Do you think some limited bus routes are useless?

[checkmatechamp13]

That argument of increased service attracting increased patronage really only works when you are dealing with parallel transit services.

 

For example:

 

I have 2 options (I actually have 4, but I'll show you the ones that best illustrate my point) of getting from my after-school program to my home:

 

Take the S48/S98 to South Avenue and transfer to the S96

Take the S48/S98 to Richmond Avenue and transfer to the S59/S89/S94 (I travel in the PM rush hour, so that is why I can't get the S44 or S46)

 

Obviously, I'm going to pick the second option because

a) Some S98 buses terminate at Richmond Avenue (so the frequency of buses to Richmond Avenue is higher than those to South Avenue)

The S59/S89/S94 combined run more frequently than the S96

 

But, if somebody offered to drive me home from my after-school program, no increase in frequency on any of these routes would make me take mass transit to get home, even with my free Student MetroCard.

[S78 via Hylan]

I want all of you to know something. When I made this thread, I was not only talking about Staten Island. The reason I am saying this is because I do not want people to think that I just want buses eliminated aimlessly. In my opinion, I think the SI limited buses higher than the (S86) are useful. I have been on all of the SI limiteds and just as mentioned before, for routes that only have limited service in one direction, instead of the limiteds the headways could just be decreased to match service.

[SIR North Shore]

Even if you increase the frequency of a local line by removing the limited, it's not going to help anyone because the time travel is higher during rush hours for locals. It saves the MTA money by having the locals and limiteds running.