be isolated on the weekends.)

[LRG]

Here's something new I came up with:

 

Overnight S78 eliminated; replaced by S59 and S79:

 

The S74 and S78 have the SAME northern and southern terminals, except the S74 operates via Arthur Kill Road and the S78 operates via Hylan Boulevard. I'm surprised that the headways the S79 has on weekends (approximately 5-6, or even 7, buses an hour), it doesn't run at night, yet the S78 does despite the fact that the route runs 3-6 buses/hour headways during the day. Having the S74 become the sole St. George-Tottenville bus cuts the redundancy down, especially if no one's riding all the way from St. George to Tottenville...if they were they could hop on the train.

 

As a result of the S78 being eliminated at night, the S79 replaces the S78 between Hylan Boulevard/Narrows Road and Richmond Avenue/Hylan Boulevard (meaning the S79 operates between Brooklyn and the Yukon depot instead of continuing to Ring Road and Marsh Avenue since the mall is closed at night).

 

The S59, despite going to Tottenville during rush hours only, would become a full-time route and would be extended to Tottenville during night hours instead, and the S89 would serve Tottenville during rush hours as it runs during rush hours only anyway in the hopes of getting a ridership boost (despite the fact that there isn't shit in the South Shore of Staten Island as I boarded the S74 one day at the jail and it literally ran non-stop to the end of the line in Tottenville). I don't see why there isn't a night-owl route along Richmond Avenue as it could transverse riders north-south of the borough.

 

So here's the breakdown:

 

 

• S59: Daytime service operates between Port Richmond - Port Richmond Avenue/Richmond Terrace and Eltingville - Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue; rush hour service to Tottenville is discontinued and replaced by the S89; late night service operates between Port Richmond and Tottenville - Main Street/Amboy Road; replaces the S78 between Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue and Main Street/Amboy Road at night.
  
• S74/84: Same, except it becomes the only bus route that runs between Saint George and Tottenville at night.
  
• S78: Late night service is discontinued due to its redundancy as a St. George/Tottenville route; replaced by the S59 between Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue and Main Street/Amboy Road; replaced by the S79 between Hylan Boulevard/Narrows Road and Richmond Avenue/Hylan Boulevard[/u]; service north of Hylan Boulevard and Narrows Road is replaced by nearby routes (e.g. S51)
  
• S79: Becomes a limited route during weekday hours in both directions; operates between Brooklyn and Yukon Depot next to the KMart (same location where the S44/61/91/94 terminate during the day) at night; replaces the S78 between Hylan Boulevard/Narrows Road and Richmond Avenue/Hylan Boulevard.
  
• S89: Extended to Tottenville to replaces the S59 between Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue and Main Street/Amboy Road; runs during rush hours only (the same time frame that the S59 runs to Tottenville)
  

 

 

Opinions anyone?

[checkmatechamp13]

Here's something new I came up with:

 

Overnight S78 eliminated; replaced by S59 and S79:

 

The S74 and S78 have the SAME northern and southern terminals, except the S74 operates via Arthur Kill Road and the S78 operates via Hylan Boulevard. I'm surprised that the headways the S79 has on weekends (approximately 5-6, or even 7, buses an hour), it doesn't run at night, yet the S78 does despite the fact that the route runs 3-6 buses/hour headways during the day. Having the S74 become the sole St. George-Tottenville bus cuts the redundancy down, especially if no one's riding all the way from St. George to Tottenville...if they were they could hop on the train.

 

As a result of the S78 being eliminated at night, the S79 replaces the S78 between Hylan Boulevard/Narrows Road and Richmond Avenue/Hylan Boulevard (meaning the S79 operates between Brooklyn and the Yukon depot instead of continuing to Ring Road and Marsh Avenue since the mall is closed at night).

 

The S59, despite going to Tottenville during rush hours only, would become a full-time route and would be extended to Tottenville during night hours instead, and the S89 would serve Tottenville during rush hours as it runs during rush hours only anyway in the hopes of getting a ridership boost (despite the fact that there isn't shit in the South Shore of Staten Island as I boarded the S74 one day at the jail and it literally ran non-stop to the end of the line in Tottenville). I don't see why there isn't a night-owl route along Richmond Avenue as it could transverse riders north-south of the borough.

 

So here's the breakdown:

 

 

• S59: Daytime service operates between Port Richmond - Port Richmond Avenue/Richmond Terrace and Eltingville - Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue; rush hour service to Tottenville is discontinued and replaced by the S89; late night service operates between Port Richmond and Tottenville - Main Street/Amboy Road; replaces the S78 between Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue and Main Street/Amboy Road at night.

• S74/84: Same, except it becomes the only bus route that runs between Saint George and Tottenville at night.

• S78: Late night service is discontinued due to its redundancy as a St. George/Tottenville route; replaced by the S59 between Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue and Main Street/Amboy Road; replaced by the S79 between Hylan Boulevard/Narrows Road and Richmond Avenue/Hylan Boulevard[/u]; service north of Hylan Boulevard and Narrows Road is replaced by nearby routes (e.g. S51)

• S79: Becomes a limited route during weekday hours in both directions; operates between Brooklyn and Yukon Depot next to the KMart (same location where the S44/61/91/94 terminate during the day) at night; replaces the S78 between Hylan Boulevard/Narrows Road and Richmond Avenue/Hylan Boulevard.

• S89: Extended to Tottenville to replaces the S59 between Hylan Boulevard/Richmond Avenue and Main Street/Amboy Road; runs during rush hours only (the same time frame that the S59 runs to Tottenville)

 

 

Opinions anyone?

 

Basically, there would be no service on Hylan Blvd south of Richmond Avenue, if I understand correctly.

I pretty much agree with the plan, as I also proposed that the S89 replace the S59 on Hylan Blvd (since riders should be attracted to the limited-stop service and direct service to Bayonne), and proposed that there be limited-stop S79 service.

The only issue that I have is that 2 services aren't necessary on Richmond Avenue between Arthur Kill Road and Hylan Blvd. Other than that, I pretty much agree with the plan, since the SIR runs parallel to the S78 south of Richmond Avenue, and there is not much there at that time of night.

[LRG]

Basically, there would be no service on Hylan Blvd south of Richmond Avenue, if I understand correctly.

 

The S59 would operate to Tottenville at night-time (replacing the S78 between Richmond Avenue and Tottenville) instead of rush hours. Since the S89 is a rush hour-only route, have it operate to Tottenville instead.

 

I pretty much agree with the plan, as I also proposed that the S89 replace the S59 on Hylan Blvd (since riders should be attracted to the limited-stop service and direct service to Bayonne), and proposed that there be limited-stop S79 service.

 

Yup, exactly my point.

 

The only issue that I have is that 2 services aren't necessary on Richmond Avenue between Arthur Kill Road and Hylan Blvd. Other than that, I pretty much agree with the plan, since the SIR runs parallel to the S78 south of Richmond Avenue, and there is not much there at that time of night.

 

Yeah that's one quirk...it's only a short section of road being shared by the two routes for the most part so shouldn't be much of a biggie.

[checkmatechamp13]

I especially agree with the fact that the S59 would provide north-south service in the borough. Other than the S53, which runs from Bay Ridge, all of the buses that run overnight are routes that run from the ferry terminal. I can't think of any major traffic generators at night, since the SI Mall is closed, but I'm sure some riders would be generated from the gap in service from Arthur Kill Road to Victory Boulevard, as well as riders in general who want to go from the North Shore to the South Shore without having to go to the ferry and back.

[LRG]

I especially agree with the fact that the S59 would provide north-south service in the borough. Other than the S53, which runs from Bay Ridge, all of the buses that run overnight are routes that run from the ferry terminal. I can't think of any major traffic generators at night, since the SI Mall is closed, but I'm sure some riders would be generated from the gap in service from Arthur Kill Road to Victory Boulevard, as well as riders in general who want to go from the North Shore to the South Shore without having to go to the ferry and back.

 

Agreed 100%.

[S78 via Hylan]

Here are some new ideas I thought of:

 

S42/S52

 

I think the S42 should be canned mostly because at least more than half of it's route is shared with the S52. What I also noticed is that ever since the S42 became a rush hour route, more people have been taking the S52 since it is more frequent, not to mention that most people take whatever bus leaves from the ferry first.

 

For those who live near Clyde Pl, the S44 and S52 are nearby.

 

The S81, S84, and S86 could also be canned (I explained why in another thread), but for those who don't know, these routes only run in one direction during the PM rush hour.

[checkmatechamp13]

I think running some routes on expressways is an idea that should be considered. One idea is to have the S46/S96 run from the West Shore Plaza, down the West Shore Expressway to Arthur Kill Road, and then go down Hugenot Avenue to Hylan Blvd.

This would provide a North Shore-South Shore route on the western side of Staten Island (some of the plans for the West Shore Light Rail have it running down the West Shore Expressway, so I feel there should be some form of transit on the West Shore Expressway before the train comes), as well as a north-south route to connect to the Staten Island Railway at Hugenot. (The S74 and S78 parallel the SIR, but don't intersect)

The problem is that any route that serves the South Shore tends to be inefficient.

[S78 via Hylan]

I think running some routes on expressways is an idea that should be considered. One idea is to have the S46/S96 run from the West Shore Plaza, down the West Shore Expressway to Arthur Kill Road, and then go down Hugenot Avenue to Hylan Blvd.

This would provide a North Shore-South Shore route on the western side of Staten Island (some of the plans for the West Shore Light Rail have it running down the West Shore Expressway, so I feel there should be some form of transit on the West Shore Expressway before the train comes), as well as a north-south route to connect to the Staten Island Railway at Hugenot. (The S74 and S78 parallel the SIR, but don't intersect)

The problem is that any route that serves the South Shore tends to be inefficient.

 

Plus, that would make the S46/S96 route too long.

[checkmatechamp13]

You're right. That would make it the longest route in NYC, at 21 miles.

Of course, when (or if) the North Shore Rail Line comes to fruition, it could run down the West Shore Expressway and serve the South Shore.

[LRG]

You're right. That would make it the longest route in NYC, at 21 miles.

Of course, when (or if) the North Shore Rail Line comes to fruition, it could run down the West Shore Expressway and serve the South Shore.

 

Anything to link the North and South Shores at night. Wish they'd just bring back the S59 at night already.

[S78 via Hylan]

Anything to link the North and South Shores at night. Wish they'd just bring back the S59 at night already.

 

They probably would if the S78 was not running at night.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

Cool thread.

 

Alot of interesting ideas here for & regarding Staten Island.