BUS - Random Thoughts Thread

[OIG119]

6 minutes ago, lara8710 said:

Have a question, if the Q50, S53, and S93 buses got bike racks, is it because a lot of riders on those routes own bikes?

All those routes cross bridges without bike paths.

[B35 via Church]

Random Thought:

I'm done with the MTA if I start seeing express buses with bike racks..... I laugh, but reading some of those comments on SI Live with how poorly some of those riders have been displaced (as far as bus stop proximity).........

[Armandito]

53 minutes ago, OIG119 said:

All those routes cross bridges without bike paths.

How about installing bike racks on the Q44 and S79 SBS as well? Both of those routes also cross the same bridges as the three routes that already have the racks.

Edited January 26, 2019 by lara8710

[trife86]

44 minutes ago, lara8710 said:

How about installing bike racks on the Q44 and S79 SBS as well? Both of those routes also cross the same bridges as the three routes that already have the racks.

Bike racks will slow down a SBS, defeats the purpose of SBS

Edited January 26, 2019 by trife86

[Armandito]

7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

I'd think most people would prefer rail transit over surface transit....

The S40 is already an infrequent route along that corridor, and Richmond Terrace is too snaky of an artery to operate a Staten Island-EWR route, hence why I chose Forest Avenue instead. It's straighter and busier than Richmond Terrace, as evidenced by the relatively more frequent S48/98 routes as well as the presence of a few express bus routes along it.

[Bay Ridge Express]

2 hours ago, lara8710 said:

How about installing bike racks on the Q44 and S79 SBS as well? Both of those routes also cross the same bridges as the three routes that already have the racks.

Those bikes would fly off the bus...

[B35 via Church]

2 hours ago, lara8710 said:

The S40 is already an infrequent route along that corridor, and Richmond Terrace is too snaky of an artery to operate a Staten Island-EWR route, hence why I chose Forest Avenue instead. It's straighter and busier than Richmond Terrace, as evidenced by the relatively more frequent S48/98 routes as well as the presence of a few express bus routes along it.

O..kay....

I'm not sure how this correlates to a point about rail service being more sought after in general than bus service though.... I'm an advocate for bus service through & through, but I'm not going to act oblivious to a basic fact at the same time.

1 hour ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Those bikes would fly off the bus...

LMAO... You sir, win the comment of the day !

[B35 via Church]

3 hours ago, lara8710 said:

The S40 is already an infrequent route along that corridor, and Richmond Terrace is too snaky of an artery to operate a Staten Island-EWR route, hence why I chose Forest Avenue instead. It's straighter and busier than Richmond Terrace, as evidenced by the relatively more frequent S48/98 routes as well as the presence of a few express bus routes along it.

O..kay....

I'm not sure how this correlates to a point about rail service being more sought after in general than bus service though.... I'm an advocate for bus service through & through, but I'm not going to act oblivious to a basic fact at the same time.

1 hour ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Those bikes would fly off the bus...

LMAO... You sir, win the comment of the day !

[bobtehpanda]

On 1/26/2019 at 8:53 AM, B35 via Church said:

I'd think most people would prefer rail transit over surface transit....

Yeah, but the problem with North Shore rail is that the catchment is rather limited just because it's right up along the shore.

Asking people to bus + rail + ferry + whatever else is quite a lot.

[B35 via Church]

26 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Yeah, but the problem with North Shore rail is that the catchment is rather limited just because it's right up along the shore.

Asking people to bus + rail + ferry + whatever else is quite a lot.

Beats what they currently have though.....

 

 

 

[Armandito]

5 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Yeah, but the problem with North Shore rail is that the catchment is rather limited just because it's right up along the shore.

Asking people to bus + rail + ferry + whatever else is quite a lot.

Except for the Port Richmond terminal at Richmond Terrace and Park Avenue, where four buses begin and end their trips (S53, S57, S59, and S66). The North Shore rail line isn't that far from it.

Edited January 28, 2019 by lara8710

[Calvin]

I wonder: how come Staten Island local routes don't use the same number for limited service? (ex: B35 and B35 Limited)

[Jdog14]

33 minutes ago, Calvin said:

I wonder: how come Staten Island local routes don't use the same number for limited service? (ex: B35 and B35 Limited)

 

Many of them are peak only so maybe thats one reason 

[Bay Ridge Express]

34 minutes ago, Calvin said:

I wonder: how come Staten Island local routes don't use the same number for limited service? (ex: B35 and B35 Limited)

I also wonder why their numbers start at 40 and not 1 (S40 v. S1) 🤔

[Around the Horn]

1 minute ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

I also wonder why their numbers start at 40 and not 1 (S40 v. S1) 🤔

The idea was that the express buses would occupy 1-40 (the X42 broke that "rule" later) then the local buses are:

4x= north shore

5x= cross island

6x= mid island

7x= south shore

8x, 9x= limited routes

 

[bobtehpanda]

9 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Beats what they currently have though.....

 

4 hours ago, lara8710 said:

Except for the Port Richmond terminal at Richmond Terrace and Park Avenue, where four buses begin and end their trips (S53, S57, S59, and S66). The North Shore rail line isn't that far from it.

Is it better, though? All those bus routes are intersected by one-seat rides to St. George.

With BRT all those bus routes can run through to St. George and you don't have to get out of your seat. Making North Shore a rail line makes it another transfer that you might miss, and at the frequencies of today's Staten Island bus network the transfer penalty is greater than the time you might save. 

[checkmatechamp13]

On 1/26/2019 at 7:09 AM, Lil 57 said:

My mistake, I meant Victory/Cebra.

I see your point (and agree it's a long stretch between stops, plus you have the S52 connection there) but I don't think it would be worth slowing the bus down for. You'd probably see more people from that stop using it as just another bus to reach the ferry than people using it to reach NJ.

The other thing with the S52 is that most of the neighborhoods it serves are covered by the S51 & S78. (And for the St. George/New Brighton area, you can stay on the S98 to Borough Hall and catch the S52 there). So it's not a huge loss. Maybe for Ward Hill (since it's a steep hill and it's one stop on the S52 from Victory) but that's about it.

On 1/26/2019 at 10:08 AM, B35 via Church said:

.... and a bad workman blames his tools.

You have people that end up uprooting or landing a new job somewhere, then expecting/hoping public transit to shapeshift (which is delusional).... Much of nobody likes to want to talk about the fact that people tend to not do (or do enough) due diligence when making major life decisions... That part of trife86's post I gotta concur with.... It has less to do with necessity & more to do with personal responsibility..... Just because you can (physically) work at some facility in any ole locale doesn't necessarily mean that you should.... Using that adage to make the point you're making, to me, is like saying the flood gates should be open to everybody, and at everybody's leisure at the same time on top of it.... Nah - public transit doesn't mean everybody gets to go wherever they want to, on one mode, in a leisurely fashion.... Sounds nice, but that aint realistic....

Being a little more literal with it for a second, connecting two land masses is one thing, connecting the last two damn brain cells people have, is quite another..... There's consequences to/sacrifices that have to be made in making less than ideal decisions (as in, whatever is ideal to that particular person)... Funny how the narrative becomes "Oh, the commute isn't worth all this shit" when you're ready to bow out, but when you were down to your last two nickels to rub together before accepting a job offer, you on all fours "bowing" down on some oh yessa massa shit (figuratively speaking)....

When interviewing people, one question I like to ask is "How was your commute this morning".... While I currently have some good guys on my team, quite frankly, I'm tired of hearing about the n23...

I can't agree with that attitude because it basically supports stagnation and the status quo. It's basically saying "Well, people are managing to do fine with what's available now, so why bother expanding the service?"

I'll give you an idea, during my college years (I just graduated in June) I had a tutoring gig and I would sometimes see offers where the client was a few miles away (e.g. Elizabeth, Westfield, Newark, Bayonne, etc). If I could reasonably get to the client (sometimes I would get a lift, sometimes I would use TransportAzumah's Route 100, sometimes I would go through Manhattan, etc all depending on if I had multiple clients in the same area/along the same path or if I was coming from CCNY, etc) I would take it. If not, I would turn it down. And then sometimes I would see that nobody accepted the gig (you would see these "rate boost incentives" and things like that that let you know that they were desperate to get them matched up) and so that's the real cost to the economy. (A gig/temp job existed, you had somebody willing and qualified to work, but because they couldn't reach the client, the work wasn't done).

I mean I'm not going to relocate (or even get a car) over a few little temporary gigs. At the end it wasn't like it was the difference between me making the rent or not, so I "managed", but at the same time, the existence of the direct travel link would've marginally improved my quality of life (and the lives of the people willing to pay me). It's the same thing for any other jobs that may exist (on both sides of the NJ/NY border).

The same thing with me trying to get a local route on the Fahy/Lamberts/Goethals corridor a few years ago (I haven't given up, but I understand their attention is primarily focused on the express routes). My family and a lot of others moved here and were alright walking to Richmond Avenue or Victory Blvd for our transit service, but if we can get something that's a little closer, and if there's demand to sustain it, why not? It's the same thing going on with the SIM2 off-peak service (and what might end up happening with the SIM3C for that matter). People moved to those areas and the service was rush hour-only, and then it was expanded to run all-day. It's not right to cut the off-peak service just because "it's what they had before" and "they were able to figure out how to make it work". 

To relate the example back to you, that's basically absolving NICE of the responsibility of running reliable n23 service. Yeah, people should be aware of the fact that the n23 is unreliable before accepting a job offer that involves that route as part of their commute, but why is it considered OK that the route is unreliable? It's the same thing I mentioned before where MTA apologists say "Oh just leave earlier". Yeah, people can do that, or they can just drive, use a car service/Uber or just not make the trip altogether and that's why ridership is declining the way it is.

On 1/26/2019 at 11:10 AM, Around the Horn said:

I would much rather a new route from St. George to New Jersey use the North Shore BRT than local streets...

As mentioned, Forest Avenue is more centralized than Richmond Terrace (and also offers easier connections to other local routes). Plus, to be perfectly honest, the neighborhoods around Forest Avenue tend to be safer than those around Richmond Terrace. (Plus, Richmond Terrace is more industrial compared to Forest Avenue, so it just feels more isolated on top of that for anybody who might be waiting with luggage).

But the other thing is that a route going over the Goethals Bridge would have inherent reliability issues (not saying that traffic along the Goethals is terrible or anything, but having the buses cross the bridge adds another potential chokepoint that would cause reliability issues from time to time). So it's better off as a separate layer of service (in other words, if there's an issue with the S98, the S48 can handle the riders). If it was the S40 running there, a problem on the NJ side would be more likely to spill onto the Staten Island side (even if you branched half the buses to Amazon and half over the Goethals Bridge. You don't have enough buses remaining intra-island to handle potential problems).

On 1/26/2019 at 7:18 PM, lara8710 said:

The S40 is already an infrequent route along that corridor, and Richmond Terrace is too snaky of an artery to operate a Staten Island-EWR route, hence why I chose Forest Avenue instead. It's straighter and busier than Richmond Terrace, as evidenced by the relatively more frequent S48/98 routes as well as the presence of a few express bus routes along it.

Forest Avenue is definitely slower than Richmond Terrace, so the whole "snaky artery" argument doesn't hold water. But I agree that it's the better corridor.

[Armandito]

1 hour ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

But the other thing is that a route going over the Goethals Bridge would have inherent reliability issues (not saying that traffic along the Goethals is terrible or anything, but having the buses cross the bridge adds another potential chokepoint that would cause reliability issues from time to time). So it's better off as a separate layer of service (in other words, if there's an issue with the S98, the S48 can handle the riders). If it was the S40 running there, a problem on the NJ side would be more likely to spill onto the Staten Island side (even if you branched half the buses to Amazon and half over the Goethals Bridge. You don't have enough buses remaining intra-island to handle potential problems).

Which once again justifies my idea of a St. George-EWR route running along Forest Avenue instead of Richmond Terrace, as well as my choice to operate it as a separate route as opposed to operating service to the airport as an extension of the existing S90 and S98 routes.

[checkmatechamp13]

5 hours ago, lara8710 said:

Which once again justifies my idea of a St. George-EWR route running along Forest Avenue instead of Richmond Terrace, as well as my choice to operate it as a separate route as opposed to operating service to the airport as an extension of the existing S90 and S98 routes.

Justifies the first not the second. The S98 is frequent enough on its own that you can still have a decent amount of intra-island buses at the height of rush hour

[B35 via Church]

7 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I can't agree with that attitude because it basically supports stagnation and the status quo. It's basically saying "Well, people are managing to do fine with what's available now, so why bother expanding the service?"

I'll give you an idea, during my college years (I just graduated in June) I had a tutoring gig and I would sometimes see offers where the client was a few miles away (e.g. Elizabeth, Westfield, Newark, Bayonne, etc). If I could reasonably get to the client (sometimes I would get a lift, sometimes I would use TransportAzumah's Route 100, sometimes I would go through Manhattan, etc all depending on if I had multiple clients in the same area/along the same path or if I was coming from CCNY, etc) I would take it. If not, I would turn it down. And then sometimes I would see that nobody accepted the gig (you would see these "rate boost incentives" and things like that that let you know that they were desperate to get them matched up) and so that's the real cost to the economy. (A gig/temp job existed, you had somebody willing and qualified to work, but because they couldn't reach the client, the work wasn't done).

I mean I'm not going to relocate (or even get a car) over a few little temporary gigs. At the end it wasn't like it was the difference between me making the rent or not, so I "managed", but at the same time, the existence of the direct travel link would've marginally improved my quality of life (and the lives of the people willing to pay me). It's the same thing for any other jobs that may exist (on both sides of the NJ/NY border).

The same thing with me trying to get a local route on the Fahy/Lamberts/Goethals corridor a few years ago (I haven't given up, but I understand their attention is primarily focused on the express routes). My family and a lot of others moved here and were alright walking to Richmond Avenue or Victory Blvd for our transit service, but if we can get something that's a little closer, and if there's demand to sustain it, why not? It's the same thing going on with the SIM2 off-peak service (and what might end up happening with the SIM3C for that matter). People moved to those areas and the service was rush hour-only, and then it was expanded to run all-day. It's not right to cut the off-peak service just because "it's what they had before" and "they were able to figure out how to make it work". 

To relate the example back to you, that's basically absolving NICE of the responsibility of running reliable n23 service. Yeah, people should be aware of the fact that the n23 is unreliable before accepting a job offer that involves that route as part of their commute, but why is it considered OK that the route is unreliable? It's the same thing I mentioned before where MTA apologists say "Oh just leave earlier". Yeah, people can do that, or they can just drive, use a car service/Uber or just not make the trip altogether and that's why ridership is declining the way it is.

No it isn't, not remotely.... This isn't an issue of absolvement....

There's a stark difference between a public transportation provider (PTP from here on in) improving current services & a PTP starting up a bunch of new services to try to appease everybody that utilizes public transit.... That's not supporting stagnation.... Sure, you don't have to get a car for a few (plural) temp assignments or whatever, but at the same token, it isn't a PTP's job to make your (as in, singular) life easier.... That may come across as being insensitive, but that's not supporting status quo.....

A line has to be drawn somewhere....

Public transportation is a great resource, but it can't be all things to all people.... How is it the MTA's or NJT's fault or responsibility that, for example, a blue collar worker that lives in, say, Travis, decides to work in Port Newark? Or someone in Bay Ridge that landed that high salaried job out there in Exchange Place? Should new services be started up for those blokes? Nobody's saying that they shouldn't decide to work where they do, but full on knowing there's no direct (or feasible) service that currently exists to facilitate such a commute, how in the world can these same people put the lion's share of the blame on a PTP for that - full knowing that they don't have their own transportation..... You have people (plenty in fact) that have that mindset & AFAIC, it's irresponsible.... Nobody ever likes to take accountability for shit.

[Armandito]

2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Justifies the first not the second. The S98 is frequent enough on its own that you can still have a decent amount of intra-island buses at the height of rush hour

The S98 already serves a purpose--to provide commuters living in Mariners Harbor and along Forest Avenue fast rush-hour service to and from the ferry at St. George, as I discussed with Lil 57. Could you clarify what you meant by what I highlighted in bold?

Edited January 28, 2019 by lara8710

[B35 via Church]

8 hours ago, lara8710 said:

Which once again justifies my idea of a St. George-EWR route running along Forest Avenue instead of Richmond Terrace, as well as my choice to operate it as a separate route as opposed to operating service to the airport as an extension of the existing S90 and S98 routes.

You brought up this bit about running a bus along Richmond Terrace to me also..... Who's advocating that the S90 run over to NJ over the S98?

6 minutes ago, lara8710 said:

The S98 already serves a purpose--to provide commuters living in Mariners Harbor and along Forest Avenue fast rush-hour service to and from the ferry at St. George, as I discussed with Lil 57.

So by this logic, no current bus routes should be extended, because they have their solidified purpose... Got it.

Look, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a bus route having multiple purposes.... You basically support unnecessary layering/redundancy.... Talk about fiscal irresponsibility; ridiculous waste of money to create another route running along Forest av so that it can run out to EWR & have luggage racks in em....

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

18 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

The idea was that the express buses would occupy 1-40 (the X42 broke that "rule" later) then the local buses are:

4x= north shore

5x= cross island

6x= mid island

7x= south shore

8x, 9x= limited routes

 

To also add, 8x limiteds were one way limiteds, and 9x limiteds are two way limiteds. The S89 broke that rule. 

[Lil 57]

5 minutes ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

To also add, 8x limiteds were one way limiteds, and 9x limiteds are two way limiteds. The S89 broke that rule. 

Not really, the S96 and I believe the S90 were also PM only until they gained ridership to have then run in the AM.

Edited January 28, 2019 by Lil 57

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

2 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

Not really, the S96 and I believe the S90 were also PM only until they gained ridership to have then run in the AM.

So basically 8x was south shore and 9x was north shore? Or just fill in the missing numbers lol.