The sad story of Staten Island bus service. How would you cheer the borough up?

checkmatechamp13 · August 30, 2011

You are right as a route is needed BUT you are wrong in implementation!!!!!! That service is better done by NJT via 26 extension or 37 from airport after renumbering of course. 26 =106; 37=110 done end of story move on. MTA routes just aren't cut out for that multipurpose routing they aren't NJT. The only reason why S54-57 would work is cause they are like crosstowns in SI and are in desparate need of a major destination where none in SI exists!!!!!!

NJT is the master of getting ppl out of cars basically where MTA is spoiled with transit dependant folk!!!!!!!! NJT has to work twice as hard to get transit ridership than MTA. MOST NJT users HAVE CARS but still use NJT

If NJT captures car-owning riders through the routing of their routes, but the route would go over the Goethals Bridge regardless of which company is running it, why doesn it necessarily have to be NJT that's running it?

Since the ridership base would be mostly Staten Islanders (rather than New Jerseyites), it makes sense to extend an SI route, not the other way around.

I doubt riders are going to want to go to a destination served by the 26 or 37 (except for Newark Airport on the 37). There's nothing of interest in the sections of Newark and Irvington that those routes serve.

B35 via Church · August 30, 2011

Via, I would've been done if CC actually made a counterpoint against my last post... I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt that he really accepted the fact about it not being a grid...

If he just said that "well you have a point there", just to say it, then I'm like whatever..... We done been through that rebellious stage as kids, so we know what that's all about.....

QJT, thanks, but it's really not about winning/victories.... it's more about free exchange of ideas... sensible ideas... makin sure confusions/misconceptions are cleared up.....

Now, I can't address all of the 1-17 (lol) CC & Via got goin on there... most of that, they're gonna have to continue discussing b/w the 2 of them, b/c I haven't been keeping up... but I have 2 things:

1) The S89 thing, is where I agree w/ Joel (Azumah); with a point he made a good while back... Sure it gets its riders, but the route is not doing near as well as expected.... As was said (forget who brought it up in here), the route has a specific purpose.... Yes, it touches NJ, but it's to get SI riders to/from the HBLR.... SI patrons that are seeking Manhattan (lower or midtown) service via the HBLR & path, or just seeking service the gold coast IMO is incomparable to the number of SI patrons that would benefit from any extension to NJ via the Outerbridge or the Goethals (that "side" of the state)....

That's what I think that side argument stemmed from....

In english, the way I see it, any other SI-NJ extension would yield less riders than the S89 gets... That whole 'we can't get to NJ' thing, has already been "tapped" by the 89.... furthermore, daily commuters outnumber casual riders by a longshot.... and for the life of me, I can't see anymore commuters takin any other extended route into NJ, over (or nearly as equal to) the S89....

The ridership from the S89, came from SI riders that either wanted (somewhat) faster service along richmond, or*any* service to NJ (if that meant another way of gettin to manhattan in the process, so be it)....

I shouldn't even have to make these disclaimers but.... No I'm not neglecting the casual rider, or somehow implying they don't matter... and No I'm not saying there's NO demand for interstate local bus service on that "side" of NJ

2) Using census data to predict latent ridership is a TERRIBLE idea..... that would be like using the yellow pages to predict the average cost of a dental visit... lmfao !!

There is no correlation b/w how many people drive between two points, and how many of those people would be willing to take public transportation....

qjtransitmaster · August 30, 2011

If NJT captures car-owning riders through the routing of their routes, but the route would go over the Goethals Bridge regardless of which company is running it, why doesn it necessarily have to be NJT that's running it?

Since the ridership base would be mostly Staten Islanders (rather than New Jerseyites), it makes sense to extend an SI route, not the other way around.

I doubt riders are going to want to go to a destination served by the 26 or 37 (except for Newark Airport on the 37). There's nothing of interest in the sections of Newark and Irvington that those routes serve.

AGAIN you are not looking at the whole network therfore you don't see the possibilities at all. The 37 extension is just for newark airport!!!!!!!!!!! and other intrastate lines my NJT plan will create or restore. Plus it's more than just 26 the 26 links with 52 and goes to kean university!!!!!! Plus 52 can extend to morris via rte 527 and replace bus service on rte 10. As in morris county local routes are completely ineffective. NJT can reroute all they want there is nothing they can do other than merge em all with regional lines. Again if I were to go into detail about what my ideas are about most of it will hurt ur brain. However I know ur smart but again in order to propose SI-NJ service you need to know about SI AND NJ as well as their travellers car and transit and potential transit travel patterns. You say what you say beacause you know nothing about NJ's travel patterns!!!!!!! however you know enough about SI hence why you came up with the S98 idea AFTER I MENTIONED NJ-SI SERVICE!!!!!!!!!!! You need to understand NJT as well as MTA to fully understand the SI-NJ travel market!!!!!!!! one problem you haven't been to NJ therefore you only see from SI perspective. The 37 extension is for brooklyn!!!!!!!! getting NJ ppl to brooklyn and vice versa with a stop in SI to get extra ridership!!!!! Plus I am not even sure about 37 as they are other routes I can use for this purpose!!!!!!!! 26 and 99 connect to other lines therefore carry sideeffects with them again too much to explain here otherwise I'd be here for hours!!!!!!

@B35 the reason why ridership on other SI-NJ lines won't be as high as S89 is due to the terminals that will connect to the S54-57 cheesequake service via S55 ridership would be limited to frequency of academy's routes and the academy routes by themselves are not exactly the most frequent at all many being bi-hourly except rush hour so the S55 will carry a certain group of riders based on the route that the trip would be timed to meet. This means S55 demand will overflow onto academy meaning if academy is not frequent but their other lines are S55 can only run so often. However S56 the NJT line that links is 139 meaning there is a chance that ridership could eclipse S89 over time should the route structure reveal a pattern that's unique. S54 and 57 due to newark and connectivity to NJT commuter rail their ridership can eventually rival S89 or surpass it depending on the travel options and their frequency of connecting lines. I do admit my plans goals are VERY COMPLEX!!!!!! cause they cater to so many groups some I may not even be aware of. Shortline has a point that some of my ideas are einstein like. The S55/56 plan actually caters more to NJ commuters heading to SI and in a sense in order for reverse commute to work NJT will need to make the 60 which would have the frequency to make GSP corridor travel via transit practical from SI S55's potential is limited to how academy runs however a part of my NJT plan rectifys this partially. The only routes that can even come close to S89 would be S57 or S54. S55/56 is more a desparate attempt to increase ridership and requires help from NJT to yield maximum results!!!!!

engineerboy6561 · August 30, 2011

AGAIN you are not looking at the whole network therfore you don't see the possibilities at all. The 37 extension is just for newark airport!!!!!!!!!!! and other intrastate lines my NJT plan will create or restore. Plus it's more than just 26 the 26 links with 52 and goes to kean university!!!!!! Plus 52 can extend to morris via rte 527 and replace bus service on rte 10. As in morris county local routes are completely ineffective. NJT can reroute all they want there is nothing they can do other than merge em all with regional lines. Again if I were to go into detail about what my ideas are about most of it will hurt ur brain. However I know ur smart but again in order to propose SI-NJ service you need to know about SI AND NJ as well as their travellers car and transit and potential transit travel patterns. You say what you say beacause you know nothing about NJ however you know enough about SI hence why you came up with the S98 idea AFTER I MENTIONED NJ-SI SERVICE!!!!!!!!!!!

@B35 the reason why ridership on other SI-NJ lines won't be as high as S89 is due to the terminals that will connect to the S54-57 cheesequake service via S55 ridership would be limited to frequency of academy's routes and the academy routes by themselves are not exactly the most frequent at all many being bi-hourly except rush hour so the S55 will carry a certain group of riders based on the route that the trip would be timed to meet. This means S55 demand will overflow onto academy meaning if academy is not frequent but their other lines are S55 can only run so often. However S56 the NJT line that links is 139 meaning there is a chance that ridership could eclipse S89 over time should the route structure reveal a pattern that's unique. S54 and 57 due to newark and connectivity to NJT commuter rail their ridership can eventually rival S89 or surpass it depending on the travel options and their frequency of connecting lines. I do admit my plans goals are VERY COMPLEX!!!!!! cause they cater to so many groups some I may not even be aware of. Shortline has a point that some of my ideas are einstein like

A few things:

1)NJT can do whatever NJT wants and I'd prefer we deal with your plan for NJT in the appropriate forum, mostly because we're trying here to figure out ways to help SI local buses get it together.

2)What exactly are you proposing here? S54/57 to Newark, S55 to Cheesequake, and S56 to Old Bridge? That's pretty ambitious and stands a pretty good chance of falling on its ass, namely because the S54 is so long as it is and sending it to Newark would make it even worse; the same goes for the S57. As for Cheesequake and Old Bridge, that's unnecessary and won't really help you. All you need is service to Perth/South Amboy to give Sputh Shore folks access to the NJT commuter rail. Also, I've said it once and I'll say it again: if we're going to start sending stuff into NJ from SI we should use new trips and/or new routes as much as possible so that delays associated with the bridges don't screw intra-SI riders all that much.

qjtransitmaster · August 30, 2011

A few things:

1)NJT can do whatever NJT wants and I'd prefer we deal with your plan for NJT in the appropriate forum, mostly because we're trying here to figure out ways to help SI local buses get it together.

2)What exactly are you proposing here? S54/57 to Newark, S55 to Cheesequake, and S56 to Old Bridge? That's pretty ambitious and stands a pretty good chance of falling on its ass, namely because the S54 is so long as it is and sending it to Newark would make it even worse; the same goes for the S57. As for Cheesequake and Old Bridge, that's unnecessary and won't really help you. All you need is service to Perth/South Amboy to give Sputh Shore folks access to the NJT commuter rail. Also, I've said it once and I'll say it again: if we're going to start sending stuff into NJ from SI we should use new trips and/or new routes as much as possible so that delays associated with the bridges don't screw intra-SI riders all that much.

academy has more speed behind it plus my NJT plan takes care of perth amboy via transfer at bricktown mall. Plus don't underestimate rte 9 corridor!!!! S56 will serve perth amboy as well!!!!!! Plus S55/56 doesn't have many intra SI users extending to NJ is again to boost ridership. S54 will lose the manor rd segment to another route so it can go to NJ faster via jewett. S57 needs the extra riders badly plus rte 440 is never a parking lot and therefore the chances of failure are low I fear overcrowding more than reliability issues. Again S54 goes to journal sq via the highway but uses back roads to get to journal sq I know those parts of NJ well that's why I proposed them that way. I know what I am doing here!!!!!! Those who want NJT commuter rail will need S56 or NJT 81 after extension/merger.

I know the outerbridge well enough it won't screw SI users at all cause S55/56 get off almost immediately after entering SI. Plus S55 can be extended to aberdeen matawan for rail connections the academy connections are very important as they can help reduce care use on GSP more directly. In addition to a few tweaks to NJT regional lines the S55 and S56 would become winners.

S54/57 are very likely to suceed. Again their routings in SI will be modified so they won't meander en rte to NJ.:cool:

B35 via Church · August 30, 2011

@B35 the reason why ridership on other SI-NJ lines won't be as high as S89 is due to the terminals that will connect to the S54-57 cheesequake service via S55 ridership would be limited to frequency of academy's routes and the academy routes by themselves are not exactly the most frequent at all many being bi-hourly except rush hour so the S55 will carry a certain group of riders based on the route that the trip would be timed to meet. This means S55 demand will overflow onto academy meaning if academy is not frequent but their other lines are S55 can only run so often. However S56 the NJT line that links is 139 meaning there is a chance that ridership could eclipse S89 over time should the route structure reveal a pattern that's unique. S54 and 57 due to newark and connectivity to NJT commuter rail their ridership can eventually rival S89 or surpass it depending on the travel options and their frequency of connecting lines. I do admit my plans goals are VERY COMPLEX!!!!!! cause they cater to so many groups some I may not even be aware of. Shortline has a point that some of my ideas are einstein like

lol @ tooting your own horn....

The focal point of your goals here, are to connect the dots basically... the only way any amount of (some other SI-NJ route's) ridership would overtake that of the S89's in any real significance, is if white flight happens in the south shore... and the hispanic community in perth amboy spills into SI & absolutely takes over.... that's how drastic I think that situation has to be.... that's how car centric that part of SI is.....

Think about it, people on the south shore (especially) seldom take the intra-SI routes... Why would they start takin them in droves, or in any significance if they went to NJ ? To transfer to NJT bus routes.... To xfer to the NJT rail... To get to the Airport... to get to the Elizabeth Ikea/Toys R us and/or Jersey Gardens area... I mean, most of that usage would be comin from w/e riders from the north shore, mid-island, or yes, even brooklyn.... I understand the whole giving riders options bit; that addresses anemic ridership on those SI routes you're speaking of, that does not address better service....

Furthermore, No central NJT route is a big enough draw to warrant extending any SI route into NJ... not the 62, not the 116 (which makes no sense anyway b/c that goes to PABT), or even the infamous 139 (which also goes to PABT).... then you have the whole zone fare thing, which is whole nother topic in & of itself....

None of this makes service better overall in Staten Island.... Quite honestly, I think such extensions are far more beneficial for NJ than they are for NY....

You are looking at matters from too broad a picture; from the NJ-to-SI perspective (from the outside looking in), and it's showing in your posts... but to your credit, you did say you'd leave the rest of the problems w/i SI, up to us guys..... That's why I'm not really attacking your stance too much....

Santa Fe via Willow · August 30, 2011

If the idea or concept is primarily just to connect SI with NJT rail services, then either the MTA or NJT running a bus route over each SI PA bridge makes sense. The (89) has Bayonne covered already:) That leaves the Goethals for the Northeast Corridor Line, & the Outerbridge for the North Coast Line.

Of course the Northeast Corridor Line's Station at Newark Airport being the Goethals' bus's NJ terminal would kill 2 birds with 1 stone:)

It's ~3:10am right now, & I'm tad tired:( Feel free in your replies to tell me if I effed up an NJT rail-line's name, location, stations, etc. I'm too lazy & tired right now to Google, yahoo!, or BING NJT train lines to double check:(

Given how TA's love to $la$h'n'burn service every/any chance & excuse they get, we should be happy we HAVE any mass transit AT ALL. If TPTB had it their way they'd probably home deliver everyone a crappy storebrand no frills bike with the bill for it attached:(, & a note saying:

"Dear Jane/John Q. Citizen,

Here's your mass transit.

Bill enclosed. Pay by date enclosed or face fine(s).

Failure to pay on time may result in a court appearance &/or jail or prison time.

Enjoy,

TPTB"

qjtransitmaster · August 30, 2011

lol @ tooting your own horn....

The focal point of your goals here, are to connect the dots basically... the only way any amount of (some other SI-NJ route's) ridership would overtake that of the S89's in any real significance, is if white flight happens in the south shore... and the hispanic community in perth amboy spills into SI & absolutely takes over.... that's how drastic I think that situation has to be.... that's how car centric that part of SI is.....

Think about it, people on the south shore (especially) seldom take the intra-SI routes... Why would they start takin them in droves, or in any significance if they went to NJ ? To transfer to NJT bus routes.... To xfer to the NJT rail... To get to the Airport... to get to the Elizabeth Ikea/Toys R us and/or Jersey Gardens area... I mean, most of that usage would be comin from w/e riders from the north shore, mid-island, or yes, even brooklyn.... I understand the whole giving riders options bit; that addresses anemic ridership on those SI routes you're speaking of, that does not address better service....

Furthermore, No central NJT route is a big enough draw to warrant extending any SI route into NJ... not the 62, not the 116 (which makes no sense anyway b/c that goes to PABT), or even the infamous 139 (which also goes to PABT).... then you have the whole zone fare thing, which is whole nother topic in & of itself....

None of this makes service better overall in Staten Island.... Quite honestly, I think such extensions are far more beneficial for NJ than they are for NY....

You are looking at matters from too broad a picture; from the NJ-to-SI perspective (from the outside looking in), and it's showing in your posts... but to your credit, you did say you'd leave the rest of the problems w/i SI, up to us guys..... That's why I'm not really attacking your stance too much....

now you understand my goals!!!! the si extensions are part of my NJT plan. Intra si service tell me how would you improve it??

B35 via Church · August 30, 2011

Intra si service tell me how would you improve it??

The first thing I would do is supply midday LTD service, not just this peak direction only bit; midday riders matters just as much as peak riders....

The second thing I would do is increase the s*** frequency on SI's routes; of course the MTA doesn't wanna hear that... but I don't wanna hear from them, that they don't have the buses (or the drivers) to do so.... I mean, the MTA does everything to discourage bus ridership across the board, but SI-ers have been shafted w/ necessary/adequate service for years; some would argue decades !!

The third thing I would do (on top of increasing freq.) is altering schedules....

Since the current bus network is structured behind getting SI-ers to manhattan via the ferry, Make connections to/from the ferry better !.... Give riders adequate time to catch buses & boats, instead of this 5-4-3-2-1 eeeerrrrkkkkk, BS... This isn't the NBA for cryin out loud, these are ppl's commutes we're talkin about... lol....

If the idea or concept is primarily just to connect SI with NJT rail services, then either the MTA or NJT running a bus route over each SI PA bridge makes sense. The (89) has Bayonne covered already:) That leaves the Goethals for the Northeast Corridor Line, & the Outerbridge for the North Coast Line.

Makes sense to who, is the question ?

- The NEC is slow (granted, there are some SI-ers that actually drive out to metropark, but that's their prerogative), and...

- The NJCL isn't as frequent (which is one reason why SI-ers drive out further to the Metropark station over the Perth Amboy station)....

^^ pick your poison

If you're gonna backtrack w/i SI just to get to manhattan, you may as well take the express bus (which is the current situation)... ppl. aren't takin x17j's, 30's, 31's, and 22's b/c there's no local bus service that connects SI riders to NJT rail.... it's just the nature of the beast....

SIR North Shore · August 30, 2011

The first thing I would do is supply midday LTD service, not just this peak direction only bit; midday riders matters just as much as peak riders....

The second thing I would do is increase the s*** frequency on SI's routes; of course the MTA doesn't wanna hear that... but I don't wanna hear from them, that they don't have the buses (or the drivers) to do so.... I mean, the MTA does everything to discourage bus ridership across the board, but SI-ers have been shafted w/ necessary/adequate service for years; some would argue decades !!

The third thing I would do (on top of increasing freq.) is altering schedules....

Since the current bus network is structured behind getting SI-ers to manhattan via the ferry, Make connections to/from the ferry better !.... Give riders adequate time to catch buses & boats, instead of this 5-4-3-2-1 eeeerrrrkkkkk, BS... This isn't the NBA for cryin out loud, these are ppl's commutes we're talkin about... lol....

Makes sense to who, is the question ?

- The NEC is slow (granted, there are some SI-ers that actually drive out to metropark, but that's their prerogative), and...

- The NJCL isn't as frequent (which is one reason why SI-ers drive out further to the Metropark station over the Perth Amboy station)....

^^ pick your poison

If you're gonna backtrack w/i SI just to get to manhattan, you may as well take the express bus (which is the current situation)... ppl. aren't takin x17j's, 30's, 31's, and 22's b/c there's no local bus service that connects SI riders to NJT rail.... it's just the nature of the beast....

Those are definitely all things we should see in the future but we'll see. One thing though, not everyone is heading to/from Manhattan. People have to travel everywhere and connecting a few Staten Island bus routes with NJT rail whether the NJT is slow, infrequent or neither, it's about connecting the network and making life easier for Staten Islanders and anyone else who may have to travel.

B35 via Church · August 30, 2011

Those are definitely all things we should see in the future but we'll see. One thing though, not everyone is heading to/from Manhattan. People have to travel everywhere and connecting a few Staten Island bus routes with NJT rail whether the NJT is slow, infrequent or neither, it's about connecting the network and making life easier for Staten Islanders and anyone else who may have to travel.

Yeah, everyone aint headin to/from Manhattan.... however, everyone aint goin to NJ either; see how that works... that's why it's called public transportation, it exists to serve the masses... or else everyone & they mammas would have 1 seat rides to any & everywhere....

I'm going to tell you the same thing I told checkmate.... yeah the expansion of a bus network's service area is a factor, but don't tell me you'd rather have buses going to NJ, over having better service w/i your own borough - and that's what this thread is about.... connecting the network doesn't necessarily mean better service.....

No one in here is eliminating/dismissing the idea of service extensions in general... matter fact, it's the easiest thing to bring up whenever these types of discussions are had.... but to tell me it's about connecting the network.... To that I have to say, Not.... entirely.....

If it was about connecting the network, we would have a hell of a lot more interborough routes than we do now (knowing the MTA, much less service on top of that, but that's some'n else).....

Via Garibaldi 8 · August 30, 2011

1) OK. So I'm wrong.

And stubborn too because you refuse to do the research...

3) Whatever...

No it's not whatever. Tell me what other research you've done besides looking at a map??

4) I don't see what you're saying. If the alternative (driving or going through Jersey City) isn't that convenient, then that proves that there could be potential for this route.

I don't see how. Many people would rather be stuck in their car than on a bus, especially if the commute on the bus entails more transfers down the line, whereas with the car they don't have to get out and wait for more connections.

5) And where was the ridership when they originally started up the route?

I never said that ridership comes overnight. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that you can just look at census data and a few connection points and automatically assume that the ridership is there. I'm saying if it is really there, then let's have some TRANSPORTATION studies to show evidence that the potential is there. As for now the census studies do nothing for me because you're not going to convince me that these people that are driving to NJ from SI are suddenly going to come running and flocking to take public transportation, especially when you and I know how many Staten Islanders shun public transportation to begin with. That's the main reason why I don't believe it. We're in a car crazed borough. If we were in a place where people were pro-transit, then I would be more likely to believe it, but even then I would want to see some transportation studies done first.

6) You're connecting a fairly dense residential area with a large transfer point in NJ (which also has a high population density). I don't know what more evidence you need. If that and the Census data can't convince you, nothing will.

See my response above. Aside from that, Richmond Avenue is a perfect example of a corridor that has very frequent service with both local and express bus service and I still see a sh*t load of cars all up and down Richmond Avenue.

7) Some would be made up by the fares. And for the rest, I have two words for you: Richmond Avenue.

What about Richmond Avenue? And what about the fares? What makes you think that ridership is going to be so high when you seem to be implying that the ridership may not be there to begin with? That would imply that if anything the routes would take a loss to start with at the very least, if not worse.

8) So let me get this straight: You were trying to use the "They're not serving anybody if they're stuck in traffic" argument against me before, and now you're saying that they shouldn't find an alternate route around the traffic. If traffic comes to a complete standstill, then they will try to find an alternate route, leaving the people in the bypassed section with the S48. They're no worse off (waiting time-wise) than they are now, but at least the bus will show up less crowded and they'll have less crowds further down the line.

No, what I'm saying that I disagree with your proposal to solve the buses getting around the traffic problem. I think they are better ways than your proposals, one being dedicated bus lanes, and signal priority. IMO in order for these extensions to be really successful, of course the ridership has to be there, but also some serious infrastructure improvements would be needed and I really don't see the (MTA) investing all of this money into something like this, especially if they don't know if the ridership is even there. Perhaps this could be done with federal funds down the line, but I don't see it happening in the near future, especially not with any studies being done.

10) And do you know why they failed? It's because the MTA ran a bus line that was more reliable, faster, and cheaper and forced it out of business. They were doing alright before that.

I'm not going to say the MTA was right or wrong in taking over the market, but they were a large factor (if not the reason) why he pulled out.

By the way, it's the same company planning to run the service.

Yeah, I know all of that, but the (MTA) really took over the routes because of political pressure more than anything. The borough president practically rammed it down their throats, so now you have the S89.

11) With tolls and the price of gas going up, I think you'll find people a bit more willing to get out of their cars.

You would think that, but that doesn't seem to be the case. If anything what folks are doing is looking for more fuel efficient cars and driving less or even carpooling, but they're still not getting out of their cars in many cases.

13) I don't see what you're saying. If the S98 ends by the Goethals Bridge, that at least makes it a candidate for extension.

Not really. The S98 already has a purpose and the ridership it needs to do just fine on its own.

14) It would add service to Forest Avenue (Off-peak. During rush hour, maybe a little service would be added). I don't see how that can hurt.

Yeah, it's a little something called delays, something that both the S48 and S98 already suffers terribly from.

15) So you stand on the corner of Henderson Avenue/Broadway and tell me that's "affluent", with a housing project on one side and Section 8 townhouses on the other. You know full well which part of the S44 I was talking about: The part east of Bard Avenue. The rest isn't "flanked by Snug Harbor and big houses", and that's not West Brighton.

Who said anything about Henderson & Broadway?? Where Randall Manor starts and where West Brighton ends is rather murky and at least most of Bard Avenue is in West Brighton and is AFFLUENT.

Now, I can't address all of the 1-17 (lol) CC & Via got goin on there... most of that, they're gonna have to continue discussing b/w the 2 of them, b/c I haven't been keeping up... but I have 2 things:

That's what I think that side argument stemmed from....

In english, the way I see it, any other SI-NJ extension would yield less riders than the S89 gets... That whole 'we can't get to NJ' thing, has already been "tapped" by the 89.... furthermore, daily commuters outnumber casual riders by a longshot.... and for the life of me, I can't see anymore commuters takin any other extended route into NJ, over (or nearly as equal to) the S89....

The ridership from the S89, came from SI riders that either wanted (somewhat) faster service along richmond, or*any* service to NJ (if that meant another way of gettin to manhattan in the process, so be it)....

I shouldn't even have to make these disclaimers but.... No I'm not neglecting the casual rider, or somehow implying they don't matter... and No I'm not saying there's NO demand for interstate local bus service on that "side" of NJ

2) Using census data to predict latent ridership is a TERRIBLE idea..... that would be like using the yellow pages to predict the average cost of a dental visit... lmfao !!

There is no correlation b/w how many people drive between two points, and how many of those people would be willing to take public transportation....

That's what I've been saying all along. He is claiming on one hand that the S89 should be cut back because of a lack of ridership, but then saying that more SI-NJ extensions are needed because so many people go to NJ from SI, but that's the thing though. We don't know how many of those people are going to leave their cars home to ride mass transit and that's what I'm saying. All the census data in the world cannot predict what the demand is for SI-NJ connections via public transit.

So let's say that we have some SI-NJ connections via public transit. What would these folks be giving up? For one the comfort of their cars. Even if they're sitting in traffic, some folks would rather be in their car than on a bus.

checkmatechamp13 · August 30, 2011

1) The S89 thing, is where I agree w/ Joel (Azumah); with a point he made a good while back... Sure it gets its riders, but the route is not doing near as well as expected.... As was said (forget who brought it up in here), the route has a specific purpose.... Yes, it touches NJ, but it's to get SI riders to/from the HBLR.... SI patrons that are seeking Manhattan (lower or midtown) service via the HBLR & path, or just seeking service the gold coast IMO is incomparable to the number of SI patrons that would benefit from any extension to NJ via the Outerbridge or the Goethals (that "side" of the state)....

That's what I think that side argument stemmed from....

In english, the way I see it, any other SI-NJ extension would yield less riders than the S89 gets... That whole 'we can't get to NJ' thing, has already been "tapped" by the 89.... furthermore, daily commuters outnumber casual riders by a longshot.... and for the life of me, I can't see anymore commuters takin any other extended route into NJ, over (or nearly as equal to) the S89....

The ridership from the S89, came from SI riders that either wanted (somewhat) faster service along richmond, or*any* service to NJ (if that meant another way of gettin to manhattan in the process, so be it)....

I shouldn't even have to make these disclaimers but.... No I'm not neglecting the casual rider, or somehow implying they don't matter... and No I'm not saying there's NO demand for interstate local bus service on that "side" of NJ

2) Using census data to predict latent ridership is a TERRIBLE idea..... that would be like using the yellow pages to predict the average cost of a dental visit... lmfao !!

There is no correlation b/w how many people drive between two points, and how many of those people would be willing to take public transportation....

1) Well, I'd just like to throw it out there that hardly anybody uses it to get to Manhattan. No matter which way you slice it, it's cheaper to take the express bus than the S89->HBLR->PATH. I think if you buy a monthly pass for the 126 and use it on the HBLR, you break even, but then you might as well take the X17J or another express route that goes through NJ.

But yeah, I don't think ridership (going over the bridge) would be as high as the S89.

2) Alright. So if hypothetically, I had a bus company and wanted to know if there was demand for a route in a certain corridor, how would I go about doing that? (I guess, theoretically, I should be asking Joel this question)

AGAIN you are not looking at the whole network therfore you don't see the possibilities at all. The 37 extension is just for newark airport!!!!!!!!!!! and other intrastate lines my NJT plan will create or restore. Plus it's more than just 26 the 26 links with 52 and goes to kean university!!!!!! Plus 52 can extend to morris via rte 527 and replace bus service on rte 10. As in morris county local routes are completely ineffective. NJT can reroute all they want there is nothing they can do other than merge em all with regional lines. Again if I were to go into detail about what my ideas are about most of it will hurt ur brain. However I know ur smart but again in order to propose SI-NJ service you need to know about SI AND NJ as well as their travellers car and transit and potential transit travel patterns. You say what you say beacause you know nothing about NJ's travel patterns!!!!!!! however you know enough about SI hence why you came up with the S98 idea AFTER I MENTIONED NJ-SI SERVICE!!!!!!!!!!! You need to understand NJT as well as MTA to fully understand the SI-NJ travel market!!!!!!!! one problem you haven't been to NJ therefore you only see from SI perspective. The 37 extension is for brooklyn!!!!!!!! getting NJ ppl to brooklyn and vice versa with a stop in SI to get extra ridership!!!!! Plus I am not even sure about 37 as they are other routes I can use for this purpose!!!!!!!! 26 and 99 connect to other lines therefore carry sideeffects with them again too much to explain here otherwise I'd be here for hours!!!!!!

@B35 the reason why ridership on other SI-NJ lines won't be as high as S89 is due to the terminals that will connect to the S54-57 cheesequake service via S55 ridership would be limited to frequency of academy's routes and the academy routes by themselves are not exactly the most frequent at all many being bi-hourly except rush hour so the S55 will carry a certain group of riders based on the route that the trip would be timed to meet. This means S55 demand will overflow onto academy meaning if academy is not frequent but their other lines are S55 can only run so often. However S56 the NJT line that links is 139 meaning there is a chance that ridership could eclipse S89 over time should the route structure reveal a pattern that's unique. S54 and 57 due to newark and connectivity to NJT commuter rail their ridership can eventually rival S89 or surpass it depending on the travel options and their frequency of connecting lines. I do admit my plans goals are VERY COMPLEX!!!!!! cause they cater to so many groups some I may not even be aware of. Shortline has a point that some of my ideas are einstein like. The S55/56 plan actually caters more to NJ commuters heading to SI and in a sense in order for reverse commute to work NJT will need to make the 60 which would have the frequency to make GSP corridor travel via transit practical from SI S55's potential is limited to how academy runs however a part of my NJT plan rectifys this partially. The only routes that can even come close to S89 would be S57 or S54. S55/56 is more a desparate attempt to increase ridership and requires help from NJT to yield maximum results!!!!!

No, I've had the S98 idea for a while. I think I mentioned it in the "Staten Island Division" thread a couple of times, and I do have a fantasy map that includes it. This is just the first time we're really getting into any sort of discussion regarding it.

And like I said, I'm not forecasting a large chunk of riders using the route over the Goethals. It's never going to have the ridership of, say, the S53, and very rarely will those buses be crushloaded going over the bridge (believe it or not, there are times when the S89 comes close to it, though it usually has to do with buses not waiting for trains. I have seen plenty of SRO S89s going over the Bayonne Bridge (technically, about to go over the bridge, but you get the point).

Like I said, I would assume that a lot of the riders would transfer to the NJT trains, or maybe the buses if they're going short distances. I don't think you're going to see SI riders going all the way into Morris County by bus.

Now, as far as the S57 going to NJ (I wouldn't have the S54 go there), I don't think the ridership will surpass that of the S89 (at least on a per-bus basis). The S89 goes down a major corridor and serves a large park-and-ride to boot.

A few things:

1)NJT can do whatever NJT wants and I'd prefer we deal with your plan for NJT in the appropriate forum, mostly because we're trying here to figure out ways to help SI local buses get it together.

2)What exactly are you proposing here? S54/57 to Newark, S55 to Cheesequake, and S56 to Old Bridge? That's pretty ambitious and stands a pretty good chance of falling on its ass, namely because the S54 is so long as it is and sending it to Newark would make it even worse; the same goes for the S57. As for Cheesequake and Old Bridge, that's unnecessary and won't really help you. All you need is service to Perth/South Amboy to give South Shore folks access to the NJT commuter rail. Also, I've said it once and I'll say it again: if we're going to start sending stuff into NJ from SI we should use new trips and/or new routes as much as possible so that delays associated with the bridges don't screw intra-SI riders all that much.

Well, he does have it right in the sense that the Bayonne Bridge very rarely suffers from serious traffic jams (maybe in some type of storm, but then every route is going to have problems), so an extension to Bayonne wouldn't be too bad. Now, sending it to Newark might be a problem.

But yeah, baby steps. Any extension to NJ should just to to the nearest rail station (Elizabeth or Perth Amboy) and they'll see how it fares. Once in NJ, that's most of the battle right there.

lol @ tooting your own horn....

None of this makes service better overall in Staten Island.... Quite honestly, I think such extensions are far more beneficial for NJ than they are for NY....

So you're saying the ridership base would be NJ riders rather than SI riders? Or are you just referring to the route via the Outerbridge?

If the idea or concept is primarily just to connect SI with NJT rail services, then either the MTA or NJT running a bus route over each SI PA bridge makes sense. The (89) has Bayonne covered already:) That leaves the Goethals for the Northeast Corridor Line, & the Outerbridge for the North Coast Line.

Of course the Northeast Corridor Line's Station at Newark Airport being the Goethals' bus's NJ terminal would kill 2 birds with 1 stone:)

It's ~3:10am right now, & I'm tad tired:( Feel free in your replies to tell me if I effed up an NJT rail-line's name, location, stations, etc. I'm too lazy & tired right now to Google, yahoo!, or BING NJT train lines to double check:(

Given how TA's love to $la$h'n'burn service every/any chance & excuse they get, we should be happy we HAVE any mass transit AT ALL. If TPTB had it their way they'd probably home deliver everyone a crappy storebrand no frills bike with the bill for it attached:(, & a note saying:

"Dear Jane/John Q. Citizen,

Here's your mass transit.

Bill enclosed. Pay by date enclosed or face fine(s).

Failure to pay on time may result in a court appearance &/or jail or prison time.

Enjoy,

TPTB"

The only thing you got wrong was that it's the North Jersey Coast Line, but hey, that's pretty good considering how tired you are. I've made plenty of mistakes at that hour myself.

And, even if the MTA withdrew all of the mass transit from SI, we'd probably still have some form of transportation. You'd probably see dollar vans popping up along major corridors (Clove Road, Hylan Blvd, Richmond Avenue, Forest Avenue, etc), but the "coverage" routes wouldn't last.

1) The first thing I would do is supply midday LTD service, not just this peak direction only bit; midday riders matters just as much as peak riders....

2) The second thing I would do is increase the s*** frequency on SI's routes; of course the MTA doesn't wanna hear that... but I don't wanna hear from them, that they don't have the buses (or the drivers) to do so.... I mean, the MTA does everything to discourage bus ridership across the board, but SI-ers have been shafted w/ necessary/adequate service for years; some would argue decades !!

3) The third thing I would do (on top of increasing freq.) is altering schedules....

Since the current bus network is structured behind getting SI-ers to manhattan via the ferry, Make connections to/from the ferry better !.... Give riders adequate time to catch buses & boats, instead of this 5-4-3-2-1 eeeerrrrkkkkk, BS... This isn't the NBA for cryin out loud, these are ppl's commutes we're talkin about... lol....

4) Makes sense to who, is the question ?

- The NEC is slow (granted, there are some SI-ers that actually drive out to metropark, but that's their prerogative), and...

- The NJCL isn't as frequent (which is one reason why SI-ers drive out further to the Metropark station over the Perth Amboy station)....

^^ pick your poison

1) Agreed. Midday service on the S98 could be 100% cost-neutral if they really want to bring up that argument.

2) Well, the problem is that a lot of routes meet the ferry, and the ridership really isn't there for much more than 30 minute service. Plus, most routes don't run every 30 minutes anyway: A lot of them run every 15-20 minutes off-peak, which is reasonable.

3) You gotta love that adreneline rush, though.

4) Damn. I didn't realize they drive out to NJ for service (I assume you're referring to Manhattan-bound riders). Then again, I didn't realize riders went to Brooklyn for express service either.

1) And stubborn too because you refuse to do the research...

2) No it's not whatever. Tell me what other research you've done besides looking at a map??

3) I don't see how. Many people would rather be stuck in their car than on a bus, especially if the commute on the bus entails more transfers down the line, whereas with the car they don't have to get out and wait for more connections.

4) I never said that ridership comes overnight. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that you can just look at census data and a few connection points and automatically assume that the ridership is there. I'm saying if it is really there, then let's have some TRANSPORTATION studies to show evidence that the potential is there. As for now the census studies do nothing for me because you're not going to convince me that these people that are driving to NJ from SI are suddenly going to come running and flocking to take public transportation, especially when you and I know how many Staten Islanders shun public transportation to begin with. That's the main reason why I don't believe it. We're in a car crazed borough. If we were in a place where people were pro-transit, then I would be more likely to believe it, but even then I would want to see some transportation studies done first.

5) See my response above. Aside from that, Richmond Avenue is a perfect example of a corridor that has very frequent service with both local and express bus service and I still see a sh*t load of cars all up and down Richmond Avenue.

6) What about Richmond Avenue? And what about the fares? What makes you think that ridership is going to be so high when you seem to be implying that the ridership may not be there to begin with? That would imply that if anything the routes would take a loss to start with at the very least, if not worse.

7) No, what I'm saying that I disagree with your proposal to solve the buses getting around the traffic problem. I think they are better ways than your proposals, one being dedicated bus lanes, and signal priority. IMO in order for these extensions to be really successful, of course the ridership has to be there, but also some serious infrastructure improvements would be needed and I really don't see the investing all of this money into something like this, especially if they don't know if the ridership is even there. Perhaps this could be done with federal funds down the line, but I don't see it happening in the near future, especially not with any studies being done.

8) I'm not going to say the MTA was right or wrong in taking over the market, but they were a large factor (if not the reason) why he pulled out.

By the way, it's the same company planning to run the service.

Yeah, I know all of that, but the (MTA) really took over the routes because of political pressure more than anything. The borough president practically rammed it down their throats, so now you have the S89.

9) You would think that, but that doesn't seem to be the case. If anything what folks are doing is looking for more fuel efficient cars and driving less or even carpooling, but they're still not getting out of their cars in many cases.

10) Not really. The S98 already has a purpose and the ridership it needs to do just fine on its own.

11) Yeah, it's a little something called delays, something that both the S48 and S98 already suffers terribly from.

12) Who said anything about Henderson & Broadway?? Where Randall Manor starts and where West Brighton ends is rather murky and at least most of Bard Avenue is in West Brighton and is AFFLUENT.

13) That's what I've been saying all along. He is claiming on one hand that the S89 should be cut back because of a lack of ridership, but then saying that more SI-NJ extensions are needed because so many people go to NJ from SI, but that's the thing though. We don't know how many of those people are going to leave their cars home to ride mass transit and that's what I'm saying. All the census data in the world cannot predict what the demand is for SI-NJ connections via public transit.

So let's say that we have some SI-NJ connections via public transit. What would these folks be giving up? For one the comfort of their cars. Even if they're sitting in traffic, some folks would rather be in their car than on a bus.

1 & 2) Read B35's comment.

3) Yeah, but at least if you're on a bus, you don't have to focus on the road or anything like that.

4) Like I said, a private company is already considering a service over the Goethals to Newark Airport. Until another route comes along and forces him out, he should do alright.

5) You have to consider that tolls also can affect transit ridership. People aren't going to take a bus that's $2.25 when they could drive there for $0.50 worth of gas (or even $2.25 worth of gas), but when they're actually reaching into their pocket for money for the toll, they may consider transit.

6) Service can be reduced there to help pay for the service.

7) Bus lanes might not work because the buses aren't frequent enough to justify taking the space away from the cars. TSP should be implemented, but if that fails, they should allow buses to be rerouted from the traffic.

I'll get to the rest later.

checkmatechamp13 · August 30, 2011

I don't know why the formatting messed my last post up, but anyway...

8) Yeah, I know all of that, but the really took over the routes because of political pressure more than anything. The borough president practically rammed it down their throats, so now you have the S89.

9) You would think that, but that doesn't seem to be the case. If anything what folks are doing is looking for more fuel efficient cars and driving less or even carpooling, but they're still not getting out of their cars in many cases.

10) Not really. The S98 already has a purpose and the ridership it needs to do just fine on its own.

11) Yeah, it's a little something called delays, something that both the S48 and S98 already suffers terribly from.

12) Who said anything about Henderson & Broadway?? Where Randall Manor starts and where West Brighton ends is rather murky and at least most of Bard Avenue is in West Brighton and is AFFLUENT.

13) That's what I've been saying all along. He is claiming on one hand that the S89 should be cut back because of a lack of ridership, but then saying that more SI-NJ extensions are needed because so many people go to NJ from SI, but that's the thing though. We don't know how many of those people are going to leave their cars home to ride mass transit and that's what I'm saying. All the census data in the world cannot predict what the demand is for SI-NJ connections via public transit.

14) So let's say that we have some SI-NJ connections via public transit. What would these folks be giving up? For one the comfort of their cars. Even if they're sitting in traffic, some folks would rather be in their car than on a bus.

8) Well, I'm not complaining.

By the way, between the SIE and Forest Avenue is where the riders get the full benefit of it being limited-stop. You have a decent number of riders at the local stops, and the S89 doesn't waste time picking them up/dropping them off. Since my trips are usually between Chistopher Lane and Walker Street, I get the advantage of the extra service and the fact that it's a limited, whereas riders going south of the SIE really don't see that much of a time savings on the S89 vs. the locals.

9) True, but even for the S89, carpoolers get a discount going over the Bayonne Bridge (besides the obvious discount of splitting the toll), and yet there are people willing to take a bus to get to work. The advantage of a bus is that you don't have to worry about missing your carpool (or delaying your coworkers): If you miss the bus, you can wait 15-20 minutes for the next one.

10) It does, but what's wrong with trying to attract even more ridership?

11) Yeah, but at least the extra buses will help ease the effect of the delays.

12) I wouldn't really consider anything west of Bard Avenue to really be "affluent". The houses are smaller and the people seem more willing to take transit (at least to the ferry) than the people in Randall Manor.

Even if they are affluent, they're more willing to take local buses than the people in Randall Manor, which was QJT's original question.

13) Well, you have to consider my high standards for crowding.

Let me put it to you this way: I catch the 07:40 bus from Christopher Lane, and I'm almost always standing (though near the end of the year, I was getting some of the last seats available). I don't consider that too crowded, but you probably would consider it decent.

Going over the Bayonne Bridge, like I said, there are usually a decent number of standees during rush hour.

14) But at least on the bus, they can sit back and relax instead of actually having to focus on the road.

qjtransitmaster · August 31, 2011

And stubborn too because you refuse to do the research...

No it's not whatever. Tell me what other research you've done besides looking at a map??

I don't see how. Many people would rather be stuck in their car than on a bus, especially if the commute on the bus entails more transfers down the line, whereas with the car they don't have to get out and wait for more connections.

I never said that ridership comes overnight. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that you can just look at census data and a few connection points and automatically assume that the ridership is there. I'm saying if it is really there, then let's have some TRANSPORTATION studies to show evidence that the potential is there. As for now the census studies do nothing for me because you're not going to convince me that these people that are driving to NJ from SI are suddenly going to come running and flocking to take public transportation, especially when you and I know how many Staten Islanders shun public transportation to begin with. That's the main reason why I don't believe it. We're in a car crazed borough. If we were in a place where people were pro-transit, then I would be more likely to believe it, but even then I would want to see some transportation studies done first.

See my response above. Aside from that, Richmond Avenue is a perfect example of a corridor that has very frequent service with both local and express bus service and I still see a sh*t load of cars all up and down Richmond Avenue.

What about Richmond Avenue? And what about the fares? What makes you think that ridership is going to be so high when you seem to be implying that the ridership may not be there to begin with? That would imply that if anything the routes would take a loss to start with at the very least, if not worse.

No, what I'm saying that I disagree with your proposal to solve the buses getting around the traffic problem. I think they are better ways than your proposals, one being dedicated bus lanes, and signal priority. IMO in order for these extensions to be really successful, of course the ridership has to be there, but also some serious infrastructure improvements would be needed and I really don't see the investing all of this money into something like this, especially if they don't know if the ridership is even there. Perhaps this could be done with federal funds down the line, but I don't see it happening in the near future, especially not with any studies being done.

I'm not going to say the MTA was right or wrong in taking over the market, but they were a large factor (if not the reason) why he pulled out.

By the way, it's the same company planning to run the service.

Yeah, I know all of that, but the (MTA) really took over the routes because of political pressure more than anything. The borough president practically rammed it down their throats, so now you have the S89.

You would think that, but that doesn't seem to be the case. If anything what folks are doing is looking for more fuel efficient cars and driving less or even carpooling, but they're still not getting out of their cars in many cases.

Not really. The S98 already has a purpose and the ridership it needs to do just fine on its own.

Yeah, it's a little something called delays, something that both the S48 and S98 already suffers terribly from.

Who said anything about Henderson & Broadway?? Where Randall Manor starts and where West Brighton ends is rather murky and at least most of Bard Avenue is in West Brighton and is AFFLUENT.

That's what I've been saying all along. He is claiming on one hand that the S89 should be cut back because of a lack of ridership, but then saying that more SI-NJ extensions are needed because so many people go to NJ from SI, but that's the thing though. We don't know how many of those people are going to leave their cars home to ride mass transit and that's what I'm saying. All the census data in the world cannot predict what the demand is for SI-NJ connections via public transit.

So let's say that we have some SI-NJ connections via public transit. What would these folks be giving up? For one the comfort of their cars. Even if they're sitting in traffic, some folks would rather be in their car than on a bus.

Yeah, everyone aint headin to/from Manhattan.... however, everyone aint goin to NJ either; see how that works... that's why it's called public transportation, it exists to serve the masses... or else everyone & they mammas would have 1 seat rides to any & everywhere....

I'm going to tell you the same thing I told checkmate.... yeah the expansion of a bus network's service area is a factor, but don't tell me you'd rather have buses going to NJ, over having better service w/i your own borough - and that's what this thread is about.... connecting the network doesn't necessarily mean better service.....

No one in here is eliminating/dismissing the idea of service extensions in general... matter fact, it's the easiest thing to bring up whenever these types of discussions are had.... but to tell me it's about connecting the network.... To that I have to say, Not.... entirely.....

If it was about connecting the network, we would have a hell of a lot more interborough routes than we do now (knowing the MTA, much less service on top of that, but that's some'n else).....

The first thing I would do is supply midday LTD service, not just this peak direction only bit; midday riders matters just as much as peak riders....

The second thing I would do is increase the s*** frequency on SI's routes; of course the MTA doesn't wanna hear that... but I don't wanna hear from them, that they don't have the buses (or the drivers) to do so.... I mean, the MTA does everything to discourage bus ridership across the board, but SI-ers have been shafted w/ necessary/adequate service for years; some would argue decades !!

The third thing I would do (on top of increasing freq.) is altering schedules....

Since the current bus network is structured behind getting SI-ers to manhattan via the ferry, Make connections to/from the ferry better !.... Give riders adequate time to catch buses & boats, instead of this 5-4-3-2-1 eeeerrrrkkkkk, BS... This isn't the NBA for cryin out loud, these are ppl's commutes we're talkin about... lol....

Makes sense to who, is the question ?

- The NEC is slow (granted, there are some SI-ers that actually drive out to metropark, but that's their prerogative), and...

- The NJCL isn't as frequent (which is one reason why SI-ers drive out further to the Metropark station over the Perth Amboy station)....

^^ pick your poison

If you're gonna backtrack w/i SI just to get to manhattan, you may as well take the express bus (which is the current situation)... ppl. aren't takin x17j's, 30's, 31's, and 22's b/c there's no local bus service that connects SI riders to NJT rail.... it's just the nature of the beast....

The routes out of gothels I chose are NJT lines that already have their ridership bases!!!!!!!!!!! meaning extending to SI would only increase it's ridership thus justifying the service!!!!!!!!!! Plus 2 routes will do it one from elizbeth the other from the airport!!!!!!! 99 gets renumbered 109 37 gets renumbered 106 one will go express to brooklyn with a stop in SI. Thus captuting 2 travel markets at once then you add it the 81 and 6 to the mix and you have lines strong enough to over take I-287 and other major corridors!!!!!!!! in NJ with SI transfer point. Now you have a complete network all thats needed is a GSP based NJT rte to brooklyn and the network gets complete.

@B35 which SI routes would you decrease headways on???

B35 via Church · August 31, 2011

That's what I've been saying all along. He is claiming on one hand that the S89 should be cut back because of a lack of ridership, but then saying that more SI-NJ extensions are needed because so many people go to NJ from SI, but that's the thing though. We don't know how many of those people are going to leave their cars home to ride mass transit and that's what I'm saying. All the census data in the world cannot predict what the demand is for SI-NJ connections via public transit.

So let's say that we have some SI-NJ connections via public transit. What would these folks be giving up? For one the comfort of their cars. Even if they're sitting in traffic, some folks would rather be in their car than on a bus.

If that's his stance (about the 89, I mean), then that kills his entire argument about makin service better on SI by expanding the service area of the network; namely the extensions to NJ..... It's hypocritical to want to do anything detrimental to a local route that already travels b/w states, and then to suggest we need more interstate routes.....

The census thing I really don't even wanna speak on anymore.... don't wanna catch whiplash from SMH so many times....

1) Well, I'd just like to throw it out there that hardly anybody uses it to get to Manhattan. No matter which way you slice it, it's cheaper to take the express bus than the S89->HBLR->PATH. I think if you buy a monthly pass for the 126 and use it on the HBLR, you break even, but then you might as well take the X17J or another express route that goes through NJ.

But yeah, I don't think ridership (going over the bridge) would be as high as the S89.

2) Alright. So if hypothetically, I had a bus company and wanted to know if there was demand for a route in a certain corridor, how would I go about doing that? (I guess, theoretically, I should be asking Joel this question)

1) I'm well aware of cost comparisons per (differing) commuting options... with that said, if service is that bad in a given area/region/etc, people will consider the most (what we would perceive as) outlandish commutes.... I'll just throw that out there.... Yes the average commuter considers the cheapest option possible, but I think you're underestimating how many ppl. really don't mind spending an extra buck, or two, or 10... lol...

as far as breaking down where S89 riders are going, I'm not sure about 'hardly anybody'... again, I think that's an underestimation.... I'm not implying it's the masses, or 1/2 of S89 riders... but I would say it's significant enough a number... but I'm not buying it's the vast majority (or w/e you consider the exact opposite of hardly anybody).....

2) Ear to the streets, noticing current commuting patterns, reading ppl's (plural) complaints on forums or w/e... or quite frankly, out-competing your competition in a different fashion....

So you're saying the ridership base would be NJ riders rather than SI riders? Or are you just referring to the route via the Outerbridge?

Neither, really.... I'll explain.

there would definitely be more SI riders on any of those extensions..... What I'm sayin is, NJ would benefit for the increase of patrons now coming into their state.... You're puttin more money in their pockets... "thanks, suckers"... lol...

NJ (residents; potential would-be bus passengers) don't have much of a benefit coming into staten island.... There's more demand for w/e SI patrons to get to NJ, than the other way around.... You'd be hard pressed to see NJ commuters (via car) choose the pkwy, the lincoln tunnel, etc., over the SI Expwy, through brooklyn, etc.... You aint gettin NJ commuters to consider taking the SIR to the ferry (or the SIR to the S53/79) to get to any of the other 4 boroughs....

B35 via Church · August 31, 2011

But yeah, baby steps. Any extension to NJ should just to to the nearest rail station (Elizabeth or Perth Amboy) and they'll see how it fares. Once in NJ, that's most of the battle right there.

I agree with takin "baby steps"...

I don't agree extensions fall in the category of baby steps, though....

1) Agreed. Midday service on the S98 could be 100% cost-neutral if they really want to bring up that argument.

2) Well, the problem is that a lot of routes meet the ferry, and the ridership really isn't there for much more than 30 minute service. Plus, most routes don't run every 30 minutes anyway: A lot of them run every 15-20 minutes off-peak, which is reasonable.

3) You gotta love that adreneline rush, though.

4) Damn. I didn't realize they drive out to NJ for service (I assume you're referring to Manhattan-bound riders). Then again, I didn't realize riders went to Brooklyn for express service either.

2) wait.... So you're satisfied with the current service out in SI?

If that's what you're conveying to me, I'd stop to think that you are one of the very select few....

3) lol.... you say that b/c you're young.... get back to me when you're in your 30's, 40's etc.

4) *nods head continuously*

1 & 2) Read B35's comment.

3) Yeah, but at least if you're on a bus, you don't have to focus on the road or anything like that.

4) Like I said, a private company is already considering a service over the Goethals to Newark Airport. Until another route comes along and forces him out, he should do alright.

5) You have to consider that tolls also can affect transit ridership. People aren't going to take a bus that's $2.25 when they could drive there for $0.50 worth of gas (or even $2.25 worth of gas), but when they're actually reaching into their pocket for money for the toll, they may consider transit.

1) I know this is in response to via.... but tryna follow along w/ the discussion, I don't understand which comment you were referring to, when you told him to read my comment.....

3) When you have a car, you don't think about that....

When I was your age, I used to think along those same lines....

5) Sure it can....

However, people aren't as frugal as you're makin them out to be.... especially ppl. that choose to drive over takin mass transit....

If ppl. were that frugal, you wouldn't have to bring that up... because they would be takin mass transit !!

Via Garibaldi 8 · August 31, 2011

I agree with takin "baby steps"...
I don't agree extensions fall in the category of baby steps, though....

My sentiments exactly...

2) wait.... So you're satisfied with the current service out in SI?

If that's what you're conveying to me, I'd stop to think that you are one of the very select few....

Yeah, he thinks overall that SI is well served. He's said that a few times in other threads, alluding to the fact that we should expect the level of service we have because of our size and because we're more suburban. Meanwhile, even the (MTA) has admitted to some degree that we're underserved, otherwise they wouldn't have talked about how a lack of depots in the past has prevented them from serving us better. LOL

3) lol.... you say that b/c you're young.... get back to me when you're in your 30's, 40's etc.

Yeeeppppp...

1) I know this is in response to via.... but tryna follow along w/ the discussion, I don't understand which comment you were referring to, when you told him to read my comment.....

I'm not sure either...

3) When you have a car, you don't think about that....

When I was your age, I used to think along those same lines....

You most certainly don't...

5) Sure it can....

However, people aren't as frugal as you're makin them out to be.... especially ppl. that choose to drive over takin mass transit....

If ppl. were that frugal, you wouldn't have to bring that up... because they would be takin mass transit !!

He doesn't seem to realize that folks LOVE their cars and while they may whine and complain about tolls and gas and so on, they generally still find a way to pay for these things and cut back elsewhere. Some folks may drive less, but they still refuse to take mass transit. He doesn't realize that the general consensus is that mass transit is looked down upon in most places across the US and that consensus certainly exists to an extent on Staten Island. Taking the express is okay since it goes to Manhattan and is also considered pricey, but the local bus... Not so... LOL He himself has even commented on how he has interacted with folks on Staten Island who have scoffed at the mere idea of having to use say the local bus to get to the ferry and talk of the express bus as if there is no other means of getting to the city. I have to admit that I am basically one of these people. If there isn't express bus service to work then as far as I'm concerned the local bus isn't an option. I'd take car service to the ferry. Perhaps it is because I am becoming of an age where the yearning for a car is becoming more and more evident, so since I don't have a dire need for one, I just take car service around when needed since up to this point it is still much cheaper for me. Even so my mindset may change in a few years.

Having a car in many ways is like part of the American dream.... You always are considered to have "made it" if you have the house and the car. Also taking the local bus is looked upon differently in say Manhattan. There I don't hesitate to use it and part of that is because of less riff raff on the Manhattan local buses, esp. the Madison & 5th Ave lines.

checkmatechamp13 · August 31, 2011

1) If that's his stance (about the 89, I mean), then that kills his entire argument about makin service better on SI by expanding the service area of the network; namely the extensions to NJ..... It's hypocritical to want to do anything detrimental to a local route that already travels b/w states, and then to suggest we need more interstate routes.....

The census thing I really don't even wanna speak on anymore.... don't wanna catch whiplash from SMH so many times....

2) I'm well aware of cost comparisons per (differing) commuting options... with that said, if service is that bad in a given area/region/etc, people will consider the most (what we would perceive as) outlandish commutes.... I'll just throw that out there.... Yes the average commuter considers the cheapest option possible, but I think you're underestimating how many ppl. really don't mind spending an extra buck, or two, or 10... lol...

as far as breaking down where S89 riders are going, I'm not sure about 'hardly anybody'... again, I think that's an underestimation.... I'm not implying it's the masses, or 1/2 of S89 riders... but I would say it's significant enough a number... but I'm not buying it's the vast majority (or w/e you consider the exact opposite of hardly anybody).....

3) Ear to the streets, noticing current commuting patterns, reading ppl's (plural) complaints on forums or w/e... or quite frankly, out-competing your competition in a different fashion....

4) Neither, really.... I'll explain.

there would definitely be more SI riders on any of those extensions..... What I'm sayin is, NJ would benefit for the increase of patrons now coming into their state.... You're puttin more money in their pockets... "thanks, suckers"... lol...

NJ (residents; potential would-be bus passengers) don't have much of a benefit coming into staten island.... There's more demand for w/e SI patrons to get to NJ, than the other way around.... You'd be hard pressed to see NJ commuters (via car) choose the pkwy, the lincoln tunnel, etc., over the SI Expwy, through brooklyn, etc.... You aint gettin NJ commuters to consider taking the SIR to the ferry (or the SIR to the S53/79) to get to any of the other 4 boroughs....

1) See #13 in post #189.

2) True. I mean, it doesn't make sense to me why somebody would give up soft cushioned seats and a one-seat ride to take a bus and 2 trains and pay more for it, but if somebody feels it works better, more power to them.

3) Well, hopefully Azumah's service gets off the ground, and we can see how the ridership turns out and what people think of it.

4) I actually do remember a "letter to the editor" in which somebody complained of the people from NJ driving over the Outerbridge and then taking the SIR to Manhattan for only $2.25 (they're probably getting a commuter discount or a carpool discount, so even with the toll, it would still be cheaper). Of course, as I don't live near the SIR, I can't verify nor deny those allegations (if you see a lot of NJ plates in the park-and-ride lots, that would prove that point.)

And yeah, that's the case if somebody went shopping in NJ, but if this allowed somebody to work some type of job in NJ, it's the reverse scenario: They're working in NJ and taking their tax dollars back to NY.

1a) I agree with takin "baby steps"...

I don't agree extensions fall in the category of baby steps, though....

2a) wait.... So you're satisfied with the current service out in SI?

If that's what you're conveying to me, I'd stop to think that you are one of the very select few....

3a) lol.... you say that b/c you're young.... get back to me when you're in your 30's, 40's etc.

4a) I know this is in response to via.... but tryna follow along w/ the discussion, I don't understand which comment you were referring to, when you told him to read my comment.....

5a) When you have a car, you don't think about that....

When I was your age, I used to think along those same lines....

6a) Sure it can....

However, people aren't as frugal as you're makin them out to be.... especially ppl. that choose to drive over takin mass transit....

If ppl. were that frugal, you wouldn't have to bring that up... because they would be takin mass transit !!

1a) So what would you consider "baby steps" to be then? An increase in frequency or better dispatching?

2a) Well, I'd like it if service ran every 5 minutes on every line I use (outside of rush hour), but I don't think it's necessary. You don't have a whole bunch of routes bursting at the seams at the current headways (like I mentioned before, there are a few exceptions)

3a) Well even at 16, it's not too fun. Those "adreneline rushes" are catching up with me 3 weeks after the program ended. I used to get by fine with 8 hours of sleep, and I'm feeling exhausted on 10 hours of sleep now. I can't think of any other reason for it besides the commute.

4a) When you said something like "I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he accepts that it's hub-and-spoke".

5a) Alright.

6a) True. I guess I'm just thinking many people would do what I would do.

1) Yeah, he thinks overall that SI is well served. He's said that a few times in other threads, alluding to the fact that we should expect the level of service we have because of our size and because we're more suburban. Meanwhile, even the has admitted to some degree that we're underserved, otherwise they wouldn't have talked about how a lack of depots in the past has prevented them from serving us better. LOL

2) He doesn't seem to realize that folks LOVE their cars and while they may whine and complain about tolls and gas and so on, they generally still find a way to pay for these things and cut back elsewhere. Some folks may drive less, but they still refuse to take mass transit. He doesn't realize that the general consensus is that mass transit is looked down upon in most places across the US and that consensus certainly exists to an extent on Staten Island. Taking the express is okay since it goes to Manhattan and is also considered pricey, but the local bus... Not so... LOL He himself has even commented on how he has interacted with folks on Staten Island who have scoffed at the mere idea of having to use say the local bus to get to the ferry and talk of the express bus as if there is no other means of getting to the city. I have to admit that I am basically one of these people. If there isn't express bus service to work then as far as I'm concerned the local bus isn't an option. I'd take car service to the ferry. Perhaps it is because I am becoming of an age where the yearning for a car is becoming more and more evident, so since I don't have a dire need for one, I just take car service around when needed since up to this point it is still much cheaper for me. Even so my mindset may change in a few years.

Having a car in many ways is like part of the American dream.... You always are considered to have "made it" if you have the house and the car. Also taking the local bus is looked upon differently in say Manhattan. There I don't hesitate to use it and part of that is because of less riff raff on the Manhattan local buses, esp. the Madison & 5th Ave lines.

1) Well then they've lied. Are you seeing huge improvements now that Charleston opened up?

You know my feelings about costs: On average, SI riders cost more to serve than riders in the other boroughs. Therefore, with the same amount of money, the MTA can't serve us as well as the other boroughs.

2) And part of that is because getting to Manhattan is very expensive by car. Between tolls, gas, wear-and-tear, and parking, you're running into big money: $50-$60 per day (say, $40 to park for the day, and then $20 for everything else). Plus, they're just as fast as driving.

And you have a good point about the American Dream, but (at least for me), what matters is what you think. A person living in a penthouse apartment on the UES has made it just as well as a person living in the suburbs with a car.

B35 via Church · August 31, 2011

No quotes.... lemme do this real quick...

This is in response to checkmate's post above [post #194]

^^ http://nyctransitforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=474093&postcount=194

#4 - I don't doubt that... however, I think the complaint may have had more to do with NJ folks drivin into SI & making the roads that much more clogged, over w/e NJ folks comin in & taking the SIR.....

...and the other part of that statement, yes, of course.... but do you really think a bus route of that nature would attract more workers over shoppers/customers ? Me, I sure don't.... If it's any route that's panning over the Goethals or the Outerbridge that isn't goin to the airport, your best chance at the highest ridership possible would be to cater such a route to some commercial area.... sure, the workers would benefit, but there's no way that amt. of ppl. can represent the masses of pax that would end up riding such a route....

1a) Schedule adjustments.... and I'm talkin about, before any headway adjustment is even considered....

2a) I'm not implying that there should be excessive service provided... but 15-20 min. headways on most routes in any borough in NYC, including SI, is not adequate... that's 3-4 buses an hour... total slap in the face if you ask me.... SI isn't that suburban now.... lol...

If you supply an area with low(er) amt's of service, you don't give residents/patrons much incentive to even want to ride the buses....

4a) I won't nitpick, since that was a paraphrase.... but I still don't see what that particular statement of mine, has to do with makin things any clearer in that particular point, to via....

are you implying that he should also give you the benefit of the doubt, like I did?

if not, let's just digress on this one....

6a) I understand...

It's somethin I had to get out of also... not just on transit related material, but an overall life-lesson.....

qjtransitmaster · August 31, 2011

No quotes.... lemme do this real quick...

This is in response to checkmate's post above [post #194]

^^ http://nyctransitforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=474093&postcount=194

#4 - I don't doubt that... however, I think the complaint may have had more to do with NJ folks drivin into SI & making the roads that much more clogged, over w/e NJ folks comin in & taking the SIR.....

...and the other part of that statement, yes, of course.... but do you really think a bus route of that nature would attract more workers over shoppers/customers ? Me, I sure don't.... If it's any route that's panning over the Goethals or the Outerbridge that isn't goin to the airport, your best chance at the highest ridership possible would be to cater such a route to some commercial area.... sure, the workers would benefit, but there's no way that amt. of ppl. can represent the masses of pax that would end up riding such a route....

1a) Schedule adjustments.... and I'm talkin about, before any headway adjustment is even considered....

2a) I'm not implying that there should be excessive service provided... but 15-20 min. headways on most routes in any borough in NYC, including SI, is not adequate... that's 3-4 buses an hour... total slap in the face if you ask me.... SI isn't that suburban now.... lol...

If you supply an area with low(er) amt's of service, you don't give residents/patrons much incentive to even want to ride the buses....

4a) I won't nitpick, since that was a paraphrase.... but I still don't see what that particular statement of mine, has to do with makin things any clearer in that particular point, to via....

are you implying that he should also give you the benefit of the doubt, like I did?

if not, let's just digress on this one....

6a) I understand...

It's somethin I had to get out of also... not just on transit related material, but an overall life-lesson.....

OK which SI routes warrent service every 10 to 5 mins??? which ones NEED to improve?? again you didn't answer that??? each route is very different.

checkmatechamp13 · August 31, 2011

No quotes.... lemme do this real quick...

This is in response to checkmate's post above [post #194]

^^ http://nyctransitforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=474093&postcount=194

#4 - I don't doubt that... however, I think the complaint may have had more to do with NJ folks drivin into SI & making the roads that much more clogged, over w/e NJ folks comin in & taking the SIR.....

...and the other part of that statement, yes, of course.... but do you really think a bus route of that nature would attract more workers over shoppers/customers ? Me, I sure don't.... If it's any route that's panning over the Goethals or the Outerbridge that isn't goin to the airport, your best chance at the highest ridership possible would be to cater such a route to some commercial area.... sure, the workers would benefit, but there's no way that amt. of ppl. can represent the masses of pax that would end up riding such a route....

1a) Schedule adjustments.... and I'm talkin about, before any headway adjustment is even considered....

2a) I'm not implying that there should be excessive service provided... but 15-20 min. headways on most routes in any borough in NYC, including SI, is not adequate... that's 3-4 buses an hour... total slap in the face if you ask me.... SI isn't that suburban now.... lol...

If you supply an area with low(er) amt's of service, you don't give residents/patrons much incentive to even want to ride the buses....

4a) I won't nitpick, since that was a paraphrase.... but I still don't see what that particular statement of mine, has to do with makin things any clearer in that particular point, to via....

are you implying that he should also give you the benefit of the doubt, like I did?

if not, let's just digress on this one....

6a) I understand...

It's somethin I had to get out of also... not just on transit related material, but an overall life-lesson.....

#4: So is Broad Street in Elizabeth a commericial area, considering the fact that it's near the train? I mean, if it's just going to a mall (like Jersey Gardens), you don't have as many transfer options. Obviously, going to Jersey Gardens, it would miss the NJT trains.

1a) Alright.

2a) But if it were a "true" suburb (like Long Island), most routes would be running every hour.

And outside of service to St. George or Brooklyn (like I said, there are tolls and parking costs to deal with. I'm sure a lot of the people take buses or the SIR to St. George to avoid the $8 parking fee near the ferry), I think demand is pretty much fixed. Even if service ran more frequently than every 15-20 minutes, I don't think car-owners would be attracted to the buses.

4a) Yeah, that was what I was implying.

6a) I have a relative who used to drive to Bay Ridge and pay the $5.76 toll. He eventually decided to just park in Arrochar and take transit, to save a little on gas and parking. He later realized that he could use the transfer to get back on the opposite bus he took (I think it was usually the S53 in and the S79 out)

The problem difference between him and potential SI-NJ riders is that transit was more convenient (buses coming every few minutes vs. the 15-20 minute headways on the NJ buses I proposed), and car travel was slightly less convenient (parking is probably harder in Bay Ridge than Elizabeth)

But yeah, I figured that with all of the hype over raising the tolls, people would be looking for cheaper alternatives (because I would do so), but then again, that isn't necessarily the case. Obviously, as you said, there wouldn't be no riders looking for an alternative, but there might not be enough to warrant a route.

qjtransitmaster · September 1, 2011

#4: So is Broad Street in Elizabeth a commericial area, considering the fact that it's near the train? I mean, if it's just going to a mall (like Jersey Gardens), you don't have as many transfer options. Obviously, going to Jersey Gardens, it would miss the NJT trains.

1a) Alright.

2a) But if it were a "true" suburb (like Long Island), most routes would be running every hour.

And outside of service to St. George or Brooklyn (like I said, there are tolls and parking costs to deal with. I'm sure a lot of the people take buses or the SIR to St. George to avoid the $8 parking fee near the ferry), I think demand is pretty much fixed. Even if service ran more frequently than every 15-20 minutes, I don't think car-owners would be attracted to the buses.

4a) Yeah, that was what I was implying.

6a) I have a relative who used to drive to Bay Ridge and pay the $5.76 toll. He eventually decided to just park in Arrochar and take transit, to save a little on gas and parking. He later realized that he could use the transfer to get back on the opposite bus he took (I think it was usually the S53 in and the S79 out)

The problem difference between him and potential SI-NJ riders is that transit was more convenient (buses coming every few minutes vs. the 15-20 minute headways on the NJ buses I proposed), and car travel was slightly less convenient (parking is probably harder in Bay Ridge than Elizabeth)

But yeah, I figured that with all of the hype over raising the tolls, people would be looking for cheaper alternatives (because I would do so), but then again, that isn't necessarily the case. Obviously, as you said, there wouldn't be no riders looking for an alternative, but there might not be enough to warrant a route.

The combined frequency of several NJT rtes will make up for it hance why 99 and 26 will do well the 26 would end up with added service while the 99 creates a rte 439 route that previously did not exist that plus other NJT long distance routes that are possible.

B35 via Church · September 1, 2011

OK which SI routes warrent service every 10 to 5 mins??? which ones NEED to improve?? again you didn't answer that??? each route is very different.

Obviously each route is different....

There's a reason why I didn't answer your question.... Every time you ask a question, there's some ulterior motive behind it.... Show me that you have a genuine interest in Staten Island more than you do New Jersey, and then I might indulge in answering it.....

#4: So is Broad Street in Elizabeth a commericial area, considering the fact that it's near the train? I mean, if it's just going to a mall (like Jersey Gardens), you don't have as many transfer options. Obviously, going to Jersey Gardens, it would miss the NJT trains.

1a) Alright.

2a) But if it were a "true" suburb (like Long Island), most routes would be running every hour.

And outside of service to St. George or Brooklyn (like I said, there are tolls and parking costs to deal with. I'm sure a lot of the people take buses or the SIR to St. George to avoid the $8 parking fee near the ferry), I think demand is pretty much fixed. Even if service ran more frequently than every 15-20 minutes, I don't think car-owners would be attracted to the buses.

4a) Yeah, that was what I was implying.

6a) I have a relative who used to drive to Bay Ridge and pay the $5.76 toll. He eventually decided to just park in Arrochar and take transit, to save a little on gas and parking. He later realized that he could use the transfer to get back on the opposite bus he took (I think it was usually the S53 in and the S79 out)

The problem difference between him and potential SI-NJ riders is that transit was more convenient (buses coming every few minutes vs. the 15-20 minute headways on the NJ buses I proposed), and car travel was slightly less convenient (parking is probably harder in Bay Ridge than Elizabeth)

But yeah, I figured that with all of the hype over raising the tolls, people would be looking for cheaper alternatives (because I would do so), but then again, that isn't necessarily the case. Obviously, as you said, there wouldn't be no riders looking for an alternative, but there might not be enough to warrant a route.

yeah, Broad st in elizabeth is very commercial... it's why those NJT routes down there all serve it in some fashion....

2a) ....and your commute would be two-to-three times as bad !

suburbs having hourly headways is a separate issue from what we're talkin about here.... I don't think you realize how you came off in even bringing that up.....

as for the other part/paragraph, it's not all about luring drivers out of their vehicles (that's more of an ideal goal of any transportation system).... the current riders of the system deserve better service.... don't forget the ppl. that decide to walk it out b/c they feel they can get to a certain destination before the bus even shows up - and there's enough of that goin on....

6a) I know ppl. do that for express buses... but ppl. actually drive up to catch locals?

If that's true, then you know service in general out there isn't adequate....

qjtransitmaster · September 1, 2011

Obviously each route is different....

There's a reason why I didn't answer your question.... Every time you ask a question, there's some ulterior motive behind it.... Show me that you have a genuine interest in Staten Island more than you do New Jersey, and then I might indulge in answering it.....

yeah, Broad st in elizabeth is very commercial... it's why those NJT routes down there all serve it in some fashion....

2a) ....and your commute would be two-to-three times as bad !

suburbs having hourly headways is a separate issue from what we're talkin about here.... I don't think you realize how you came off in even bringing that up.....

as for the other part/paragraph, it's not all about luring drivers out of their vehicles (that's more of an ideal goal of any transportation system).... the current riders of the system deserve better service.... don't forget the ppl. that decide to walk it out b/c they feel they can get to a certain destination before the bus even shows up - and there's enough of that goin on....

6a) I know ppl. do that for express buses... but ppl. actually drive up to catch locals?

If that's true, then you know service in general out there isn't adequate....

WHAT ppl drive to locals???? Ok I will tell you B35 the only SI routes I believe can go to NJ are the S54,55,56,and 57 that's it. The rest however I am simply curious and have an interest in SI service but am not sure which routes need more frequent service since my planning style is long range rather than short range. So for the sake of intra SI service other than S54-57 which lines need a service enhancement?? The only reason why except S54-57 is cause NJ alone will force those lines to improve anyway!!!!!!! But for all other lines what lines warrant super frequent service?? If you were MTA what lines would you enhance service on and I will compare ur ideas to others and see what SI is about NOT involving NJ.

Sign In

The sad story of Staten Island bus service. How would you cheer the borough up?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Archived

Important Information