Staten Island Bus Proposal Thread 2012-2013

[checkmatechamp13]

S79 SBS rendered S89 redundant south of the SI mall buddy. S89 is like a LTD it's northern segment that is an alternative to the S44/59 is unchanged. That routing makes it easier to reach via SIR and other buses in south shore. Meaning more connections that way and that routing may be the only way it can run outside rush hr. Sadly I admit that highway is barely used.

 

Where's the damn facepalm where you need one?

 

If you're rerouting it via Rockland Avenue, that means you have to bypass the mall, don't you? Unless you plan on going down to the mall and going back up, which defeats the purpose of it being a limited-stop route because it's supposed to be fast.

 

If you are having it do some funky reroute after the mall, you're still bypassing the ETC. Do you really think the people are going to take the S79 from the ETC to access the S89?

 

You're kidding me, if you think my argument is based on taking away a limited south of the ETC. That segment is fairly quick, limited or no limited.

 

It makes it easier to reach the SIR? That's a joke, right? What's the problem with going straight down Richmond Avenue like it currently does? If you're going to/from the East Shore, you just sit on the train for a few more minutes. And what other buses does it make it easier to reach that people are trying to get to in such large numbers that it's worth rerouting it from the ETC?

[qjtransitmaster]

Where's the damn facepalm where you need one?

 

If you're rerouting it via Rockland Avenue, that means you have to bypass the mall, don't you? Unless you plan on going down to the mall and going back up, which defeats the purpose of it being a limited-stop route because it's supposed to be fast.

 

If you are having it do some funky reroute after the mall, you're still bypassing the ETC. Do you really think the people are going to take the S79 from the ETC to access the S89?

 

You're kidding me, if you think my argument is based on taking away a limited south of the ETC. That segment is fairly quick, limited or no limited.

 

It makes it easier to reach the SIR? That's a joke, right? What's the problem with going straight down Richmond Avenue like it currently does? If you're going to/from the East Shore, you just sit on the train for a few more minutes. And what other buses does it make it easier to reach that people are trying to get to in such large numbers that it's worth rerouting it from the ETC?

no read it goes to the mall first then it goes via forest hiill to rockland ave please read before you bash I know you can read right? You give south new dorp folks quicker access to the SI mall and you make the S89 unique eliminating duplication of the S79 SBS and S59 both are very frequent more so than the S89.

[B35 via Church]

...Want to run S89 off-peak? then eliminate it's route south of SI mall and reroute it via rockland ave then replace S57's guyon service with rerouted S89s running at 20 min frequencies basically after rockland it follows S57 route to new dorp replacing that part. Reroute S57 via S76 routing. Then restructure S76 but I am not sure how for now. Maybe leave S76 alone with S57 south given to S89 S57 can be rerouted to giffords la via ETC and SI mall via forest hill Or leave S57 alone and let it go via S76 routing in oakwood forcing S76 to change.

 

no read it goes to the mall first then it goes via forest hiill to rockland ave....

 

You give south new dorp folks quicker access to the SI mall and you make the S89 unique eliminating duplication of the S79 SBS and S59 both are very frequent more so than the S89.

S57, S76.... Unbelievable....

 

None of all this crap is necessary to run the S89 off peak.

Edited February 14, 2013 by B35 via Church

[Turbo19]

Damn it, what are all these damn proposals for the S89? The route is fine as it is. If you want it to run off-peak, then I suggest you get in contact with the local represenatives and the MTA to bring it to a reality, not all these bullshit reroutes that only complicate the process.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Damn it, what are all these damn proposals for the S89? The route is fine as it is. If you want it to run off-peak, then I suggest you get in contact with the local represenatives and the MTA to bring it to a reality, not all these bullshit reroutes that only complicate the process.

lol... These fantasy routes are just a joke.  Out of all of the boroughs, I would say Staten Island has routes that need re-routing the least.

[checkmatechamp13]

no read it goes to the mall first then it goes via forest hiill to rockland ave please read before you bash I know you can read right? You give south new dorp folks quicker access to the SI mall and you make the S89 unique eliminating duplication of the S79 SBS and S59 both are very frequent more so than the S89.

 

I said: "Unless you plan on going down to the mall and going back up, which defeats the purpose of it being a limited-stop route because it's supposed to be fast", and "If you are having it do some funky reroute after the mall, you're still bypassing the ETC."

 

New Dorp folks can just make their way to the S79. How much time is this route realistically going to save them? Especially considering that the S79 is more frequent than this proposed S89 would be. Whenever I'm in that area, I just go straight for the S79 and then transfer to a Richmond Avenue route. I don't want to bother with the S57, and worrying about whether I missed it, or whether it'll hit traffic in the Greenbelt or anything.

 

And the S59 isn't "very frequent".

 

lol... These fantasy routes are just a joke.  Out of all of the boroughs, I would say Staten Island has routes that need re-routing the least.

 

I wouldn't. In this case, the S89 is fine as is, but we have our fair share of routes that can be re-routed.

[qjtransitmaster]

I said: "Unless you plan on going down to the mall and going back up, which defeats the purpose of it being a limited-stop route because it's supposed to be fast", and "If you are having it do some funky reroute after the mall, you're still bypassing the ETC."

 

New Dorp folks can just make their way to the S79. How much time is this route realistically going to save them? Especially considering that the S79 is more frequent than this proposed S89 would be. Whenever I'm in that area, I just go straight for the S79 and then transfer to a Richmond Avenue route. I don't want to bother with the S57, and worrying about whether I missed it, or whether it'll hit traffic in the Greenbelt or anything.

 

And the S59 isn't "very frequent".

 

 

I wouldn't. In this case, the S89 is fine as is, but we have our fair share of routes that can be re-routed.

S59 and S89 have almost the same frequencies. Plus 2 LTD lines on richmond south of SI mall is a bit much. What would happen is S94 becomes LTD on richmond ave as well?

 

S57, S76.... Unbelievable....

 

None of all this crap is necessary to run the S89 off peak.

so in it's current form it would do well off-peak? even south of SI mall?

[Turbo19]

lol... These fantasy routes are just a joke.  Out of all of the boroughs, I would say Staten Island has routes that need re-routing the least.

Well some tweaks wouldn't hurt, but complete re-routes may actually complicate the network and compromise ridership. If an area needs more service, then the focus should be increasing frequency on an existing route or adding a new route, such as a short feeder service.

[checkmatechamp13]

S59 and S89 have almost the same frequencies. Plus 2 LTD lines on richmond south of SI mall is a bit much. What would happen is S94 becomes LTD on richmond ave as well?

 

so in it's current form it would do well off-peak? even south of SI mall?

 

If it's "a bit much" then just cut it back to the ETC. No need to send it to New Dorp or whatever.

 

And the S94 won't become a limited on Richmond. I thought you said something like "Don't go by what ifs" anyway.

 

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but in its current form, it would only do well north of the ETC at best. But that still doesn't mean you should send it to New Dorp.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Well some tweaks wouldn't hurt, but complete re-routes may actually complicate the network and compromise ridership. If an area needs more service, then the focus should be increasing frequency on an existing route or adding a new route, such as a short feeder service.

Well I never said that tweaks weren't necessary. I just said that Staten Island has routes that need the least amount of tweaking.  I mean I certainly wouldn't tweak many of the express buses because most of those routes are okay but surely some of the local routes could be tweaked here and there.

[B35 via Church]

so in it's current form it would do well off-peak? even south of SI mall?

The S89 ?

 

Dude, if you wanna run em off peak, just end em at the transit center (Eltingville) & have the off peak buses run up to the HBLR station, and vice versa..... Simple solution.

 

You don't have to run them (the full route) down to Hylan Blvd.... And to have peak & off peak buses have that drastic a difference in routing (the current 89 vs. w/e garbage you're talkin about, regarding it & New Dorp) is not practical nor necessary.....

[qjtransitmaster]

The S89 ?

 

Dude, if you wanna run em off peak, just end em at the transit center (Eltingville) & have the off peak buses run up to the HBLR station, and vice versa..... Simple solution.

 

You don't have to run them (the full route) down to Hylan Blvd.... And to have peak & off peak buses have that drastic a difference in routing (the current 89 vs. w/e garbage you're talkin about, regarding it & New Dorp) is not practical nor necessary.....

I guess my original plan for it was better after all which still had it serving ETC but with it going down richmond parkway yes even rush hr will make the trip sort of like an express down there. I haven't figured the routing though down bricktown mall and page ave or via X22 routing since no local bus exists there. 

[checkmatechamp13]

I didn't want to just put it in the Bus - Random Thoughts Thread, but I just saw this notice on the S40.

 

The northbound S59 & S89 were recently changed to stop at the S79 stop instead of the stop with all the other routes. (So now they only have to pass through the Richmond/Arthur Kill intersection once instead of twice)

[BreeddekalbL]

i was thinking  

 

take the s79 off of SBS and delete all the changes to it for sbs and make it a limited 

still same left right routing etc and terminals 

 

basically what im saying is restore the s79 to pre sbs changes but delete some stops here and there but make it a true limited,

[qjtransitmaster]

i was thinking  

 

take the s79 off of SBS and delete all the changes to it for sbs and make it a limited 

still same left right routing etc and terminals 

 

basically what im saying is restore the s79 to pre sbs changes but delete some stops here and there but make it a true limited,

People seem satisfied with the current SBS S79.

[Culver]

i was thinking  

 

take the s79 off of SBS and delete all the changes to it for sbs and make it a limited 

still same left right routing etc and terminals 

 

basically what im saying is restore the s79 to pre sbs changes but delete some stops here and there but make it a true limited,

Well you can just take the wraps off the bus and accomplish that. It's LTD in service, SBS in name.

[qjtransitmaster]

Well you can just take the wraps off the bus and accomplish that. It's LTD in service, SBS in name.

why does it matter?

[Culver]

why does it matter?

It doesn't. I was just responding to his post.

[qjtransitmaster]

It doesn't. I was just responding to his post.

Good point.

[checkmatechamp13]

lol... This is just a modified version of your S93 swapping the S93 with the S66 instead for the western part of the route... I'm rather bewildered as to where this additional ridership on the new S67 would come from...?? Let me guess... The tons of college students you talked about last time is that it?? Aside from that, who else is supposed to be using it??

 

Very nice of you to steal service from folks on Decker and Forest Av too... I'd like to see you justify to them having their service taken away to serve an area that already has three bus route in the vicinity with the S40, S46 and S48, all of which provide service to the commercial areas (i.e. Forest Av and the Ferry).

 

You know, it sucks that I cant always come up with a good comeback immediately, but I realized I never added this:

 

It's primary users would be retarded, self-hating racists who want to avoid the Blacks & Hispanics on the S46. I'm sure you can relate to that, right?  I mean, you avoided the S44 like the plague, and it was a couple of blocks from Delafield between Broadway & Elizabeth.

 

Oh, and I'm still waiting for your response about Willowbrook Road, which of course, you keep trying to avoid.

 

i was thinking

 

take the s79 off of SBS and delete all the changes to it for sbs and make it a limited

still same left right routing etc and terminals

 

basically what im saying is restore the s79 to pre sbs changes but delete some stops here and there but make it a true limited,

 

Well, there's probably some sort of money they get for calling it +SBS+ that they wouldn't if they just called it a plain limited. If that's what it takes to get the improvements, then I really don't care what they call it.

Edited March 30, 2013 by checkmatechamp13

[BreeddekalbL]

i also forgot to mention that they should make the S78 sbs   and pull sbs off of the s79  

 

my proposal is that there would still be an s78 local and an s78 sbs    s79 loses sbs status becomes regular limited 

 

s78 local terminates at hugenot ave, last stop is hugenot ave and jansen street   bus uses jansen street for first stop on luten and jansen to layover and start back to ferry terminal  late nights runs to bricktown mall with no sbs 

 

s78 sbs runs full route to 5:00 am to 10pm   the local runs the whole way from 10 pm till 5am

[qjtransitmaster]

i also forgot to mention that they should make the S78 sbs   and pull sbs off of the s79  

 

my proposal is that there would still be an s78 local and an s78 sbs    s79 loses sbs status becomes regular limited 

 

s78 local terminates at hugenot ave, last stop is hugenot ave and jansen street   bus uses jansen street for first stop on luten and jansen to layover and start back to ferry terminal  late nights runs to bricktown mall with no sbs 

 

s78 sbs runs full route to 5:00 am to 10pm   the local runs the whole way from 10 pm till 5am

Err just leave em alone.

[qjtransitmaster]

how fast is the S40 from end to end?

[S78 via Hylan]

Usually 25-35 minutes depending on the time of day.

Edited April 7, 2013 by S78 via Hylan

[checkmatechamp13]

i also forgot to mention that they should make the S78 sbs   and pull sbs off of the s79  

 

my proposal is that there would still be an s78 local and an s78 sbs    s79 loses sbs status becomes regular limited 

 

s78 local terminates at hugenot ave, last stop is hugenot ave and jansen street   bus uses jansen street for first stop on luten and jansen to layover and start back to ferry terminal  late nights runs to bricktown mall with no sbs 

 

s78 sbs runs full route to 5:00 am to 10pm   the local runs the whole way from 10 pm till 5am

 

The S79 was made SBS because it wouldn't cost too much in terms of increased operating costs: You'd simply take the existing runs, convert them to SBS, boost the frequencies a little (to account for increased ridership), and then then boost the frequencies a little on the locals, and you're done.

 

With the S78, for most of the day, it runs every 15 minutes, so almost every single limited, you'd have to add outright. (Rather than converting some of the locals). Aside from that, you're stopping it short of Tottenville HS for no reason (You have to walk along Luten Avenue, which is a wide street with a very narrow sidewalk on one side, and no sidewalk on the other) Not to mention the fact that for longer distances, the SIR already acts as a limited. While I'm sure some people may ride all the way down from St. George to Eltingville, most people just take the SIR.

 

The more I think about it, the more I think the S78 should go and serve the townhouses up around Huguenot Avenue. Buses would take Hylan-Luten-Amboy-Huguenot-Arthur Kill, terminate, and then take Arden-Vespa-Huguenot-Amboy-Luten-Hylan (if people on Vespa don't like it, the S78 could always take Woodrow). You'd connect that part of Arden Heights to Tottenville HS (as well as I.S.7 and I.S.75 along Huguenot), and for whoever wants it, there's shopping along Hylan east of Richmond (though of course, it's not as much of a shopping district as the area by New Dorp). And you might get a handful of riders transferring from the SIR to get towards Arden Heights, though of course, that's express bus territory over there.

 

As I mentioned before, the S59 would be extended to Tottenville full-time to provide coverage down there, so there wouldn't be any issues with removing the S78 from there. The S74 would pass through the Bricktown Mall and continue to serve Tottenville.

Edited April 7, 2013 by checkmatechamp13