Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
'89 Liberty MCI

Can we have a Knapp Street depot?

Recommended Posts

I think the MTA should build a bus depot on Knapp Street by Avenue Y. I know there's stuff there now (Burger King, public storage, and a parking lot), would it be possible for them to buy at least some of this land and build this depot? This would be a great location since it wouldn't be right up on residences and would be in a somewhat isolated area. They might consider having two parts to this depot; a maintenance building in one spot and an extra parking lot in a separate spot if they can't have it all within one building or property boundary.

 

It would take on the B4, B31, B36, B44, and B49. At the very least it would have to take the B4, B44, and B49; it may have to take on these lines only because building space in that area is limited. Assuming this is after they make the B44 SBS, I would figure about this many buses for each route: 15 for the B4, 75 for the B44 (local and SBS), 25 for the B49, 10 for the B31, 15 for the B36. This is including spare buses, so these add up to give the total number of buses that must fit in the depot.

 

So if Knapp Street depot has the B4, B44, and B49, it will be a 125-bus depot. 135 with the B31 only, 140 with the B36 only, 150 with the B31 and B36. For the B4 and B44 it would be great for reducing dead mileage because it would only be a few blocks away from their terminals. 2.8 and 2.5 dead miles per bus (77 St/Narrows Av to Gleason, and Knapp St/Shore Pky to Flatbush) would be reduced to 0.3 and 0.5 dead mile per bus, respectively. For the B49, the dead mileage would nearly be cut to about 3 dead miles per bus since they currently operate empty from KCC or Flatbush/Foster to Flatbush depot (about 5 dead miles per bus). 3 dead miles per bus if they all pull out/in to/from KCC only.

 

I don't know if the B36 should go because it might be much better off extended to Kings Plaza and then moved to Flatbush depot. The B31s that pull out/in to/from Lois Avenue would be better off in Knapp Street than in Flatbush, but I know buses also pull out/in to/from Kings Highway station and this might be what most of them do now. These buses are better off in Flatbush than in Knapp Street.

 

Thoughts about the Knapp Street depot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the MTA should build a bus depot on Knapp Street by Avenue Y. I know there's stuff there now (Burger King, public storage, and a parking lot), would it be possible for them to buy at least some of this land and build this depot? This would be a great location since it wouldn't be right up on residences and would be in a somewhat isolated area. They might consider having two parts to this depot; a maintenance building in one spot and an extra parking lot in a separate spot if they can't have it all within one building or property boundary.

 

It would take on the B4, B31, B36, B44, and B49. At the very least it would have to take the B4, B44, and B49; it may have to take on these lines only because building space in that area is limited. Assuming this is after they make the B44 SBS, I would figure about this many buses for each route: 15 for the B4, 75 for the B44 (local and SBS), 25 for the B49, 10 for the B31, 15 for the B36. This is including spare buses, so these add up to give the total number of buses that must fit in the depot.

 

So if Knapp Street depot has the B4, B44, and B49, it will be a 125-bus depot. 135 with the B31 only, 140 with the B36 only, 150 with the B31 and B36. For the B4 and B44 it would be great for reducing dead mileage because it would only be a few blocks away from their terminals. 2.8 and 2.5 dead miles per bus (77 St/Narrows Av to Gleason, and Knapp St/Shore Pky to Flatbush) would be reduced to 0.3 and 0.5 dead mile per bus, respectively. For the B49, the dead mileage would nearly be cut to about 3 dead miles per bus since they currently operate empty from KCC or Flatbush/Foster to Flatbush depot (about 5 dead miles per bus). 3 dead miles per bus if they all pull out/in to/from KCC only.

 

I don't know if the B36 should go because it might be much better off extended to Kings Plaza and then moved to Flatbush depot. The B31s that pull out/in to/from Lois Avenue would be better off in Knapp Street than in Flatbush, but I know buses also pull out/in to/from Kings Highway station and this might be what most of them do now. These buses are better off in Flatbush than in Knapp Street.

 

Thoughts about the Knapp Street depot?

 

 

One little problem. Sheapshead Bay NIMBY's. :eek: An example is the 100th Street Depot in Upper Manhattan had to deal with NIMBY's while it was being rebulit. Some in that community tried to have it close for good.

 

So despite your points, a Knapp Street depot is not the best idea. If anything there an area around Stillwell Avenue (just north of the Coney Island Subway Terminal)between Neptune and Bay 50th that makes more sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On what basis would they complain? The construction noise may be a problem, yes, but once it's finished being built it wouldn't bother anybody since it would be far away from residences. If sanitation and sewage treatment are right there in that Knapp Street area, why would they complain about having a bus depot in the same spot?

 

Couldn't it be argued that in exchange for the bus depot, the residents of Knapp Street north of Avenue Y (which are greater in number than those by Avenue Y, since there are more apartment buildings up that way) would no longer have to deal with noise and pollution from buses deadheading between Flatbush depot and either Knapp St/Shore Pky (B44) and KCC (B49)? As for those near Y, where were the complaints when they built a public storage facility right there? Where are the complaints about the Sanitation trucks with their engine noise and pollution? Where are the complaints about the vehicles (including trucks and, again, deadheading B44s and B49s) that use Knapp Street all day, generating their noise and pollution?

 

What about asking them, do you want this dead mileage to continue being as high as it is so that we can raise the fare again in order to pay for it, or do you want to have the dead mileage reduced in order to improve the system's efficiency and mitigate a possible fare increase?

 

In addition, something I forgot to add in my original post: The Knapp Street depot would make it very convenient for the MTA to restore full-time B4 service to Knapp Street, something that Sheepshead Bay residents have been begging for since it was cut back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not saying your idea Liberty was a terrible idea. It actually a good one. Just playing 'devil's advocate' & addressing the many problems if a Knapp Street depot was going to be bulit. That why i suggested Stillwell Ave on the CI/Bensonhurst border (by the junk yards near the Bay 50th (D) station)as an alternative for a mini depot.

 

On what basis would they complain? The construction noise may be a problem, yes, but once it's finished being built it wouldn't bother anybody since it would be far away from residences. If sanitation and sewage treatment are right there in that Knapp Street area, why would they complain about having a bus depot in the same spot?

 

Couldn't it be argued that in exchange for the bus depot, the residents of Knapp Street north of Avenue Y (which are greater in number than those by Avenue Y, since there are more apartment buildings up that way) would no longer have to deal with noise and pollution from buses deadheading between Flatbush depot and either Knapp St/Shore Pky (B44) and KCC (B49)? As for those near Y, where were the complaints when they built a public storage facility right there? Where are the complaints about the Sanitation trucks with their engine noise and pollution? Where are the complaints about the vehicles (including trucks and, again, deadheading B44s and B49s) that use Knapp Street all day, generating their noise and pollution?

 

What about asking them, do you want this dead mileage to continue being as high as it is so that we can raise the fare again in order to pay for it, or do you want to have the dead mileage reduced in order to improve the system's efficiency and mitigate a possible fare increase?

 

In addition, something I forgot to add in my original post: The Knapp Street depot would make it very convenient for the MTA to restore full-time B4 service to Knapp Street, something that Sheepshead Bay residents have been begging for since it was cut back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On what basis would they complain? The construction noise may be a problem, yes, but once it's finished being built it wouldn't bother anybody since it would be far away from residences. If sanitation and sewage treatment are right there in that Knapp Street area, why would they complain about having a bus depot in the same spot?

 

Couldn't it be argued that in exchange for the bus depot, the residents of Knapp Street north of Avenue Y (which are greater in number than those by Avenue Y, since there are more apartment buildings up that way) would no longer have to deal with noise and pollution from buses deadheading between Flatbush depot and either Knapp St/Shore Pky (B44) and KCC (B49)? As for those near Y, where were the complaints when they built a public storage facility right there? Where are the complaints about the Sanitation trucks with their engine noise and pollution? Where are the complaints about the vehicles (including trucks and, again, deadheading B44s and B49s) that use Knapp Street all day, generating their noise and pollution?

 

What about asking them, do you want this dead mileage to continue being as high as it is so that we can raise the fare again in order to pay for it, or do you want to have the dead mileage reduced in order to improve the system's efficiency and mitigate a possible fare increase?

 

In addition, something I forgot to add in my original post: The Knapp Street depot would make it very convenient for the MTA to restore full-time B4 service to Knapp Street, something that Sheepshead Bay residents have been begging for since it was cut back.

 

Well I can tell you. I grew up Sheepshead Bay and remember the sewage plant very well. It was vehemently protested against and I can certainly understand why. I used to smell the stench on the other side of the bay. Just smelled like sewage and it wasn't a pleasant smell at all, so it wasn't like we just said "Yeah come on in". While I live in Staten Island, I still have very close ties to the neighbourhood and go back there each month, at least once every few weeks. I don't think a depot belongs anywhere in Sheepshead Bay. The immediate area that you're referring to is not really heavily served by transit and so folks need to get in and out with their cars, thus making parking a premium. Knowing the (MTA) they would built some depot that would probably be green, but having buses parked all over the street creates more congestion and less parking, not to mention the pollution. That's one of the reasons the Bronx got so many new clean air buses because residents in the areas where depots existed complained of the pollution issues. Those areas have some of the highest asthma rates in the city and that certainly isn't just because either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The savings in gas and salary will probably take 100 years too offset the price of the depot. So whats the point of building it there if there is no savings for the MTA ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MTA are not going to be building a brand new depot for a while. they have the money tied up in rebuilding the older one's. Charleston is gonna be the last brand new from scratch depot built for a couple years. after MCH is finished being rebuilt 126th is getting knocked down, than ENY is getting rehabed, than Jamaica i believe is getting knocked down and so on until all of those trolley barn retro fitted depots are all gone or rebuilt...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MTA are not going to be building a brand new depot for a while. they have the money tied up in rebuilding the older one's. Charleston is gonna be the last brand new from scratch depot built for a couple years. after MCH is finished being rebuilt 126th is getting knocked down, than ENY is getting rehabed, than Jamaica i believe is getting knocked down and so on until all of those trolley barn retro fitted depots are all gone or rebuilt...

 

I agree, and not only that, but there are already 6 depots in Brooklyn. There is no need for a new one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shortline: I read you, sorry if I came off as defensive. This is just one of those issues that burns me up, you know what it is.

 

And Garibaldi, I follow what you are saying. One of the things that sucks about transit facilities is that we all want them to be located in areas such that dead mileage is minimized, yet they can't be in residential areas because then the residents will [rightfully] blow a gasket. I thought that if all the 'crap' facilities (Sanitation, sewage treament) were in one seemingly isolated area, there wouldn't be a problem with putting another 'crap' facility in that area. A bus depot isn't as much of a 'crap' facility as a sanitation depot or sewage treatment plant, but you know. The smells and other things emanating from the 'crap' facilities travel to the residences.

 

I understand that there are not a lot of places in which they can build bus depots, but I am really baffled as to why they had to build the newest Brooklyn/Queens depot at Grand Avenue & 47 Street, which is only close to three bus routes that it maintains, one of which (B57) terminates not too far away, but two of which (Q54 and Q59) have to deadhead between the damn Williamsburg Bridge Plaza and the depot, racking up a dreadful amount of dead mileage. And of course the other routes it services are much further away and rack up even more dead mileage. I mean, they actually went as far as to put the B47 there when it had a 5-minute pull-in by Kings Plaza and Flatbush. They couldn't have built the depot anywhere else? Close to the Bridge Plaza where six bus routes terminate and one runs straight through? Some isolated Downtown Brooklyn area near the East River, by High Street or Sands Street? Or like Shortline said, by Bay 50th Street station would have been much better.

 

Well, it's nothing we wouldn't expect from them. I don't know if the authority's ineptitude was to blame for this one (Grand), but of course NIMBYism, land prices, and red tape are partially to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An example is the 100th Street Depot in Upper Manhattan had to deal with NIMBY's while it was being rebulit. Some in that community tried to have it close for good.

 

The 100th Street crowd's argument was that, because the original depot had been demolished, the replacement depot would be a new and unprecedented land use which should be subject to the full community review procedure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, and not only that, but there are already 6 depots in Brooklyn. There is no need for a new one.

 

Six depots in Brooklyn, four of which are in great locations for minimizing dead mileage as they are right next to major bus terminals. One of which is in an OK location (Gleason) for this purpose and the other (Grand), the newest one, is in a horrible location. So horrible that a route that had little dead mileage in its former depot (B47 in Flatbush) was placed in this new depot and has had its dead mileage tripled ever since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In addition, something I forgot to add in my original post: The Knapp Street depot would make it very convenient for the MTA to restore full-time B4 service to Knapp Street, something that Sheepshead Bay residents have been begging for since it was cut back.

 

Also to extend service up Knapp Street which would help the B36 and could run to Kings Plaza on weekends.

 

The thing is the MTA doesn't seem to be concerned about reducing deadhead mileage these days. Their concern is reducing revenue service. If they keep doing that, no new depots would be necessary. However, if this part of Brooklyn is growing in population and there is a need for additional transit services, I think it would be a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The deadhead mileage issue has always irked me. For example, the S89 could be carrying reverse-peak passengers, at least from Bayonne to Forest Avenue, rather than running empty and forcing reverse-peak passengers to wait another 15 minutes for a bus.

 

I don't mind the deadheading if the service is frequent enough, but I do mind it if the service is infrequent and/or overcrowded.

 

For example, on Thursday, I saw a bus deadheading eastbound along Walker Street. There was over a 20 minute gap in S46 service, which caused 2 buses to bypass the stop I was waiting at (though I was clever enough to get onto the second bus, by forcing my way on when he was dropping off passengers). If that bus was placed into service, it could've helped fill the gap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The deadhead mileage issue has always irked me. For example, the S89 could be carrying reverse-peak passengers, at least from Bayonne to Forest Avenue, rather than running empty and forcing reverse-peak passengers to wait another 15 minutes for a bus.

 

I don't mind the deadheading if the service is frequent enough, but I do mind it if the service is infrequent and/or overcrowded.

 

For example, on Thursday, I saw a bus deadheading eastbound along Walker Street. There was over a 20 minute gap in S46 service, which caused 2 buses to bypass the stop I was waiting at (though I was clever enough to get onto the second bus, by forcing my way on when he was dropping off passengers). If that bus was placed into service, it could've helped fill the gap.

 

 

I don't have that much of a problem with it. My issue is with scheduled buses that are late or don't show up on Staten Island. That seriously needs to be better managed by the (MTA). Seems like every weekend the X10 coming back to Staten Island is a mess. Now how is it the X1s are generally on time and the X10s are generally 20 minutes late?? They split at 23rd and 6th, so for 30-40 blocks in the city they run slightly different routes and somehow the X10 just can't keep up. I find that hard to believe and if it is really that difficult for them because of detours then the (MTA) should be looking to see how they can better reroute the X10 so that it can stay on time. I tend to ride the X10 to either 48th and Madison or 5th and Madison or sometimes the last stop, and I really don't see why they have such issues coming back to Staten Island. They don't face anymore traffic than the X1s do. Now they've addressed the frequencies by running X10s every 20 minutes on Sundays when it is needed, but what good is that doing if each of them is 20 minutes late from around 16:30 to 18:00 or so? I seriously wish I had some pull because I would be looking into the operations at Castleton as to why the X10 has such reliability problems. :mad:

 

As far as the S46 goes, the big problem with the local buses in general is they are poorly spaced and do have enough time to do the runs. However, this is not the case with the X10. During some portions of the route, too much time is given to get from one stop to the next especially on Staten Island going to Manhattan. Now I want to see when those new buses come in what the excuse will be then because they do have some really old MCIs so it could be that some of them are breaking down, although I sort of doubt that since even though these are old, most of them came over from (MTA) Bus (like Spring Creek) or New York City transit depots like MJQ , both of which do good jobs with their buses overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't have that much of a problem with it. My issue is with scheduled buses that are late or don't show up on Staten Island. That seriously needs to be better managed by the (MTA). Seems like every weekend the X10 coming back to Staten Island is a mess. Now how is it the X1s are generally on time and the X10s are generally 20 minutes late?? They split at 23rd and 6th, so for 30-40 blocks in the city they run slightly different routes and somehow the X10 just can't keep up. I find that hard to believe and if it is really that difficult for them because of detours then the (MTA) should be looking to see how they can better reroute the X10 so that it can stay on time. I tend to ride the X10 to either 48th and Madison or 5th and Madison or sometimes the last stop, and I really don't see why they have such issues coming back to Staten Island. They don't face anymore traffic than the X1s do. Now they've addressed the frequencies by running X10s every 20 minutes on Sundays when it is needed, but what good is that doing if each of them is 20 minutes late from around 16:30 to 18:00 or so? I seriously wish I had some pull because I would be looking into the operations at Castleton as to why the X10 has such reliability problems. :mad:

 

As far as the S46 goes, the big problem with the local buses in general is they are poorly spaced and do have enough time to do the runs. However, this is not the case with the X10. During some portions of the route, too much time is given to get from one stop to the next especially on Staten Island going to Manhattan. Now I want to see when those new buses come in what the excuse will be then because they do have some really old MCIs so it could be that some of them are breaking down, although I sort of doubt that since even though these are old, most of them came over from (MTA) Bus (like Spring Creek) or New York City transit depots like MJQ , both of which do good jobs with their buses overall.

 

That wasn't the problem, though. What happened was that the S96 was supposed to come to Walker Street/Morningstar Road almost 15 minutes earlier than it did (and this was 2 days in a row), but the S96 shouldn't have that problem: It doesn't get that many riders until Forest Avenue, and even then it shouldn't take double the time to get from Grandview Avenue/Forest Avenue to Walker Street/Morningstar Road.

 

Normally, it comes less than 5 minutes late, so the amount of time allocated to the run isn't that big of an issue. The buses weren't scheduled to be poorly spaced, but that is what ended up happening.

 

The problem that I have is that, for some reason, the S44 gets service roughly every 10 minutes when it has the S59/S89 as backup, whereas the S46/S96 run roughly every 6-7 minutes with nothing to back them up, and they are much busier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That wasn't the problem, though. What happened was that the S96 was supposed to come to Walker Street/Morningstar Road almost 15 minutes earlier than it did (and this was 2 days in a row), but the S96 shouldn't have that problem: It doesn't get that many riders until Forest Avenue, and even then it shouldn't take double the time to get from Grandview Avenue/Forest Avenue to Walker Street/Morningstar Road.

 

Normally, it comes less than 5 minutes late, so the amount of time allocated to the run isn't that big of an issue. The buses weren't scheduled to be poorly spaced, but that is what ended up happening.

 

The problem that I have is that, for some reason, the S44 gets service roughly every 10 minutes when it has the S59/S89 as backup, whereas the S46/S96 run roughly every 6-7 minutes with nothing to back them up, and they are much busier.

 

I meant to say that the local buses don't have enough time... In any event, yes it does go back to poor spacing. This would go on for a week or more at a time with the S98. The question is why do the scheduled runs on Staten Island have so many issues and one of the things that I can point to is that the schedules haven't been addressed and adjusted accordingly on many routes in years. Many of the X10 runs I have down pat because they haven't changed in at least 4-5 years. If service is not working in terms of buses showing when they should and it is a recurring problem then at some point that has to be addressed. Now Castleton has mainly new buses which accelerate rather quickly, as well as low floor buses, so all of this should mean that the local buses should be on time more than they are. The only line that is pretty reliable in terms of adhering to the schedule is the S53 and even that line has its problems from time to time.

 

 

I think the (MTA) is well aware of the problem too because I know plenty of people write in and complain. That could be one of the reasons why we are getting the bus tracking system first, but that still won't address the problem which is why buses are so unreliable. They need to do more to adjust schedules on Staten Island. Do you think that if the S46 were run out of Meredith Depot that the reliability issue would be improved??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I meant to say that the local buses don't have enough time... In any event, yes it does go back to poor spacing. This would go on for a week or more at a time with the S98. The question is why do the scheduled runs on Staten Island have so many issues and one of the things that I can point to is that the schedules haven't been addressed and adjusted accordingly on many routes in years. Many of the X10 runs I have down pat because they haven't changed in at least 4-5 years. If service is not working in terms of buses showing when they should and it is a recurring problem then at some point that has to be addressed. Now Castleton has mainly new buses which accelerate rather quickly, as well as low floor buses, so all of this should mean that the local buses should be on time more than they are. The only line that is pretty reliable in terms of adhering to the schedule is the S53 and even that line has its problems from time to time.

 

I know that's what you were referring to.

 

The problem (with all buses, not just SI buses) is varying traffic conditions and boarding conditions, which make it hard to develop a good schedule. For example, that particular bus is scheduled to arrive at 7:51AM, but in reality can arrive anywhere from 7:51AM to 8:05AM.

 

As far as the hybrids go, they accelerate quickly, but that doesn't help much on the S46/S96 in Mariners' Harbor because of the narrow streets they use to travel on (that is one problem that just can't be fixed, unless they used eminent domain to try to connect Walker Street with Brabant Street, which is highly unlikely to happen). If those streets were connected, the buses would be faster, and there would be the chance to make the S96 limited in that area.

 

With the S53, it has its problems, but the saving grace is the fact that it runs fairly frequently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know that's what you were referring to.

 

The problem (with all buses, not just SI buses) is varying traffic conditions and boarding conditions, which make it hard to develop a good schedule. For example, that particular bus is scheduled to arrive at 7:51AM, but in reality can arrive anywhere from 7:51AM to 8:05AM.

 

That's true, but that's why things like signal priority which the (MTA) has been tossing around for years for Staten Island needs to get done. Traffic can be difficult to predict, but that is exactly why you need to look at other variables that also cause delays and see how those variables which you have control over can be addressed. In that regard they can still do more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's true, but that's why things like signal priority which the (MTA) has been tossing around for years for Staten Island needs to get done. Traffic can be difficult to predict, but that is exactly why you need to look at other variables that also cause delays and see how those variables which you have control over can be addressed. In that regard they can still do more.

 

But that's the problem: There are no traffic lights on the S46/S96 in Mariners' Harbor, so there was basically nothing they could've done to alleviate the delay. Making the S96 limited in that area would work, except for the fact that Mariners' Harbor has a poorly planned street grid.

 

There is the possibility of putting bus lanes down, but the problem becomes that some of those streets have bad traffic, and the buses don't run frequently enough to make it worthwhile to create the lane.

 

So on a street like Hylan Blvd, it would make sense to create the lane, simply because, between the express buses and the S78/S79, that lane will be well-used. But on a street like Forest Avenue, where the only bus route is the S48/S98, it isn't justifyable to create the lane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the problem: There are no traffic lights on the S46/S96 in Mariners' Harbor, so there was basically nothing they could've done to alleviate the delay. Making the S96 limited in that area would work, except for the fact that Mariners' Harbor has a poorly planned street grid.

 

There is the possibility of putting bus lanes down, but the problem becomes that some of those streets have bad traffic, and the buses don't run frequently enough to make it worthwhile to create the lane.

 

So on a street like Hylan Blvd, it would make sense to create the lane, simply because, between the express buses and the S78/S79, that lane will be well-used. But on a street like Forest Avenue, where the only bus route is the S48/S98, it isn't justifyable to create the lane.

 

I never said that bus lanes needed to be everywhere. In fact I didn't even talk about bus lanes, but since we're on the subject of the S79, you could put them in select areas on other lines where there is a good frequency of buses so that the bottlenecking that occurs in some areas could be evened out in other areas like Victory Blvd. I would also have the number of stops between blocks changed and make the distance longer. Way too many bus stops in some areas and all it does is slow folks down and make people lazier. It could help speed up buses and cut down on obesity at the same time. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said that bus lanes needed to be everywhere. In fact I didn't even talk about bus lanes, but since we're on the subject of the S79, you could put them in select areas on other lines where there is a good frequency of buses so that the bottlenecking that occurs in some areas could be evened out in other areas like Victory Blvd. I would also have the number of stops between blocks changed and make the distance longer. Way too many bus stops in some areas and all it does is slow folks down and make people lazier. It could help speed up buses and cut down on obesity at the same time. :cool:

 

I know, but traffic signal priority doesn't do much good if the traffic isn't moving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The deadhead mileage issue has always irked me. For example, the S89 could be carrying reverse-peak passengers, at least from Bayonne to Forest Avenue, rather than running empty and forcing reverse-peak passengers to wait another 15 minutes for a bus.

 

I don't mind the deadheading if the service is frequent enough, but I do mind it if the service is infrequent and/or overcrowded.

 

For example, on Thursday, I saw a bus deadheading eastbound along Walker Street. There was over a 20 minute gap in S46 service, which caused 2 buses to bypass the stop I was waiting at (though I was clever enough to get onto the second bus, by forcing my way on when he was dropping off passengers). If that bus was placed into service, it could've helped fill the gap.

 

Several years ago I wrote to Howard Roberts about all the deadheads. Some are okay but I agree with you that many are not. Where I live around 9AM you have to wait 10 or 15 minutes for a bus while as many a 6 in a row bypass you deadheading. It is very upsetting, since half the people only need to go about a mile to the subway and the buses are going there anyway.

 

He justified it saying that deadheading saves them money and is more cost-efficient since service guidelines are met with the scheduled buses. Of course that assumes that everything is always running on time. Someone needs to remind them why they are in existence for, to serve the customer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know, but traffic signal priority doesn't do much good if the traffic isn't moving.

 

Oh please. Now traffic doesn't get that bad on Staten Island. Just select areas and signal priority in some areas would help. You act like we're in Manhattan or something. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.