Staten Island Bus Proposal Thread 2012-2013

[Q43LTD]

So what routes should serve Bricktown then since the S74/84 and the 78 are too long for their own good?

[checkmatechamp13]

I'm not all that fond of the S89 running all the way down to Hylan to begin with.... Hell, I wouldn't even run them down to ETC....  I would rather increase service on the S59 (not just during the hours the S89 runs, but within the span of the S59 itself) & turn the S89 into a shuttle over the bridge from *somewhere* within the north shore.... I was thinking having them terminate with the S46 short turns, then doing Grandview > Brabant > South > back to Forest, then turn up Morningstar, etc. en route to Bayonne.... Also, with the increased service the S59 would get, I'd also split the route north of Forest.... Meaning, some buses run the current route & some buses run via Morningstar.....

 

I was thinking about this post again, and I think S89 ridership would take too much of a hit if it were to be cut back to a North Shore shuttle. Aside from that little park-and-ride by Walker Street (which I'm not even sure if it's an official one. There was a story a while back about the local businesses complaining that S89 riders were taking spots from their customers. I think the Port Authority might've expanded it a bit). But in any case, you're not going to get the riders boarding at the park-and-rides at the SI Mall & ETC to drive all the way to a little park-and-ride at Walker Street. (And that's not even getting into the whole North Shore stigma deal)

 

I think it works well to have the S89 running towards the South Shore. The peak direction is the opposite of the S59 (the S59 has students and workers from the North Shore going down towards the SI Mall and South Shore, while the S89 obviously has the Bayonne-bound riders. And vice versa in the evening)

 

I mean, right now, during rush hour, you have around 4-6 BPH (buses per hour for anybody who doesn't know) from the S44/94 and 4 BPH from the S59 (for simplicity's sake), and then the S89 on top of that. To dump the full 10+ BPH onto the S59 alone is overkill.

 

I'd rather keep the S89 as the limited-stop supplement to the S59, to get more overall usage out of it. It's not like buses are so unreliable coming from Eltingville that Bayonne-bound riders in Elm Park are complaining or anything. I'd still have all buses run via Morningstar-Walker, and leave the southern part of Port Richmond Avenue for the S44 to cover.

 

BTW, for you and anybody who's interested, page 14 has some on-off data for the S89. Southbound, the peak load point is after leaving Forest Avenue/Monsey Place. Make of that what you will.

 

As for the S44 (which also serves Morningstar), that route exemplifies what's wrong w/ the SI bus network.....That route should not be running to SI mall; too sluggish within the north shore to have it be that much of a supplement to the S59.... Instead, I'd run it to CSI (via Willowbrook rd) & call it a day.....

 

That's a good idea. It solves the issue of where to terminate my "S58" on the northern end, and it basically gives the whole Bulls Head/Graniteville area over to the S66 as far as ferry-bound riders are concerned.

 

But just so you know, those little side streets between Victory & Watchogue are all too narrow to run a bus along (and Willowbrook Road north of Watchogue lines up with Stewart Avenue south of it). That would be worse than the streets along S46/96 in Mariners Harbor, since I doubt you'll get the residents to agree to ban parking on one side like they do along Brabant Street & Walloon Street.

 

I know the X10/11 run along a block of Willowbrook, but it's slightly wider, and that's along the parking lots of some businesses, so there's no residents to complain.

 

So I think the best way is to just run down Woolley and enter CSI through the back entrance where the S61 stops. (Ideally, it would run through that gate over by Willowbrook Road, but that enters through the opposite side of the campus from where the S93 ends).

 

So what routes should serve Bricktown then since the S74/84 and the 78 are too long for their own good?

 

IMO, the S74 should be split up at the ETC. The western split of the route (let's call it S73 for now) would serve Bricktown, but via a more direct route that covers more residential areas on the South Shore (you can look at my CartoDB map, but basically, it would run via Arthur Kill-Rossville-Correll-Bloomingdale-Englewood). After serving Bricktown, it would run via the Page Avenue commercial district and continue to Tottenville.

 

I would also have the S55 serve Bricktown, en route to Perth Amboy.

 

I'd have a separate route (I'll call it S72 for now) run straight down Arthur Kill Road from the ETC to Tottenville, to provide basic coverage to the industrial part of Arthur Kill Road, including the Charleston Depot. 

 

I think it's utterly ridiculous to have a route run through Tottenville without terminating there. Even on the S78 itself, the riders going to/from Bricktown are generally Tottenville residents. So I have the S59 be the sole route serving the western part of Hylan Blvd, terminating at Tottenville.

 

Also, there's more to the "Bricktown" area than Bricktown itself. The South Shore Commons across the street actually has a lot more stores, and yet the only bus stop in the whole area is at the north end of the Bricktown Mall, which is nothing short of stupid.

[Threxx]

@checkmatechamp13

 

Do you have a more clear outline of your plan to reconfigure the SI bus system? (Something similar to my own Fantasy NYC Subway, with detailed service plans and such) I'd be interested.

[checkmatechamp13]

I posted the following proposals with the service plans (I have the original Word documents on my home computer)

 

Local buses

Express buses

 

The only thing missing is something mentioning the approximate headway. If I make a chart in Excel or Google Docs, I'll post it up.

[B35 via Church]

.....With running some S59s via Morningstar, are you referring to running them via the current S44 route (Morningstar-Walker), or running the full length of Morningstar and heading back over to "Port Richmond Terminal"?

 

 

How about this: The S44 runs via Post-Port Richmond-Willowbrook, and all S59s run via Morningstar-Walker? I think ridership is stronger on Morningstar south of Walker, compared to Port Richmond Avenue south of Walker (with much of that being attributable to Mariners Harbor residents taking the S46 to Morningstar to catch a bus towards the SI Mall).

Neither, actually.....

 

I was thinking of having buses running up Morningstar to Innis, then doing the S46 route to Pt Richmond av, en route to the terminal in Pt. Richmond....

 

So how exactly would you go about doing splitting the S78?

Northern portion of the S78 (rebranded as the "S58", with a new corresponding LTD being the "S88") running b/w St George & New Dorp / Oakwood

 

Southern portion of the S78 (keeping the S78 notation) running b/w Tottenville (Amboy/Main) & Fingerboard/Narrows Rd.

 

I'll draw a map of both of them later on today when I get back.....

 

So what routes should serve Bricktown then since the S74/84 and the 78 are too long for their own good?

The 55 & the 56....

 

The Tottenville HS thing's got to stop, like yesterday..... And to think, once upon a time, both of those routes ended @ Luten/Eyelandt..... No bus route should be terminating there full time....

 

I was thinking about this post again, and I think S89 ridership would take too much of a hit if it were to be cut back to a North Shore shuttle. Aside from that little park-and-ride by Walker Street (which I'm not even sure if it's an official one. There was a story a while back about the local businesses complaining that S89 riders were taking spots from their customers. I think the Port Authority might've expanded it a bit). But in any case, you're not going to get the riders boarding at the park-and-rides at the SI Mall & ETC to drive all the way to a little park-and-ride at Walker Street. (And that's not even getting into the whole North Shore stigma deal)

 

I think it works well to have the S89 running towards the South Shore. The peak direction is the opposite of the S59 (the S59 has students and workers from the North Shore going down towards the SI Mall and South Shore, while the S89 obviously has the Bayonne-bound riders. And vice versa in the evening)

 

I mean, right now, during rush hour, you have around 4-6 BPH (buses per hour for anybody who doesn't know) from the S44/94 and 4 BPH from the S59 (for simplicity's sake), and then the S89 on top of that. To dump the full 10+ BPH onto the S59 alone is overkill.

 

I'd rather keep the S89 as the limited-stop supplement to the S59, to get more overall usage out of it. It's not like buses are so unreliable coming from Eltingville that Bayonne-bound riders in Elm Park are complaining or anything. I'd still have all buses run via Morningstar-Walker, and leave the southern part of Port Richmond Avenue for the S44 to cover.

 

BTW, for you and anybody who's interested, page 14 has some on-off data for the S89. Southbound, the peak load point is after leaving Forest Avenue/Monsey Place. Make of that what you will.

That's what I'm aiming for - to have w/e intra-SI ridership on the S89 all go to the S59..... My issue w/ the S89 isn't unreliability at all (you said it yourself, Richmond av is a pretty quick corridor [especially the more north you go], it's the fact that it's yet another route that takes away from the S59.... My train of thought is & always have been, the S59 should be the quintessential north-south route in the whole island.... The MTA does not treat it as such - especially when they have the thing retardedly running to freakin Tottenville part time.... Virtually no one w/i Mid-Island or the North shore benefits from this crap..... To me, it's like running a prominent route like the S53 to West shore Plaza.... It's all in the name of frugality, much like, the SI local bus system, period (as much as I hate to say that).....

 

The only compromise I suppose I would make, is ending the S89 somewhere w/i Mid-Island, short of the mall or ETC..... Where that magical place is though, I haven't a clue.... But I do think running em down to Hylan is wasteful.... Everytime I have seen the SB S89, it's w/i a handful of pax away from carrying air before it even hits the mall - I've been on my fair share of 17J's, 42's, and 10s to realize this (which is something I'm going to start doing after work again btw; fanning SI expresses).....

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying ending it in the north shore is what's best, but it is the immediate thing I would do to the route, short of cutting it (which I wouldn't/don't want to do).....

 

As far as, as many BPH being too much on the S59 (I haven't done the math, so thanks for that), we could always distribute buses elsewhere w/i the system.....

 

That's a good idea. It solves the issue of where to terminate my "S58" on the northern end, and it basically gives the whole Bulls Head/Graniteville area over to the S66 as far as ferry-bound riders are concerned.

 

 

But just so you know, those little side streets between Victory & Watchogue are all too narrow to run a bus along (and Willowbrook Road north of Watchogue lines up with Stewart Avenue south of it). That would be worse than the streets along S46/96 in Mariners Harbor, since I doubt you'll get the residents to agree to ban parking on one side like they do along Brabant Street & Walloon Street.

 

I know the X10/11 run along a block of Willowbrook, but it's slightly wider, and that's along the parking lots of some businesses, so there's no residents to complain.

 

So I think the best way is to just run down Woolley and enter CSI through the back entrance where the S61 stops.

(Ideally, it would run through that gate over by Willowbrook Road, but that enters through the opposite side of the campus from where the S93 ends).

Anything no longer involving the S44 stealing riders from the S59 (and the S61 as well) to/from the mall, it's fine by me (your suggestion, I'm referring to)....

[Threxx]

I posted the following proposals with the service plans (I have the original Word documents on my home computer)

 

Local buses

Express buses

 

The only thing missing is something mentioning the approximate headway. If I make a chart in Excel or Google Docs, I'll post it up.

Obviously I'm not an SI resident so my knowledge is going to be limited... but I find a few things problematic with these plans (most of the changes actually seem good but there is still an elephant in the room)

 

1. Mariners Harbor service seems to get really overcomplicated from these changes, and off peak hours you're deprived of direct service to St. George. I'm not sure how many riders would prefer the S83 to Bay Ridge over the S46 to St. George, but that's something to consider.

If you want to cut back the S46 to improve reliability, perhaps switch western terminals with the S40? it shortens the route a bit so it would be a start. It also seems less necessary to restructure the S46 so significantly if you'll have the S42 along such a long stretch of Castleton Avenue supporting it as well.

 

2. The S59. B35 hit at it somewhat, but you're splitting up the S78 (a super route) to create another super route in the S59. If the point is to make sure there are no more 15+ KM routes on SI, then the southern Hylan portion should become it's own route entirely. The S59 has the most direct route through the island right now, on one of it's busiest streets, so efforts should be focused on improving it as a north-south route.

 

3. The obvious but big problem, is the money. There are some cuts from other routes which is good foresight, but I'm not sure if it's enough to have reinvestments elsewhere. The overall net of these changes is that there will be more routes and likely more service necessary. This would probably require more serious calculation though.

 

I might make some maps in Google Maps of a few of the ideas that you and B35 have thrown around, perhaps put them together a bit better. S/W island service also seems to be a bit overcomplex in your plan, streamlining some of those routes may be a good idea in the long run.

 

EDIT: Said file with the maps: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1e1fhgeMNnXTRNeVs9C62M12vmnM&usp=sharing

 

I'll keep updating it with more routes. The S77 proposal is an attempt to streamline the reconfiguration of the S54 and the Hylan Blvd corridor. The S78 would continue to provide local service to the S79 SBS on the northern portion, while the new "S77" route would provide service to sections of the former S54 as well as the wester portion of Hylan. The northern terminal at Seaview Hospital is probably not optimal, I'm also considering the SI mall as a possible northern terminal.

Edited May 4, 2016 by Threxx

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I posted the following proposals with the service plans (I have the original Word documents on my home computer)

 

Local buses

Express buses

 

The only thing missing is something mentioning the approximate headway. If I make a chart in Excel or Google Docs, I'll post it up.

I know this proposal is not there, but would it be worth it to branch the X10 to serve Mariners Harbor on weekdays (those buses would terminate at Forest Avenue and South Avenue. It would be relatively cost-neutral  if it were to be implemented.

[Threxx]

Slightly off topic but a moderator might want to look into removing the years from this thread... since we obviously aren't in 2013 anymore. A small nitpick but it still bothers me.

[checkmatechamp13]

Another proposal of my own before responding to these comments:

 

Have the northbound S74 (and S84 that I would add/convert some existing trips into) take Targee Street straight to Van Duzer Street. Southbound buses would take Bay-Victory-St. Pauls-Van Duzer. In exchange, the southbound S78 would take Bay Street directly to Water Street, and then continue down Canal Street and Tompkins Avenue from there.

 

This would straighten out the S78, and have it be the primary route serving the Stapleton Houses (of course, the S52 stops along Tompkins as well, but is much more circuitous). The S74 would still be available on Targee/Van Duzer for those towards the "back end" of the Stapleton Houses. It's no worse than the way the buses are routed by the West Brighton Houses.

 

So you have the S74/84 as the quick route for those traveling towards the western part of Stapleton/Park Hill (which is even more important since I have the S76 running down Osgood/Mosel, which is currently slightly faster than the S74), and the S78 as the quick route towards the Tompkins Avenue corridor. So you have two direct lines, as opposed to everything meandering back and forth.

 

Neither, actually.....

 

I was thinking of having buses running up Morningstar to Innis, then doing the S46 route to Pt Richmond av, en route to the terminal in Pt. Richmond....

 

Seems reasonable. Would the goal be to straighten the S46 out (say, Walker-Port Richmond-Castleton), or just to provide some more coverage in Port Richmond (as far as connecting to Richmond Avenue goes)?

 

Northern portion of the S78 (rebranded as the "S58", with a new corresponding LTD being the "S88") running b/w St George & New Dorp / Oakwood

 

Southern portion of the S78 (keeping the S78 notation) running b/w Tottenville (Amboy/Main) & Fingerboard/Narrows Rd.

 

I'll draw a map of both of them later on today when I get back.....

 

I'll say this: In terms of providing a direct ride to the current S78 ridership base, you got it down-pat. North Shore riders usually fizzle out by New Dorp, and riders from the South Shore usually don't ride north of Clove. It's a pretty long stretch of overlap (New Dorp-Arrochar), but at the same time, ridership north of New Dorp is higher than ridership south of it, so it's reasonable.

 

I'm not wild about ending just before the bridge and not continuing, but obviously, a long route on (likely) coverage-level headways, you can't really have it getting involved in the overcrowding and traffic going over the bridge.

 

The 55 & the 56....

 

The Tottenville HS thing's got to stop, like yesterday..... And to think, once upon a time, both of those routes ended @ Luten/Eyelandt..... No bus route should be terminating there full time....

 

I assume you'll probably have one big map for your South Shore restructuring plan.

 

That's what I'm aiming for - to have w/e intra-SI ridership on the S89 all go to the S59..... My issue w/ the S89 isn't unreliability at all (you said it yourself, Richmond av is a pretty quick corridor [especially the more north you go], it's the fact that it's yet another route that takes away from the S59.... My train of thought is & always have been, the S59 should be the quintessential north-south route in the whole island.... The MTA does not treat it as such - especially when they have the thing retardedly running to freakin Tottenville part time.... Virtually no one w/i Mid-Island or the North shore benefits from this crap..... To me, it's like running a prominent route like the S53 to West shore Plaza.... It's all in the name of frugality, much like, the SI local bus system, period (as much as I hate to say that).....

 

The only compromise I suppose I would make, is ending the S89 somewhere w/i Mid-Island, short of the mall or ETC..... Where that magical place is though, I haven't a clue.... But I do think running em down to Hylan is wasteful.... Everytime I have seen the SB S89, it's w/i a handful of pax away from carrying air before it even hits the mall - I've been on my fair share of 17J's, 42's, and 10s to realize this (which is something I'm going to start doing after work again btw; fanning SI expresses).....

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying ending it in the north shore is what's best, but it is the immediate thing I would do to the route, short of cutting it (which I wouldn't/don't want to do).....

 

As far as, as many BPH being too much on the S59 (I haven't done the math, so thanks for that), we could always distribute buses elsewhere w/i the system.....

 

I think the part in red is where where our disagreement is stemming from. The way I've seen it all these years, the S59 has always played second fiddle to the S44 & S79, so to see somebody advocating for it to be the primary north-south route on the island seems rather odd to me. Whenever I have to go home from Eltingville (either the SIR station or Transit Center), I have no qualms about taking the S79 to the S44. 

 

I get why you're advocating for it, since the S44 & S79 have their own ridership bases to serve outside of the Richmond Avenue corridor. 

 

As for the 10 BPH comment, I was referring to putting them all on a single route, not the idea that 10 BPH is too much for the corridor (toss in the trippers and the S89 and it comes out to a lot more than that) Again, it probably just comes down to the idea of it being odd to see the S59 being beefed up like that as a singular route.

 

The way I see it, Port Richmond/Elm Park, while a big source of ridership for the Richmond Avenue corridor doesn't make that much of a proportion of the ridership where you have to make sure every single Richmond Avenue bus goes up to Port Richmond. Limited or not, you can just look at the S89 as a third branch of the Richmond Avenue route. So you'd have Port Richmond via Morningstar, Port Richmond via Port Richmond (lol) and then Bayonne via Morningstar. Ridership south of Forest (inclusive) is high enough that you can still fill up buses from any of the three branches.

 

I see a problem in focusing too much on the route designation that's getting the ridership, rather than the ridership itself. If headways on the trunk portion of the route are evenly spaced, and there's sufficient capacity to meet demand, then I don't see the problem in having branches to where the people need to go.

 

Also, another problem I realized is that you'd probably have to turn back anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of your buses at the SI Mall (coming from the north), for the sake of avoiding an excess of service south of that point. The mall is (obviously) a big turnover point on all the Richmond Avenue routes, but when you throw the S79 into the mix, you're running way more service south of it, than north of it.

 

Mariners Harbor service seems to get really overcomplicated from these changes, and off peak hours you're deprived of direct service to St. George. I'm not sure how many riders would prefer the S83 to Bay Ridge over the S46 to St. George, but that's something to consider.

If you want to cut back the S46 to improve reliability, perhaps switch western terminals with the S40? it shortens the route a bit so it would be a start. It also seems less necessary to restructure the S46 so significantly if you'll have the S42 along such a long stretch of Castleton Avenue supporting it as well.

 

The thing is that the S46 as-is gets a lot of intra-island ridership. Stops like Broadway and Port Richmond Avenue see heavy westbound ridership in addition to heavy eastbound ridership. A lot of residents already make their way to Richmond Terrace from S46 "territory" if they're heading to St. George (where I'm sure you know, time is of the essence when trying to catch the ferry). A good chunk of Mariners Harbor riders are only traveling to Port Richmond or West Brighton anyway, so they'll simply be taking the S83 instead of the S46/96.

 

I do see your point about it being supplemented by the S42 (as a matter of fact, I actually considered just giving that whole corridor over to the S42, and just short-turn half the buses at Clove Road). Of course the problem is that looping through the Cottage Hill area means it takes longer to reach St. George, and on top of that, it doesn't serve the Tompkinsville area (including of course, the Victory/Bay intersection). In that case, I would just run the S95 all day. 

 

IMO, if you had the S83 running from Port Richmond to Bay Ridge, and the S53 running from West Brighton to Bay Ridge, I could easily see the S83 justifying 15 minute midday headways. If it only justified 30 minute headways, I'd say sure just run the S83 to Arlington as a supplementary route. But on 15 minute headways, on top of the 15 minute headways on the S46, that's overserving Mariners Harbor.

 

And the thing is that if you tried to force a service pattern where the S83 only justifies 30 minute headways, it doesn't do justice to the people seeking service to Bay Ridge from the North Shore. While it's better than the current situation, I wouldn't want a situation where the MTA just added an S83 every 30 minutes to the existing S53 service.

 

The S59. B35 hit at it somewhat, but you're splitting up the S78 (a super route) to create another super route in the S59. If the point is to make sure there are no more 15+ KM routes on SI, then the southern Hylan portion should become it's own route entirely. The S59 has the most direct route through the island right now, on one of it's busiest streets, so efforts should be focused on improving it as a north-south route.

 

I don't think I'm really "creating" a super-route, since the S59 runs that pattern during rush hours already. Maybe "reinforcing" or another term might be appropriate.

 

The thing with the current S78 is that Hylan Blvd is a lot more congested than Richmond Avenue. In all my years of living here, I only recall one time when I saw Richmond Avenue with bumper-to-bumper traffic (it was between roughly Rockland Avenue and Victory Blvd heading northbound. Probably something happened on Victory itself that caused traffic to back up along Richmond). Along Richmond, at most, you might miss a light cycle or two if you're really unlucky. Compared to Hylan Blvd, where there's stretches where you'll just sit there and crawl (especially in the New Dorp area). The bus lane helps of course, but only when and where it's in effect.

 

And on top of that, the S78 is tied to the ferry schedule (so if the bus is held by 5 minutes because the ferry is late, right away it's off to a bad start). And of course, the Bricktown extension didn't help matters.

 

The obvious but big problem, is the money. There are some cuts from other routes which is good foresight, but I'm not sure if it's enough to have reinvestments elsewhere. The overall net of these changes is that there will be more routes and likely more service necessary. This would probably require more serious calculation though.

 

I didn't do calculations down to the last dollar, but in general, the cost is minimal. With the S57/66, the main cost is the weekend service. With the S42/54, you have the cost of the weekend service, plus the cost of the S75 (which you could cut into S79 service a bit, since it's basically the local supplement to the S79). 

 

And the idea is to have more direct routes to St. George, so you minimize the amount of double buses during rush hour (when all the deadheading and split shifts adds to the cost). So for example, I know off the top of my head, there's a few intervals with two S96s, two S90s, two S91s (or an S61 & S91 when the S62 & S66 already cover all the local stops).

 

So for example, there's two S40s, two S90s and two S96s meeting the 5:10PM ferry arrival. An S42 replaces one of the S40s, and an S95 replaces an S90 and S96.

 

The S74 truncation to/from Narrows Road North during rush hours will also result in some savings. Same thing with the S76 in the morning (in the afternoon, buses already end at Clove). (The S84/86 cover riders traveling south of the SIE in the peak direction).

 

And then of course, there's the increased ridership which would generate some extra revenue as well.

 

EDIT: Said file with the maps: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1e1fhgeMNnXTRNeVs9C62M12vmnM&usp=sharing

I'll keep updating it with more routes. The S77 proposal is an attempt to streamline the reconfiguration of the S54 and the Hylan Blvd corridor. The S78 would continue to provide local service to the S79 SBS on the northern portion, while the new "S77" route would provide service to sections of the former S54 as well as the wester portion of Hylan. The northern terminal at Seaview Hospital is probably not optimal, I'm also considering the SI mall as a possible northern terminal.

 

The SI Mall would definitely be a better terminal than Seaview. I don't even have to think twice about that (also, don't underestimate the potential for traffic in the Greenbelt). Just keep in mind that the school zone for Susan Wagner High School extends to Great Kills for some reason (I wouldn't be surprised if that reason was because of the S54 itself), so you would still need some trippers to/from that school (they could run straight down Manor like the trippers currently do)

 

The connection to the SI Mall should increase ridership compared to the present-day S54 in that area. But I'm still not wild about having it go to Tottenville on the southern end. And like I said, it shouldn't loop through Tottenville to serve Bricktown. Have something run through Bricktown from the east and then continue down to Tottenville (I personally have the western split of the S74 doing it. If you want to send the S55 or S56 through there, that might work too)

 

I know this proposal is not there, but would it be worth it to branch the X10 to serve Mariners Harbor on weekdays (those buses would terminate at Forest Avenue and South Avenue. It would be relatively cost-neutral  if it were to be implemented.

 

I've mentioned it a couple of times, and I'm neutral on the idea. Ridership-wise, it definitely makes sense, I'd say you'd probably get a little more ridership on the Forest Avenue branch than the Port Richmond branch. The only problem is that the X10 tends to bunch, even on 30 minute headways, which is obviously problematic when the individual branches run every 60 minutes.

[Threxx]

Some reworked ideas:

 

S44/94: St. George - College of SI via Henderson/Cary. Takes a minor hit in service since the route no longer doubles with the S59 on Richmond and no longer serves SI Mall. This service would be reinvested into the S59 and the new S77 route (S59 part time service to Tottenville would be eliminated.)

 

S55: College of SI - Perth Amboy, via Annandale/Amboy and Bricktown Mall. Follows current S59 route north of Eltingville Transit Center, then runs via Victory Blvd to the College of SI. Covers service on Richmond lost from S44 and provides a connection to Central Jersey.

 

S56: SI Mall - Bricktown Mall via Woodrow/Amboy. Interlines with the S73 (western half of current S74) on both ends. Rerouted to use the X23 route on Woodrow Road. (Shorter S72/73 means that route is more reliable to cover that corridor on its own). Weekday service only. (Use S55 or S72 for service to Bricktown weekends)

 

S72/73: SI Mall - Bricktown Mall via Arthur Kill. Interlines with the S56 on both ends. Same as checkmate's proposal otherwise.

 

S77: SI Mall - Tottenville/Amboy Road via Hylan. From SI Mall, runs Richmond Hill Rd-Arthur Kill Rd-Giffords Ln-Nelson Ave-Hylan Blvd, covering the southern half of the S54. Takes some service from S59 rush hours to cover eastern Hylan Blvd.

S78: St. George - Richmond/Hylan via Hylan. Approx. half of buses turn at New Dorp station.

I'll make maps of these later, but this i think should help western SI service a bit better.

[checkmatechamp13]

Some reworked ideas:

 

S44/94: St. George - College of SI via Henderson/Cary. Takes a minor hit in service since the route no longer doubles with the S59 on Richmond and no longer serves SI Mall. This service would be reinvested into the S59 and the new S77 route (S59 part time service to Tottenville would be eliminated.)

 

S55: College of SI - Perth Amboy, via Annandale/Amboy and Bricktown Mall. Follows current S59 route north of Eltingville Transit Center, then runs via Victory Blvd to the College of SI. Covers service on Richmond lost from S44 and provides a connection to Central Jersey.

 

S56: SI Mall - Bricktown Mall via Woodrow/Amboy. Interlines with the S73 (western half of current S74) on both ends. Rerouted to use the X23 route on Woodrow Road. (Shorter S72/73 means that route is more reliable to cover that corridor on its own). Weekday service only. (Use S55 or S72 for service to Bricktown weekends)

 

S72/73: SI Mall - Bricktown Mall via Arthur Kill. Interlines with the S56 on both ends. Same as checkmate's proposal otherwise.

 

S77: SI Mall - Tottenville/Amboy Road via Hylan. From SI Mall, runs Richmond Hill Rd-Arthur Kill Rd-Giffords Ln-Nelson Ave-Hylan Blvd, covering the southern half of the S54. Takes some service from S59 rush hours to cover eastern Hylan Blvd.

 

S78: St. George - Richmond/Hylan via Hylan. Approx. half of buses turn at New Dorp station.

 

I'll make maps of these later, but this i think should help western SI service a bit better.

 

I don't see a need to have the S55 serve CSI via Richmond Avenue. It's a longer route (both because of the longer route to the center of the campus, and because you're traveling along the most traffic-prone part of Victory Blvd). Just run the S55 up through Forest Hill Road and use the buses that you saved to add service to the S59 directly.

 

I'm not sure if you plan on covering the Arden Avenue service gap and the gap you created between Bricktown and Tottenville with a separate route or something, but basically, the reason I had the S55 run the way it did (along Arden) was because Woodrow is already close to the northern part of Annadale Road (look at the S55 stops on BusTime and see that they line straight up with streets that connect to Woodrow). South of Drumgoogle, the Richmond Avenue routes are a few blocks to the east, and the western side of Annadale Road is mostly parkland. I'd rather create a smaller service gap on Annadale Road instead of a larger one along Arden Avenue. (And the bonus is that it provides a direct link from that corridor to the Annadale SIR station and Tottenville High School). 

 

BTW, on the S78, are you referring to the New Dorp SIR station, or just New Dorp/Hylan?

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

You do realize what you're proposing is ridiculous? What you're trying to say indirectly is force riders to use the routes that run along Father Capodanno which is not nearly as important as Hylan Blvd. in terms of major arteries.

From Random thoughts Thread:

 

I did propose something similar to what checkmate was saying in my edit post in reply towards your comment

 

 

As for adding service on the variants, perhaps you could have the X1 not run during the AM rush as mentioned, and redistribute those 23 buses, with 8 being for X7 service, 6 for X9 service, 7 for X4 service (this is because the X4 starts after after the 23 Street Short-turns begin, by about an hour, in addition to some addition in service), and 2 on the X3.

 

In the afternoon, there's 37 X1 short-turns. 9 of those would go for X7 service, 7 of those for X9 service, 9 of those for X4 service, and 10 for the X3 service (a lot has to do because of its span of service and headway). 

 

The number of PM buses used goes down by 2, and the AM buses used stays the same. However, DH's change on the X3/X4 trips (IDK if X3/4 buses just go to/from MJQ or SI after the AM and before the PM, if so, perhaps that can save money if BO's have a midday run or something, and end before the PM; I know some depots do that after pulling in).

 

 

I mean, while Father Capodanno is less busy, there is a bit of an overlap between Midland Avenue and the New Dorp Terminal near Hylan Plaza, so headways wouldn't be such a problem, if they're distributed right enough.

 

So, there's 23 AM buses, which I mentioned above could be distributed between the 4 routes. Here's how the new schedules would look like (which has been modified from the original proposal).

 

 

 

X3 From New Dorp

5:18, 5:38, 5:58, 6:18, 6:29, 6:38, 6:47, 6:55, 7:03, 7:11, 7:18, 7:25, 7:31, 7:38, 7:45, 7:55, 8:05, 8:25 (18 buses compared to 13 buses)

 

X4 From Eltingville

4:55, 5:10, 5:25, 5:40, 5:52, 6:04, 6:16, 6:25, 6:34, 6:43, 6:52, 7:01, 7:10, 7:19, 7:28, 7:37, 7:46, 7:55, 8:05, 8:25 (20 buses compared to 13 buses)

 

X9 From New Dorp

5:05, 5:20, 5:32, 5:44, 5:56, 6:08, 6:18, 6:27, 6:36, 6:41, 6:46, 6:51, 6:56, 7:01, 7:06, 7:11, 7:16, 7:21, 7:26, 7:31, 7:36, 7:42, 7:50, 7:59, 8:10, 8:25 (26 buses compared to 22 buses)

 

X7 From Eltingville

4:50, 5:02, 5:11, 5:20, 5:29, 5:38, 5:46, 5:53, 6:00, 6:06, 6:12, 6:18, 6:24, 6:30, 6:34, 6:40, 6:44, 6:48, 6:52, 6:55, 6:58, 7:02, 7:06, 7:10, 7:14, 7:18, 7:22, 7:26, 7:30, 7:34, 7:39, 7:44, 7:49, 7:56, 8:04, 8:12, 8:22, 8:32, 8:50 (39 buses compared to 34 buses).

 

 

 

 

The extra headways account on the X4 and X3 account the addition of X1 riders going only towards Downtown. The extra headways on the X7 and X9 account for riders going north of Houston Street. The X3 current has a peak headway of 6-7 minutes, the X4 has a peak headway of 10 minutes, the X7 has a peak headway of 4 minutes, and the X9 has a peak headway of 6 minutes. That would stay relatively the same on the X3 and X7, and go down to 5 minutes on the X9, and 9 minutes on the X4. 

Edited August 6, 2016 by BM5 via WOODHAVEN BL

[Via Garibaldi 8]

From Random thoughts Thread:

 

I did propose something similar to what checkmate was saying in my edit post in reply towards your comment

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, while Father Capodanno is less busy, there is a bit of an overlap between Midland Avenue and the New Dorp Terminal near Hylan Plaza, so headways wouldn't be such a problem, if they're distributed right enough.

 

So, there's 23 AM buses, which I mentioned above could be distributed between the 4 routes. Here's how the new schedules would look like (which has been modified from the original proposal).

 

 

 

X3 From New Dorp

5:18, 5:38, 5:58, 6:18, 6:29, 6:38, 6:47, 6:55, 7:03, 7:11, 7:18, 7:25, 7:31, 7:38, 7:45, 7:55, 8:05, 8:25 (18 buses compared to 13 buses)

 

X4 From Eltingville

4:55, 5:10, 5:25, 5:40, 5:52, 6:04, 6:16, 6:25, 6:34, 6:43, 6:52, 7:01, 7:10, 7:19, 7:28, 7:37, 7:46, 7:55, 8:05, 8:25 (20 buses compared to 13 buses)

 

X9 From New Dorp

5:05, 5:20, 5:32, 5:44, 5:56, 6:08, 6:18, 6:27, 6:36, 6:41, 6:46, 6:51, 6:56, 7:01, 7:06, 7:11, 7:16, 7:21, 7:26, 7:31, 7:36, 7:42, 7:50, 7:59, 8:10, 8:25 (26 buses compared to 22 buses)

 

X7 From Eltingville

4:50, 5:02, 5:11, 5:20, 5:29, 5:38, 5:46, 5:53, 6:00, 6:06, 6:12, 6:18, 6:24, 6:30, 6:34, 6:40, 6:44, 6:48, 6:52, 6:55, 6:58, 7:02, 7:06, 7:10, 7:14, 7:18, 7:22, 7:26, 7:30, 7:34, 7:39, 7:44, 7:49, 7:56, 8:04, 8:12, 8:22, 8:32, 8:50 (39 buses compared to 34 buses).

 

 

 

 

The extra headways account on the X4 and X3 account the addition of X1 riders going only towards Downtown. The extra headways on the X7 and X9 account for riders going north of Houston Street. The X3 current has a peak headway of 6-7 minutes, the X4 has a peak headway of 10 minutes, the X7 has a peak headway of 4 minutes, and the X9 has a peak headway of 6 minutes. That would stay relatively the same on the X3 and X7, and go down to 5 minutes on the X9, and 9 minutes on the X4.

 

The thing is there are already enough complaints about some of the express buses running down Father Capodanno as it is. Additionally, you would have too many complaints about not enough service along Hylan Blvd. I strongly suspect the X1 runs the way it does for that reason... Too many missing buses on the variants. Aside from that you can't just yank service from a main corridor like Hylan Blvd.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

The thing is there are already enough complaints about some of the express buses running down Father Capodanno as it is. Additionally, you would have too many complaints about not enough service along Hylan Blvd. I strongly suspect the X1 runs the way it does for that reason... Too many missing buses on the variants. Aside from that you can't just yank service from a main corridor like Hylan Blvd.

 

Well yeah, that's true, but you have to also take into account other things.  With the proposal mentioned above during the height of the rush hour in the AM, yes, there will be less bph, but not by a monstrous amount (there would be 18 on the X3/X9 compared to 23 as it is with the X1, X3, and X9. In addition, those X3 and X9 buses all start in New Dorp, so that means that there would be emptier buses right after Midland Avenue than the traditional set-up. There are no buses which come from Eltingville with people from south of New Dorp anymore. From Hylan Plaza to Midland Avenue, the same number of buses is being kept, so there's no problem there.

 

South of Hylan Plaza, the same thing exists (overall bph is 5 buses less than with the X1). However, since buses aren't going on Hylan north of Midland Avenue, they won't have to deal with riders north of Midland Avenue (the X3/X9 will). In addition, those buses will typically be more frequent than the northern section of Hylan Blvd, so riders between Hylan Plaza and Midland Avenue would have a better chance of catching the X4 and X7 over the X3 and X9, so the latter two will have more seats open for riders on Hylan Blvd north of Midland Avenue.

 

In the afternoon (the way it came out when I tried scheduling those trips), the bus going south of New Dorp would almost always pass first, so that means that riders North of Midland Avenue would have most people riding to only North of Midland Avenue on the X3 and X9. 

 

The only other thing to do without having the MTA allocate additional resources would be have more people take X24's (IDK, but I feel like those buses aren't used much along Hylan, when it could be used in certain areas to/from get to points north of 42 Street much quicker in many cases).

Edited August 6, 2016 by BM5 via WOODHAVEN BL

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Well yeah, that's true, but you have to also take into account other things.  With the proposal mentioned above during the height of the rush hour in the AM, yes, there will be less bph, but not by a monstrous amount (there would be 18 on the X3/X9 compared to 23 as it is with the X1, X3, and X9. In addition, those X3 and X9 buses all start in New Dorp, so that means that there would be emptier buses right after Midland Avenue than the traditional set-up. There are no buses which come from Eltingville with people from south of New Dorp anymore. From Hylan Plaza to Midland Avenue, the same number of buses is being kept, so there's no problem there.

 

South of Hylan Plaza, the same thing exists (overall bph is 5 buses less than with the X1). However, since buses aren't going on Hylan north of Midland Avenue, they won't have to deal with riders north of Midland Avenue (the X3/X9 will). In addition, those buses will typically be more frequent than the northern section of Hylan Blvd, so riders between Hylan Plaza and Midland Avenue would have a better chance of catching the X4 and X7 over the X3 and X9, so the latter two will have more seats open for riders on Hylan Blvd north of Midland Avenue.

 

In the afternoon (the way it came out when I tried scheduling those trips), the bus going south of New Dorp would almost always pass first, so that means that riders North of Midland Avenue would have most people riding to only North of Midland Avenue on the X3 and X9. 

 

The only other thing to do without having the MTA allocate additional resources would be have more people take X24's (IDK, but I feel like those buses aren't used much along Hylan, when it could be used in certain areas to/from get to points north of 42 Street much quicker in many cases).

I think the X1 just serves too many neighborhoods to the be yanked during the rush with no replacement along Hylan Blvd.

[checkmatechamp13]

 Delete

Edited August 7, 2016 by checkmatechamp13

[checkmatechamp13]

The thing is there are already enough complaints about some of the express buses running down Father Capodanno as it is. Additionally, you would have too many complaints about not enough service along Hylan Blvd. I strongly suspect the X1 runs the way it does for that reason... Too many missing buses on the variants. Aside from that you can't just yank service from a main corridor like Hylan Blvd.

 

The people on Hylan Blvd (north of Midland) would be served by emptier buses starting/ending in New Dorp. Both passengers north of Midland and south of Tysens Lane would receive more frequent service on the remaining routes. (And passengers south of Tysens Lane won't have to deal with the extra time spent along Hylan because the X4 & X7 would be more frequent, since Father Capodanno is slightly quicker. There's a reason the ETC routes use Father Capodanno instead of Hylan and not the other way around). 

 

And if the buses remain within the guideline loads, there's no problem, whether it's a major corridor or not. There's still going to be enough capacity for all the people.

 

I think the X1 just serves too many neighborhoods to the be yanked during the rush with no replacement along Hylan Blvd.

 

It already has the X2-9 serving the riders. That's like saying the X17C should run at the height of rush hour in addition to the X17A & X17J (and remember that the X17 is the second-busiest express route after the X1)

 

You're acting like we want to pull 8-12 buses per hour off the Hylan corridor entirely. We're still using approximately the same levels of overall service.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The people on Hylan Blvd (north of Midland) would be served by emptier buses starting/ending in New Dorp. Both passengers north of Midland and south of Tysens Lane would receive more frequent service on the remaining routes. (And passengers south of Tysens Lane won't have to deal with the extra time spent along Hylan because the X4 & X7 would be more frequent, since Father Capodanno is slightly quicker. There's a reason the ETC routes use Father Capodanno instead of Hylan and not the other way around). 

 

And if the buses remain within the guideline loads, there's no problem, whether it's a major corridor or not. There's still going to be enough capacity for all the people.

 

 

It already has the X2-9 serving the riders. That's like saying the X17C should run at the height of rush hour in addition to the X17A & X17J (and remember that the X17 is the second-busiest express route after the X1)

 

You're acting like we want to pull 8-12 buses per hour off the Hylan corridor entirely. We're still using approximately the same levels of overall service.

You know exactly what you're proposing, which is to make it more inconvenient for riders that would normally go to Hylan Blvd for express bus service.  Restructuring is needed across the board IMO, not just with the X1 because there are a lot of other buses that should have better service and the riders of those lines are running to the X1 instead.  A perfect example is the X15.  That bus runs like crap in the morning.  Quite frankly I used to go and try to take that in but it ran so erratic that it wasn't worth it, and I just went to Hylan Blvd. instead.  Ultimately the needs to fully understand where ALL of the ridership comes from across the board and then make changes.  

[B35 via Church]

To me, it is as simple as this:

 

North shore needs more reliable express bus service.... This is why you even have the phenomena of north shore patrons being willing to make their way to Hylan for express bus service.... When you think of express bus service in Staten Island, you think of Hylan Blvd - that right there is a huge problem.

 

You look at how express bus service is divvied up in the Bronx, you look at how imbalanced express bus service is (allocated) on Staten Island, and the problem is quite glaring..... It's not even about BPH on one route vs another AFAIC; it is a "regional" issue....

 

In a word, Politics.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

To me, it is as simple as this:

 

North shore needs more reliable express bus service.... This is why you even have the phenomena of north shore patrons being willing to make their way to Hylan for express bus service.... When you think of express bus service in Staten Island, you think of Hylan Blvd - that right there is a huge problem.

 

You look at how express bus service is divvied up in the Bronx, you look at how imbalanced express bus service is (allocated) on Staten Island, and the problem is quite glaring..... It's not even about BPH on one route vs another AFAIC; it is a "regional" issue....

 

In a word, Politics.

It's been political for as long as I could remember... What really clarified it was when I wrote a letter to Michael Grimm's office shortly after he was elected about express bus service (particularly on the North Shore), and he had the nerve to respond talking about how yeah, he had received complaints about it and was addressing it, but the response along with his actions made it clear how he was responding to it... He was only addressing express bus service for the South Shore (when he took office, there was nothing but news articles about him working specifically with other South Shore politicians like Vincent Ignizio to improve service on lines like the X22), and basically giving a big F-you to the North Shore, even though many of us (myself included) voted for him because we wanted McMahon out (another one that did nothing transportation wise for the North Shore).  The only politician that has really advocated for all of Staten Island with regards to express bus service was Vito Fossella, and even he didn't really specifically address service on the North Shore.  What he did do however was fought to get the HOV lanes implemented and he was in direct communication with many of us via e-mail, which was greatly appreciated.  However, he often times would call for better express bus service, but it was usually directed at lines like the X1, and the definitely responded, because the X1 improved, and you would see sometimes six express buses within a fairly short span while I waited for car service along Hylan Blvd, so they were running like water.

 

Meanwhile the few politicians that represent the North Shore like Debbie Rose are totally useless.  It actually infuriated me when I lived on the Island that I basically had no one fighting for me and my needs.  Where I'm at now, I write to my elected officials and they are very responsive.  Huge difference... Definitely political and perhaps to some extent money related, even though there are quite a few affluent neighborhoods on the North Shore, but the South Shore is always treated as if it is better than the North Shore in every way (richer, safer, etc.), when that really isn't the case overall.  

Edited August 8, 2016 by Via Garibaldi 8

[checkmatechamp13]

You know exactly what you're proposing, which is to make it more inconvenient for riders that would normally go to Hylan Blvd for express bus service.  Restructuring is needed across the board IMO, not just with the X1 because there are a lot of other buses that should have better service and the riders of those lines are running to the X1 instead.  A perfect example is the X15.  That bus runs like crap in the morning.  Quite frankly I used to go and try to take that in but it ran so erratic that it wasn't worth it, and I just went to Hylan Blvd. instead.  Ultimately the needs to fully understand where ALL of the ridership comes from across the board and then make changes.  

 

Yeah, being forced to make that loop down to Battery Place on the X1 (with the traffic from cars and a bunch of other express buses doing the same thing) is soooo much more convenient than just making a right onto West Street on the X7 or X9 and going directly where you need to go.   And being flagged by overcrowded and delayed X1s coming from 23rd Street is so much more convenient than waiting for an X3 or X4 starting Downtown.

 

As for unreliable service, that's it's own issue to be addressed. They have to stop being cheap and actually fill in the runs when B/Os call out or whatever. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Yeah, being forced to make that loop down to Battery Place on the X1 (with the traffic from cars and a bunch of other express buses doing the same thing) is soooo much more convenient than just making a right onto West Street on the X7 or X9 and going directly where you need to go.   And being flagged by overcrowded and delayed X1s coming from 23rd Street is so much more convenient than waiting for an X3 or X4 starting Downtown.

 

As for unreliable service, that's it's own issue to be addressed. They have to stop being cheap and actually fill in the runs when B/Os call out or whatever. 

It's definitely something... I know that the X5 has been a problem for a while with missing buses... Same deal with the X3 and X4... I don't have a problem switching the service to the branches, but it must meet demand.  That was the main problem before and why I believe they switched back to running more X1 service.  I think the X21 is just the start of more changes to come.

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

I notice this every morning, X15 riders get off at Narrows & Hylan and get on other express buses. Why? Are they paying double?

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I notice this every morning, X15 riders get off at Narrows & Hylan and get on other express buses. Why? Are they paying double?

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Because they likely need West Midtown or East Midtown and don't want to take the subway.  The X15 runs through areas south of the SIE that aren't served by Midtown express bus service.  And no they aren't paying double.  There's a few transfer points for express buses on Staten Island (Fingerboard Rd is one of them).  The X14 currently serves as a transfer express bus in Manhattan (unofficially). That first stop where it drops off, you will see people get on there either for service along Water Street or to Midtown.  Not shocked at all... I've rode with plenty of folks on Staten Island that make it very clear that they do NOT like riding the subway (or local bus for that matter) and will transfer between express buses within Staten Island going to or from Manhattan.

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

Because they likely need West Midtown or East Midtown and don't want to take the subway. The X15 runs through areas south of the SIE that aren't served by Midtown express bus service. And no they aren't paying double. There's a few transfer points for express buses on Staten Island (Fingerboard Rd is one of them). The X14 currently serves as a transfer express bus in Manhattan (unofficially). That first stop where it drops off, you will see people get on there either for service along Water Street or to Midtown. Not shocked at all... I've rode with plenty of folks on Staten Island that make it very clear that they do NOT like riding the subway (or local bus for that matter) and will transfer between express buses within Staten Island going to or from Manhattan.

Thats true, that whole area, Todt Hill, & all along Richmond Rd, only have the X15, which is Downtown. So, how does that work? When you get on the X15, do you say "I'm only going to Narrows & Hylan"? And then pay on your next bus?

 

Same thing I guess for the X14?

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Edited August 9, 2016 by XcelsiorBoii4888