Staten Island Bus Proposal Thread 2012-2013

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1. Alright, so some of those riders are people coming from other parts of Staten Island. Doesn't change the fact that Hylan Blvd is a busy corridor in its own right. The question is (which is why I said I'm tossing it off the wall) is, is there enough ridership on Hylan to sustain a branch that goes up the West Side of Manhattan and across 42nd Street (or another crosstown street)? Or would the lack of frequency make it better to just stick with the existing services that are slower but run more frequently? (In other words, West Side riders are just going to have to make due with the X7/9)

 

2. Right, so I would solve the fact that the S54 doesn't run on the weekends by running it on the weekends, and extending it to the ferry (and creating a branch of the S79 to cover the Great Kills portion) so that it has more connections available to generate more ridership.

 

As for using the savings for other services, well by definition, running the S54 on the weekends is adding service (and that's the only way you could justify having the S57 bypass Seaview), so even within that plan it requires the MTA to use funds to improve service (and aside from the fact that it's an improvement from current service levels with no weekend service, it's even an improvement compared to the old S42 & S54 because it improves connectivity and takes pressure off busier routes).

 

I mean, as it is right now, the S54 & S57 are usually scheduled very closely together (you'll be pulling out of one of the loops and see the other bus entering the loop from the other side), so you have two buses looping through the whole campus, and maybe one of them picks up or drops off a passenger. I don't think you'd be saying it's "stupid" to save 3-4 minutes if it gets you to your connection in time to not have to wait a whole 30 minutes or whatever the headway might be for the next bus or SIR train.

1. Yes, but part of the reason that it is a busy corridor is because of the frequent service.  You have people coming from the North Shore to use the buses along Hylan Blvd because they don't have good service in their own areas and that's a problem.  It inflates the numbers of the express buses along Hylan Blvd.  The had to know that when they cut service on the North Shore, that people weren't just all going to go the ferry.  Not happening.  It's not just cut service either but buses like the X14 now serving Downtown forcing riders to drive to lines like the X2.

 

2. Ok fine, but there's no need to eliminate the loop when it's only saving 3-4 minutes, especially when riders are getting nothing in return by way of additional service. You know that those so called savings you're referring to won't be used to improve bus service else where on the island.  If it was then maybe I wouldn't mind it as much.

 

3. Going back to your West Side question, what exactly would the routing be?  No stops along the West Side to 42nd? Having used that route, when the X30 was a mess, I can say that it isn't that quick.  Perhaps a better option would be to beef up the X21 with more frequent service, which is what passengers have been requesting.

[checkmatechamp13]

1. Alright, so there's nothing to disagree on then. Hylan Blvd has high ridership, and the high frequencies attract even more ridership. 

 

2. Except they are. Neighborhoods along the S42 & S54 would see weekend service. Westerleigh, West Brighton, New Brighton, etc

 

3. Yes, that's what I had in mind, the West Side Highway and 10th Avenue over to 42nd Street. I was basically thinking of a version of the X21 for people along Hylan Blvd (the X21 ends at Hylan & Richmond, and if anything, it's mostly serving former X17 & X23 riders).

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1. Alright, so there's nothing to disagree on then. Hylan Blvd has high ridership, and the high frequencies attract even more ridership.

 

2. Except they are. Neighborhoods along the S42 & S54 would see weekend service. Westerleigh, West Brighton, New Brighton, etc

 

3. Yes, that's what I had in mind, the West Side Highway and 10th Avenue over to 42nd Street. I was basically thinking of a version of the X21 for people along Hylan Blvd (the X21 ends at Hylan & Richmond, and if anything, it's mostly serving former X17 & X23 riders).

1. There is because ridership along Hylan is being propped up by people that don't have adequate express bus service elsewhere, which includes Father Capodanno Blvd. If you had service restored on the North Shore, reliable bus service along Father Capodanno and elsewhere, those numbers along Hylan would go down. The politicians on the South Shore have had the (MTA)'s ear now for years, and part of that is because they've argued that the South Shore needs more express bus service because of the growing population, and they can point to the numbers along the Hylan Blvd corridor as "proof". The question is how much of that growth is actually from legitimate ridership on the South Shore? Likely not as high as it seems.

 

2.Yes while losing service to the campus... Given the fact this has been a major complaint from various Staten Island residents, it makes no sense to run weekend service and offer it to more areas, and then turn around and cut off access to the campus to save a measley 3-4 minutes.

 

3. I see. I don't know how successful that would be. I would have a study conducted first to see how many people would use such a service and then see what sort of issues could arise should it be implemented.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Via Garibaldi 8

[CDTA]

And I have the actual ridership numbers for those stops, since you want to be stupid, talking about how I'm claiming low ridership....it's about 33 people per day getting on at the stops within the loop, and only 24 of those are actually going to the hospital stops (the remaining ones are going to the stops right next to Brielle Avenue, which are basically right next to the stops on Brielle Avenue itself).

Is this data available for other stops?

[checkmatechamp13]

1. There is because ridership along Hylan is being propped up by people that don't have adequate express bus service elsewhere, which includes Father Capodanno Blvd. If you had service restored on the North Shore, reliable bus service along Father Capodanno and elsewhere, those numbers along Hylan would go down. The politicians on the South Shore have had the (MTA)'s ear now for years, and part of that is because they've argued that the South Shore needs more express bus service because of the growing population, and they can point to the numbers along the Hylan Blvd corridor as "proof". The question is how much of that growth is actually from legitimate ridership on the South Shore? Likely not as high as it seems.

 

2.Yes while losing service to the campus... Given the fact this has been a major complaint from various Staten Island residents, it makes no sense to run weekend service and offer it to more areas, and then turn around and cut off access to the campus to save a measley 3-4 minutes.

 

3. I see. I don't know how successful that would be. I would have a study conducted first to see how many people would use such a service and then see what sort of issues could arise should it be implemented.

 

1. As far as Father Capodanno vs. Hylan, if you're going to insist that "natural" ridership (meaning, ridership from people living in the immediate area) on Father Capodanno is similar to that of Hylan north of Midland, then I don't know what to tell you. You're on the bus and you look to one side and see the ocean, and on the other side, you're seeing wetlands half the time (matter of fact, the street I walked down after I got off the express bus ran right through wetlands). Aside from that, incomes are lower as you get closer to the water.

 

As for Hylan Blvd in general, yes some of the ridership is from other corridors. Not sure what you want me to say. 

 

2. You're misunderstanding my proposal. The S57 would bypass Seaview Hospital while the S54 would terminate there, be extended on the northern end to St. George via the S42 route, and have weekend service added (Great Kills would get covered by a separate route that connects it to the SI Mall, which the S54 currently doesn't do for those residents).

 

That's why I said: The only way it makes sense to allow the S57 to bypass Seaview Hospital is if there's another route that actually covers it (which is why it's necessary to run the S54 on weekends). 

 

3. Well I would hope the MTA would actually take the time to decide if a route would actually get ridership before they implement it lol.

 

Is this data available for other stops?

 

The S57 numbers were sent to me by the MTA (along with the S66/S67 numbers) as ons/offs for each stop, because I was discussing my proposal to restructure the S57/S66. If you want to PM me your email, I can send those over to you.

 

There's also more data over here (an express bus O/D table, some BusTime data, and a table showing the maximum load point for each route). Some of the numbers seemed off, though. 12 people on the most crowded NB S59? 33 people on the most crowded S44?  

Edited May 10, 2017 by checkmatechamp13

[Deucey]

...

3. I see. I don't know how successful that would be. I would have a study conducted first to see how many people would use such a service and then see what sort of issues could arise should it be implemented.

Think how much easier it'd be to do that study real-time if express riders didn't have two MetroCards - one for express and one for the train.

 

That's where I think could boost revenue meaningfully - a combo unlimited MetroCard. Pay $155 and get one card that gives unlimited express bus and local bus/subway. I'm sure a goodly amount of people who could use the express bus w would spend the extra $34 for "just in case" access.

[checkmatechamp13]

Think how much easier it'd be to do that study real-time if express riders didn't have two MetroCards - one for express and one for the train.

 

That's where I think could boost revenue meaningfully - a combo unlimited MetroCard. Pay $155 and get one card that gives unlimited express bus and local bus/subway. I'm sure a goodly amount of people who could use the express bus w would spend the extra $34 for "just in case" access.

 

Express bus passes are already good for the local bus/subway (as well as NICE/Bee Line Bus). $59.50 per week, which comes out to $238 per month.

 

I do think there should be some type of monthly express pass (I remember years ago, there was one for $120, but the weekly was $39 or something like that). Still, something around the $200 mark would be fair for a monthly pass (as much as I would love a $155 monthly express pass, I don't see the MTA offering access to the entire express system for only $34 extra per month). LIRR Zone 1 fares are $60.75 per week, or $190 per month.

Edited May 10, 2017 by checkmatechamp13

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Think how much easier it'd be to do that study real-time if express riders didn't have two MetroCards - one for express and one for the train.

 

That's where I think could boost revenue meaningfully - a combo unlimited MetroCard. Pay $155 and get one card that gives unlimited express bus and local bus/subway. I'm sure a goodly amount of people who could use the express bus w would spend the extra $34 for "just in case" access.

As was noted, there is already a weekly express bus pass that covers the local bus and subway.  I do think that they should bring back the monthly card.  Their excuse was a lame one.  They claimed that the express bus monthly pass was too costly to replace if people lost it, yet it's okay for me to spend $208.00 for a Metro-North monthly pass or even better $246.75 a month for a Metro-North monthly pass with the Hudson Raillink included, on a flimsy paper stock Metrocard at that that I wouldn't dare put money on.  Talk about a load of BS.  

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1. As far as Father Capodanno vs. Hylan, if you're going to insist that "natural" ridership (meaning, ridership from people living in the immediate area) on Father Capodanno is similar to that of Hylan north of Midland, then I don't know what to tell you. You're on the bus and you look to one side and see the ocean, and on the other side, you're seeing wetlands half the time (matter of fact, the street I walked down after I got off the express bus ran right through wetlands). Aside from that, incomes are lower as you get closer to the water.

 

As for Hylan Blvd in general, yes some of the ridership is from other corridors. Not sure what you want me to say. 

 

2. You're misunderstanding my proposal. The S57 would bypass Seaview Hospital while the S54 would terminate there, be extended on the northern end to St. George via the S42 route, and have weekend service added (Great Kills would get covered by a separate route that connects it to the SI Mall, which the S54 currently doesn't do for those residents).

 

That's why I said: The only way it makes sense to allow the S57 to bypass Seaview Hospital is if there's another route that actually covers it (which is why it's necessary to run the S54 on weekends). 

 

3. Well I would hope the MTA would actually take the time to decide if a route would actually get ridership before they implement it lol.

1.  I never insisted that ridership along Father Capodanno was higher than that of Hylan Blvd.  I simply said that ridership along Hylan Blvd is inflated because of a lack of coverage and or reliability elsewhere and it's the truth.  When you have people from my old neighborhood going to Hylan Blvd for express bus service because of the amount of cuts to express bus service along Forest Avenue, there's a problem. I knew of quite a few people that used to take the X16 with me who started going to Hylan Blvd once liens were cut/merged. The issue with Father Capodanno is both a reduction in service and unreliability, so it's only natural that people that perhaps could take the buses along Father Capodanno go to Hylan Blvd instead.  That's all that I'm saying.  Is there high usage along Hylan from people living near Hylan? Of course, but some of that is indeed inflated, and I wish the would spread out the resources better.  You talked about them trying to redistribute usage... Well you don't do that when outright cut service in various communities thinking that those people will just usage the subway.  They just go to other express bus lines.  Same story with the X12 too.  Lots of people driving from the Forest Avenue corridor up to Victory.  That was going on even before the cuts because of how the X12 runs (getting on the SIE after Victory and Slosson), but now it's just been accelerated ever since.

 

2.  That sounds even worse then. I was under the impression that you would be combining the S42 and S54 and having the S54 run down to Hylan that it normally does.  I don't understand the point of terminating it at the Hospital.  Either run it the entire length or the route or don't bother.  That's something else that has irked me... The curtailing of local bus service on Staten Island going from North to South.  No reason for that at all. It's another example of how difficult the makes intraborough travel for Staten Islanders.

 

3.  I'm not too worried about that.  I think the plan is to eventually look at creating other super express like routes for Staten Island.  Lines like the X1 will need to be cut up anyway as congestion worsens.

[checkmatechamp13]

1. 100% agreed.

 

2. The point of terminating at the hospital is to avoid the heavy traffic on Rockland Avenue during certain hours (on both weekdays & weekends). I wouldn't want to have buses delayed getting to the ferry because of a problem mlies away in the Greenbelt.

 

Now one interesting idea I've seen is to have the S54 run from West Brighton to Eltingville via the SI Mall instead of Richmondtown (buses would still run via Great Kills between the ETC & Hylan). While I do agree that such a route would garner more ridership than the current S54 I still think there's more usage to be gained from the ferry than the mall. Also there's the issue of the S42 as-is being a route that does very little for riders along it. It dead-ends in New Brighton, takes a circuitous route out of there, and as a result you see people in that neighborhood making their way to the S44 when they shouldn't have to.

 

3. Agreed.

[checkmatechamp13]

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.

 

I forgot to add that the limited stops would be as follows:

Northbound Local to DeKalb Street, then Vanderbilt, Broad, Beach, Victory, Borough Place, St. George

Southbound St. George, Victory, Broad, Vanderbilt, Narrows Road South

 

I've also been thinking, besides my earlier S93X (which would basically be for CSI students westbound in the AM and eastbound in the PM, which is reverse-peak), there should be some local routes using the SI Expressway Bus Lane. Maybe one from the ETC to Bay Ridge via Richmond Avenue (every 30 minutes to start) and one from Port Richmond to Bay Ridge via Richmond Avenue. A full S79 trip is around an hour and change, whereas a route running up Richmond would take about 15 minutes to get to Lamberts Lane, and probably another 25 minutes to get to Bay Ridge, which is still a good 15-20 minutes quicker than the S79. The same thing for a North Shore route vs. taking a hypothetical S83 to Forest for the S48 (The S83 should be implemented regardless, since it benefits a lot of people directly on the route)

[checkmatechamp13]

I've been thinking (and I wonder if the MTA's been thinking the same thing): What if the S62 & S93 were combined?

There would still be the two service patterns we discussed before (CSI-Bay Ridge via Victory/Narrows and CSI-Bay Ridge via SI Expwy), but the primary route would be from Travis to Bay Ridge. I do believe there should be some sort of a Teleport-Victory Blvd connection, so some buses would run to the Teleport instead of Travis.

Personally, if there's no problems on the VZN Bridge, I prefer taking the S93 to the  rather than take the S44 or S62 to the ferry. The train runs more frequently, covers more areas Downtown compared to the ferry, and offers a cross-platform transfer to the   for those looking for Midtown service. Within Staten Island, the S93 offers connections to most of the same routes the S62 does. And for those seeking St. George itself, they can transfer to the S61/91.

The only issue is that the bridge (and the routes heading towards it, like Clove Road) is very traffic-prone. In the AM rush, sadly, I'd trust the bus-ferry over bus- train for that very reason. Once you get past Clove Road on the S92, you're usually good, but on the S93, once you turn onto Clove, you usually hit even more traffic. One accident on the bridge, and you're screwed. And unfortunately, the local buses aren't allowed to use the HOV lane. 

The other issue is I'd be worried about having those extra buses taking Clove to Narrows potentially cutting into limited-stop service towards Port Richmond. I've thought about having the main S53 route run from West Brighton (S54 terminal) to New Dorp via Broadway, Clove, and Hylan (and having the S83 be the main Port Richmond-Bay Ridge route. It could work, but you'd need to combine them overnight). A local branch of the S79 would cover the McClean Avenue portion (both the S53 portion and S52 portion)

Thoughts? I know one of the things we discussed in the other thread is how cheap the MTA was being with regards to adding service to the S93, but with the proper amount of service (and figuring out how to use the bus lane on the bridge), could this work? Since right turns are permitted from bus lanes (but most of the traffic is headed straight towards the bridge), perhaps some bus lanes could reasonably be added to parts of Narrows Road (I'm thinking of Narrows Road South approaching Hylan Blvd, and Clove Road approaching Howard Avenue northbound, which is presently a right turn-only lane)

Edited November 14, 2017 by checkmatechamp13

[bobtehpanda]

Is there any reason why express buses don't use the Bayonne Bridge?

[Deucey]

2 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Is there any reason why express buses don't use the Bayonne Bridge?

Aside from the congestion getting to the bridge?

Once you get to Bayonne, NJ 440 becomes what the rest of the US calls an expressway - semi-limited access with traffic signals and driveways (like other NJ almost-freeways), then having to deal with E Street onto 78-Turnpike Extension to the Holland Tunnel charlie foxtrot.

Not something I’d recommend.

[checkmatechamp13]

20 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Is there any reason why express buses don't use the Bayonne Bridge?

The Holland Tunnel has no bus lanes leading up to it. I don't commute through the Holland Tunnel, but from what I hear, it's worse than the Lincoln Tunnel (especially since it's pretty much a bunch of surface streets leading up to it), and with no bus/HOV lane leading up to it, it's pretty much a non-starter.

 

[aemoreira81]

On 11/13/2017 at 11:05 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I've been thinking (and I wonder if the MTA's been thinking the same thing): What if the S62 & S93 were combined?

There would still be the two service patterns we discussed before (CSI-Bay Ridge via Victory/Narrows and CSI-Bay Ridge via SI Expwy), but the primary route would be from Travis to Bay Ridge. I do believe there should be some sort of a Teleport-Victory Blvd connection, so some buses would run to the Teleport instead of Travis.

Personally, if there's no problems on the VZN Bridge, I prefer taking the S93 to the  rather than take the S44 or S62 to the ferry. The train runs more frequently, covers more areas Downtown compared to the ferry, and offers a cross-platform transfer to the   for those looking for Midtown service. Within Staten Island, the S93 offers connections to most of the same routes the S62 does. And for those seeking St. George itself, they can transfer to the S61/91.

The only issue is that the bridge (and the routes heading towards it, like Clove Road) is very traffic-prone. In the AM rush, sadly, I'd trust the bus-ferry over bus- train for that very reason. Once you get past Clove Road on the S92, you're usually good, but on the S93, once you turn onto Clove, you usually hit even more traffic. One accident on the bridge, and you're screwed. And unfortunately, the local buses aren't allowed to use the HOV lane. 

The other issue is I'd be worried about having those extra buses taking Clove to Narrows potentially cutting into limited-stop service towards Port Richmond. I've thought about having the main S53 route run from West Brighton (S54 terminal) to New Dorp via Broadway, Clove, and Hylan (and having the S83 be the main Port Richmond-Bay Ridge route. It could work, but you'd need to combine them overnight). A local branch of the S79 would cover the McClean Avenue portion (both the S53 portion and S52 portion)

Thoughts? I know one of the things we discussed in the other thread is how cheap the MTA was being with regards to adding service to the S93, but with the proper amount of service (and figuring out how to use the bus lane on the bridge), could this work? Since right turns are permitted from bus lanes (but most of the traffic is headed straight towards the bridge), perhaps some bus lanes could reasonably be added to parts of Narrows Road (I'm thinking of Narrows Road South approaching Hylan Blvd, and Clove Road approaching Howard Avenue northbound, which is presently a right turn-only lane)

 

The S53/93 really needs bigger buses. Maybe when the LFS artics come in, they could be assigned to the S53/93? Then the S93 could operate in an SBS fashion, as its biggest issues are queues at both ends of the line. With SBS, loading would be much quicker. Now, as for your S83 idea...flip it with the S53 and you have an idea where the S83/93 could be a weekday and Saturday SBS with the savings allowing for Saturday S93 service and peak S93 service being slightly reduced to account for the bigger buses. (The CSI campus should be able to accommodate a 62-foot bus if the parking regulations are fully enforced.)  Right now, however, one won't have more artics available unless hand-me-down D60HFs are transferred from the Bronx, West Farms and the B35, followed by the B82, are next in line for artics.

As for the S53 part, I would actually have it run along Clove Road straight to Castleton Avenue, and run it to the Port Richmond terminus, for lack of any better place for a turn-around. As for the bus lane, unless this S53/93 sub-fleet is governed higher than 40 mph, it won't work in a bus lane no matter what.

[checkmatechamp13]

21 minutes ago, aemoreira81 said:

 

The S53/93 really needs bigger buses. Maybe when the LFS artics come in, they could be assigned to the S53/93? Then the S93 could operate in an SBS fashion, as its biggest issues are queues at both ends of the line. With SBS, loading would be much quicker. Now, as for your S83 idea...flip it with the S53 and you have an idea where the S83/93 could be a weekday and Saturday SBS with the savings allowing for Saturday S93 service and peak S93 service being slightly reduced to account for the bigger buses. (The CSI campus should be able to accommodate a 62-foot bus if the parking regulations are fully enforced.)  Right now, however, one won't have more artics available unless hand-me-down D60HFs are transferred from the Bronx, West Farms and the B35, followed by the B82, are next in line for artics.

As for the S53 part, I would actually have it run along Clove Road straight to Castleton Avenue, and run it to the Port Richmond terminus, for lack of any better place for a turn-around. As for the bus lane, unless this S53/93 sub-fleet is governed higher than 40 mph, it won't work in a bus lane no matter what.

 

Absolutely not. I will personally fight tooth-and-nail against bringing artics to Staten Island and have the community board back me up. Artics = reduced frequencies, and with the low frequencies we have on a lot of the lines out here, we can't afford to lose anymore frequency. 

And if the lines are longest at the two terminals (which I'm not denying they are), that's an argument against +SBS+, not for it. If the line is at the first stop, you simply have the B/O start loading a minute or two before the departure time and call it a day. By that logic, all the routes in St. George see heavy crowds at the first stop, so we should put +SBS+ on all of them. 

Not sure what you mean by "flip it with the S53". My S83 would run from Port Richmond to Bay Ridge via Castleton, Broadway, Clove, and Narrows. The idea I was toying with on the S53 was to have it start at Broadway & Richmond Terrace, and take Broadway, Clove, and Hylan to New Dorp (or in any case, if it still runs it to Brooklyn, still start it from West Brighton)

And having the S53 take Clove to Castleton would bypass the West Brighton Houses, so that's a non-starter. And a bus lane on Narrows can easily be done approaching Hylan. Is for the governors, I really don't see why they aren't governed at speeds of higher than 40 mph. It's not like express buses don't travel that speed with standees. 

[bobtehpanda]

Full disclaimer: I don't really live/work on Staten Island. But here's a proposal for a BRT branch of the North Shore BRT line, the S3.

The core centerpiece of this proposal is a newly constructed elevated median busway above the MLK expressway. This would extend from the North Shore Line to just past Victory Blvd, where a connection would be made at the intersection of Loop Road and... Loop Road. A small, bus-only road would also be built from Loop Road to Slayton Av, where buses would turn onto Merrymount St before making the same stops as the S79+.

Thoughts? I feel like this would serve more people than a West Shore Line.

Edited November 19, 2017 by bobtehpanda

[Around the Horn]

The S53/79/93 all need artics at the current frequencies. The crowding at 86th Street is insane...

But I'd create the S83 first and see if that makes any difference.

[B35 via Church]

On 11/13/2017 at 11:05 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I've been thinking (and I wonder if the MTA's been thinking the same thing): What if the S62 & S93 were combined?

There would still be the two service patterns we discussed before (CSI-Bay Ridge via Victory/Narrows and CSI-Bay Ridge via SI Expwy), but the primary route would be from Travis to Bay Ridge. I do believe there should be some sort of a Teleport-Victory Blvd connection, so some buses would run to the Teleport instead of Travis.

Personally, if there's no problems on the VZN Bridge, I prefer taking the S93 to the  rather than take the S44 or S62 to the ferry. The train runs more frequently, covers more areas Downtown compared to the ferry, and offers a cross-platform transfer to the   for those looking for Midtown service. Within Staten Island, the S93 offers connections to most of the same routes the S62 does. And for those seeking St. George itself, they can transfer to the S61/91.

The only issue is that the bridge (and the routes heading towards it, like Clove Road) is very traffic-prone. In the AM rush, sadly, I'd trust the bus-ferry over bus- train for that very reason. Once you get past Clove Road on the S92, you're usually good, but on the S93, once you turn onto Clove, you usually hit even more traffic. One accident on the bridge, and you're screwed. And unfortunately, the local buses aren't allowed to use the HOV lane. 

The other issue is I'd be worried about having those extra buses taking Clove to Narrows potentially cutting into limited-stop service towards Port Richmond. I've thought about having the main S53 route run from West Brighton (S54 terminal) to New Dorp via Broadway, Clove, and Hylan (and having the S83 be the main Port Richmond-Bay Ridge route. It could work, but you'd need to combine them overnight). A local branch of the S79 would cover the McClean Avenue portion (both the S53 portion and S52 portion)

Thoughts? I know one of the things we discussed in the other thread is how cheap the MTA was being with regards to adding service to the S93, but with the proper amount of service (and figuring out how to use the bus lane on the bridge), could this work? Since right turns are permitted from bus lanes (but most of the traffic is headed straight towards the bridge), perhaps some bus lanes could reasonably be added to parts of Narrows Road (I'm thinking of Narrows Road South approaching Hylan Blvd, and Clove Road approaching Howard Avenue northbound, which is presently a right turn-only lane)

I may have blurted this out on the forum years ago or so, IDK, but I (still) think there should be one route serving Travis, West Shore Plaza, and the Teleport..... I used to also think that there should be a north shore route & a south shore route running to West shore Plaza, but w/ the advent of Bricktowne, there's not much of a point for the latter of the two to do so....

Anyway, while the S62 is a straight shot along Victory, I personally despise the fact that it runs to Travis.... I understand you can't have all trips stopping dead at CSI (nor would it really make the route all that useful).... I would look to extend (or, divert) the S62 on the western end of the route instead of the east.... Meaning, instead of combining the S62 & the S93 to have a Brooklyn - Travis route (full route), I would have the S62 running b/w the Ferry & the Mall (SI Mall) via Victory, via Richmond av, via Ring Rd to end w/ the S61....

So yeah, the S93 I would leave alone & I don't think combining it with the S62 will give the MTA anymore of a kick in the ass (so to speak) into providing more service b/w Brooklyn & CSI.... If the two routes were to be combined, I think service wouldn't be too much different than what's already provided on the S93.....

On 11/16/2017 at 11:33 PM, aemoreira81 said:

The S53/93 really needs bigger buses. Maybe when the LFS artics come in, they could be assigned to the S53/93? Then the S93 could operate in an SBS fashion, as its biggest issues are queues at both ends of the line. With SBS, loading would be much quicker. Now, as for your S83 idea...flip it with the S53 and you have an idea where the S83/93 could be a weekday and Saturday SBS with the savings allowing for Saturday S93 service and peak S93 service being slightly reduced to account for the bigger buses. (The CSI campus should be able to accommodate a 62-foot bus if the parking regulations are fully enforced.)  Right now, however, one won't have more artics available unless hand-me-down D60HFs are transferred from the Bronx, West Farms and the B35, followed by the B82, are next in line for artics.

As for the S53 part, I would actually have it run along Clove Road straight to Castleton Avenue, and run it to the Port Richmond terminus, for lack of any better place for a turn-around. As for the bus lane, unless this S53/93 sub-fleet is governed higher than 40 mph, it won't work in a bus lane no matter what.

There isn't a single route on Staten Island that needs artics - especially in conjunction with the complete & utter lack of service on these routes.... Also, seems as if you're still stuck in 2010; there is nothing saying that SBS routes have to be articulated (The M34/a put the initial kibosh on that notion & Staten Island's own S79 less than a year later came right after it !) - talking about "then the S93 could operate in an SBS fashion"....

The S53 along Broadway is much more useful/worth it than whatever time savings you think having buses continue along Clove b/w Victory & Castleton..... That part of Clove that the S54 already serves is more or less dead...... As for Clove, south of the S54, I don't see much of anyone wanting to take S53's over there by Martling, before you hit Forest due north..... Leave the buses on Broadway up there....

 

11 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Full disclaimer: I don't really live/work on Staten Island. But here's a proposal for a BRT branch of the North Shore BRT line, the S3.

**image **

The core centerpiece of this proposal is a newly constructed elevated median busway above the MLK expressway. This would extend from the North Shore Line to just past Victory Blvd, where a connection would be made at the intersection of Loop Road and... Loop Road. A small, bus-only road would also be built from Loop Road to Slayton Av, where buses would turn onto Merrymount St before making the same stops as the S79+.

Thoughts? I feel like this would serve more people than a West Shore Line.

Looks like it would take forever (a commute on this thing, I'm talking about).... Also appears to be very Mid-Island centric....

North shore needs that proposed West Shore line moreso than Mid-Islanders need, whatever this proposal is....

North Shore folks get shafted enough with inadequate local bus service (regardless of how many # of routes there are) & poor express bus coverage as it is....

[checkmatechamp13]

21 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Full disclaimer: I don't really live/work on Staten Island. But here's a proposal for a BRT branch of the North Shore BRT line, the S3.

The core centerpiece of this proposal is a newly constructed elevated median busway above the MLK expressway. This would extend from the North Shore Line to just past Victory Blvd, where a connection would be made at the intersection of Loop Road and... Loop Road. A small, bus-only road would also be built from Loop Road to Slayton Av, where buses would turn onto Merrymount St before making the same stops as the S79+.

Thoughts? I feel like this would serve more people than a West Shore Line.

Let me put it to you this way: I've lived out here for years and this is the first time I'm hearing of Slayton Avenue. It's a little residential street (that's basically an extension of Merrymount Street), so that's a no-go for sending buses down.

In any case, CSI isn't a small campus (area-wise) like say, CCNY or Baruch. The S93's official terminal (it's basically been temporarily cut back to its old terminal at the front gate because of construction, which I love because it means westbound passengers actually have access to the front gate stop and the shuttle bus for those heading to the northern part of the campus, and passengers living in the vicinity of the front gate can actually walk like they used to). Anyway, that stop is almost a mile away from the front gate stop, and there's still parts of the campus to the south of the 1N building. Having the bus go to the front gate and letting passengers transfer to the shuttle bus to get around the campus should be sufficient. If you want the bus to go to the SI Mall via Richmond Avenue, that's fine.

I do agree that a West Shore Light Rail/BRT shouldn't be going up the West Shore Expressway, but rather go in the vicinity of Richmond Avenue (if it is to exist at all)

12 hours ago, Around the Horn said:

The S53/79/93 all need artics at the current frequencies. The crowding at 86th Street is insane...

But I'd create the S83 first and see if that makes any difference.

Then more service needs to be run. MTA guidelines call for service to run every 5-6 minutes before artics are introduced to a line. Artics are a non-starter when the S93 still runs every 20-30 minutes off-peak. Maybe on the S79 during rush hour, they could use them, but that's about it.

Also, lines being long doesn't necessarily mean there's not enough buses. There's times the line for the S93 goes around the corner in the PM rush, but when people actually get on the bus, you'll see a few people standing and that's it (of course, more people get on at 92nd Street, so the bus is pretty crowded going over the bridge). A bus can seat what, like 30-35 people? Plus maybe 20-25 standees. All those people waiting on the sidewalk looks like a long line, but that's to be expected at any major bus terminal (Flushing, Jamaica, etc)

9 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

I may have blurted this out on the forum years ago or so, IDK, but I (still) think there should be one route serving Travis, West Shore Plaza, and the Teleport..... I used to also think that there should be a north shore route & a south shore route running to West shore Plaza, but w/ the advent of Bricktowne, there's not much of a point for the latter of the two to do so....

Anyway, while the S62 is a straight shot along Victory, I personally despise the fact that it runs to Travis.... I understand you can't have all trips stopping dead at CSI (nor would it really make the route all that useful).... I would look to extend (or, divert) the S62 on the western end of the route instead of the east.... Meaning, instead of combining the S62 & the S93 to have a Brooklyn - Travis route (full route), I would have the S62 running b/w the Ferry & the Mall (SI Mall) via Victory, via Richmond av, via Ring Rd to end w/ the S61....

So yeah, the S93 I would leave alone & I don't think combining it with the S62 will give the MTA anymore of a kick in the ass (so to speak) into providing more service b/w Brooklyn & CSI.... If the two routes were to be combined, I think service wouldn't be too much different than what's already provided on the S93.....

There isn't a single route on Staten Island that needs artics - especially in conjunction with the complete & utter lack of service on these routes.... Also, seems as if you're still stuck in 2010; there is nothing saying that SBS routes have to be articulated (The M34/a put the initial kibosh on that notion & Staten Island's own S79 less than a year later came right after it !) - talking about "then the S93 could operate in an SBS fashion"....

The S53 along Broadway is much more useful/worth it than whatever time savings you think having buses continue along Clove b/w Victory & Castleton..... That part of Clove that the S54 already serves is more or less dead...... As for Clove, south of the S54, I don't see much of anyone wanting to take S53's over there by Martling, before you hit Forest due north..... Leave the buses on Broadway up there....

Looks like it would take forever (a commute on this thing, I'm talking about).... Also appears to be very Mid-Island centric....

North shore needs that proposed West Shore line moreso than Mid-Islanders need, whatever this proposal is....

North Shore folks get shafted enough with inadequate local bus service (regardless of how many # of routes there are) & poor express bus coverage as it is....

I disagree on a couple of points:

Travis definitely needs some east-west service connecting to a major hub (either St. George or Bay Ridge). Even if you beefed up express service (so they have an option to reach Manhattan), I don't agree with isolating them like that local service-wise. A shuttle to Richmond Avenue (which is what I assume you would leave them with) would likely perform even worse than the S55/56. Aside from Manhattan-bound and cross-island commuters, there's also a lot of schoolkids using it to reach the S54/57 to/from Wagner High School, who would have to transfer twice.

I'd be curious to see how you would serve them all with one route. Would you have it run up the West Shore Expressway, have a stop in Travis, a stop at the West Shore Plaza, and then continue via South Avenue (with the diversion to the Teleport), to Arlington or Port Richmond? Or would you have it start at Richmond Avenue, take Travis Avenue to South, and then serve the Teleport, backtrack to the West Shore Plaza, and then jump on the West Shore Expressway for one exit to terminate at Victory & Glen (or maybe run as a continuous loop down Victory back to Richmond Avenue)

In any case, I really don't like the idea of any S62s short-turning at CSI period (whether it runs to the SI Mall or Travis or the Teleport afterwards). CSI has its own shuttle to the ferry, and the S93 already covers a good chunk of Victory and offers connections to most of the same routes as the S62 (for those in the Stapleton/Park Hill area, the travel time is comparable or slightly quicker. For most of those heading south, the S93 is definitely quicker and more direct). For those CSI students who need the S62 specifically (which is really just people who don't want to take the S93 to the S61/66), they can hop on a bus coming from points west. There aren't crowds of CSI students waiting at that stop like there were before the CSI-ferry shuttle started running.

As for his proposed route, it wouldn't be any longer than the present-day S44 (which I know you don't like). In any case, as I mentioned to him, I really don't think BRT/LRT is necessary down the West Shore Expressway (not sure if I think it's necessary at all). I'd rather see a West Shore Line built as an extension of the HBLR from Bayonne (with a free transfer available to those seeking to reach the North Shore Rail/BRT). 

Edited November 20, 2017 by checkmatechamp13

[bobtehpanda]

12 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Looks like it would take forever (a commute on this thing, I'm talking about).... Also appears to be very Mid-Island centric....

North shore needs that proposed West Shore line moreso than Mid-Islanders need, whatever this proposal is....

North Shore folks get shafted enough with inadequate local bus service (regardless of how many # of routes there are) & poor express bus coverage as it is....

Like the North Shore Line, everything Victory and north would be its own grade-separated right of way. The North Shore BRT study estimates that such a busway with a max operating speed of 60MPH would make the trip from St. George to Arlington in 19 minutes. Extrapolating that over the extra distance would put St. George to CSI at approximately 23 minutes, and I would like to aim for St. George to the Staten Island mall in 30-35 minutes. Everything south of the SI Mall is mostly to link those areas to the North Shore and CSI, because presumably you wouldn't go the long way around the island to go to St. George.

I'm proposing this in addition to the North Shore BRT as a kind of Phase II. Long term, having three or four relatively fast spines in place (North/West Shore, this North/Mid-Island, the SIR, and Hylan) would be a lot easier to reorganize a transit network around.

In all seriousness, how important is the West Shore? From a map it looks like a whole lotta nothin.

3 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Let me put it to you this way: I've lived out here for years and this is the first time I'm hearing of Slayton Avenue. It's a little residential street (that's basically an extension of Merrymount Street), so that's a no-go for sending buses down.

In any case, CSI isn't a small campus (area-wise) like say, CCNY or Baruch. The S93's official terminal (it's basically been temporarily cut back to its old terminal at the front gate because of construction, which I love because it means westbound passengers actually have access to the front gate stop and the shuttle bus for those heading to the northern part of the campus, and passengers living in the vicinity of the front gate can actually walk like they used to). Anyway, that stop is almost a mile away from the front gate stop, and there's still parts of the campus to the south of the 1N building. Having the bus go to the front gate and letting passengers transfer to the shuttle bus to get around the campus should be sufficient. If you want the bus to go to the SI Mall via Richmond Avenue, that's fine.

I do agree that a West Shore Light Rail/BRT shouldn't be going up the West Shore Expressway, but rather go in the vicinity of Richmond Avenue (if it is to exist at all)

This is more of a pencil on a napkin kind of thing. I was thinking about in what scenario I would be okay with some sort of SI-Brooklyn subway link, and for me the most logical thing to do would be to extend a line down Victory. But going all the way down Victory would never really justify the cost, but you could link CSI. And if you link CSI via subway, the SI Mall is not very far away as the crow flies. Personally I see value in connecting two major destinations for riders in a straight line with dense neighborhoods. But I could also be very wrong, because in my mind CSI is important in that it has similar enrollment numbers to QCC, which I think should also get a subway to it.

Edited November 20, 2017 by bobtehpanda

[B35 via Church]

6 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I disagree on a couple of points:

Travis definitely needs some east-west service connecting to a major hub (either St. George or Bay Ridge). Even if you beefed up express service (so they have an option to reach Manhattan), I don't agree with isolating them like that local service-wise. A shuttle to Richmond Avenue (which is what I assume you would leave them with) would likely perform even worse than the S55/56. Aside from Manhattan-bound and cross-island commuters, there's also a lot of schoolkids using it to reach the S54/57 to/from Wagner High School, who would have to transfer twice.

I'd be curious to see how you would serve them all with one route. Would you have it run up the West Shore Expressway, have a stop in Travis, a stop at the West Shore Plaza, and then continue via South Avenue (with the diversion to the Teleport), to Arlington or Port Richmond? Or would you have it start at Richmond Avenue, take Travis Avenue to South, and then serve the Teleport, backtrack to the West Shore Plaza, and then jump on the West Shore Expressway for one exit to terminate at Victory & Glen (or maybe run as a continuous loop down Victory back to Richmond Avenue)

In any case, I really don't like the idea of any S62s short-turning at CSI period (whether it runs to the SI Mall or Travis or the Teleport afterwards). CSI has its own shuttle to the ferry, and the S93 already covers a good chunk of Victory and offers connections to most of the same routes as the S62 (for those in the Stapleton/Park Hill area, the travel time is comparable or slightly quicker. For most of those heading south, the S93 is definitely quicker and more direct). For those CSI students who need the S62 specifically (which is really just people who don't want to take the S93 to the S61/66), they can hop on a bus coming from points west. There aren't crowds of CSI students waiting at that stop like there were before the CSI-ferry shuttle started running.

As for his proposed route, it wouldn't be any longer than the present-day S44 (which I know you don't like). In any case, as I mentioned to him, I really don't think BRT/LRT is necessary down the West Shore Expressway (not sure if I think it's necessary at all). I'd rather see a West Shore Line built as an extension of the HBLR from Bayonne (with a free transfer available to those seeking to reach the North Shore Rail/BRT). 

I'm not seeing a justification for the S93 (which is essentially what you're inquiring about) running to Travis in any capacity..... I would rather have the MTA leaving the S93 with the current inadequate service it gets, than combining the S62/S93 with hopes of service being bolstered.... Anything serving Travis should be a route that completely remains w/I the island, the way I see it....

Isolating Travis like what? Because I would not propose a counterproductive shuttle to Travis - it would have to be a diversion of a current route, or a brand new route running b/w that part of the borough & somewhere else due eastward.... As for serving Travis, West Shore Plaza & the Teleport in one shot, the general idea would be to have something terminating @ Wild/Victory, continuing along Victory to Travis (av), to backtrack to serve West Shore Plz., continue along South to then serve the Teleport, get back on South, to then take Fahy > Lamberts to hit Richmond, to go on serving some other part of the borough due east..... You're running on the assumption that since I wouldn't have S62's (or your S62/S93 combo) serving Travis, I would suggest some "S60" type of route or something & it's not the case..... I generally don't propose dinky shuttles anyway & the last borough that they should exist on is on Staten Island......

To your point about short turning S62's at CSI, well I wasn't suggesting that at all - it was a reference to the current trips that already exist & not going off the deep end to have every trip ending there, over having buses run to Travis.... So that whole paragraph is moot to me; I don't have any indignation or concurrence over whether the S62 short turns there or not.... I've been & still are more bothered with S62's running to Travis than any issue regarding short turning S62's.... If the S62 were to be diverted to the mall like I suggested, I wouldn't have buses short turning, period, anyway....

As for what BobPanda posted, well you see why I wouldn't be too fond of such a thing.... As for what you just brought up, I wouldn't have a problem w/ an extension of HBLR serving the North Shore either.... I don't need to tell you that the North Shore deserves some type of rail service....

 

2 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Like the North Shore Line, everything Victory and north would be its own grade-separated right of way. The North Shore BRT study estimates that such a busway with a max operating speed of 60MPH would make the trip from St. George to Arlington in 19 minutes. Extrapolating that over the extra distance would put St. George to CSI at approximately 23 minutes, and I would like to aim for St. George to the Staten Island mall in 30-35 minutes. Everything south of the SI Mall is mostly to link those areas to the North Shore and CSI, because presumably you wouldn't go the long way around the island to go to St. George.

I'm proposing this in addition to the North Shore BRT as a kind of Phase II. Long term, having three or four relatively fast spines in place (North/West Shore, this North/Mid-Island, the SIR, and Hylan) would be a lot easier to reorganize a transit network around.

In all seriousness, how important is the West Shore? From a map it looks like a whole lotta nothing.

...and that addition is what I'm contesting as being necessary.

The West Shore is more or less a whole lot of nothing, not disputing that..... At the same time, it isn't about how important the West Shore is anyway, it's about the North Shore.... Transit improvements in SI needs to be more North Shore centric....

[checkmatechamp13]

 

On 11/20/2017 at 3:36 AM, bobtehpanda said:

In all seriousness, how important is the West Shore? From a map it looks like a whole lotta nothin.

This is more of a pencil on a napkin kind of thing. I was thinking about in what scenario I would be okay with some sort of SI-Brooklyn subway link, and for me the most logical thing to do would be to extend a line down Victory. But going all the way down Victory would never really justify the cost, but you could link CSI. And if you link CSI via subway, the SI Mall is not very far away as the crow flies. Personally I see value in connecting two major destinations for riders in a straight line with dense neighborhoods. But I could also be very wrong, because in my mind CSI is important in that it has similar enrollment numbers to QCC, which I think should also get a subway to it.

Pretty much, it's a whole lot of nothing. Let me put it to you this way....you have a busy route like the S46 ending at a little shopping plaza smaller than the ones most people can find in their own neighborhoods elsewhere on Staten Island. There's no residential activity along South Avenue (south of the SIE) and you just have a few office buildings and some hotels.

And eh, like I said, I don't disagree with some high-quality transit (BRT or rail) serving CSI, but the front entrance would be sufficient.

On 11/20/2017 at 7:57 AM, B35 via Church said:

I'm not seeing a justification for the S93 (which is essentially what you're inquiring about) running to Travis in any capacity..... I would rather have the MTA leaving the S93 with the current inadequate service it gets, than combining the S62/S93 with hopes of service being bolstered.... Anything serving Travis should be a route that completely remains w/I the island, the way I see it....

Isolating Travis like what? Because I would not propose a counterproductive shuttle to Travis - it would have to be a diversion of a current route, or a brand new route running b/w that part of the borough & somewhere else due eastward.... As for serving Travis, West Shore Plaza & the Teleport in one shot, the general idea would be to have something terminating @ Wild/Victory, continuing along Victory to Travis (av), to backtrack to serve West Shore Plz., continue along South to then serve the Teleport, get back on South, to then take Fahy > Lamberts to hit Richmond, to go on serving some other part of the borough due east..... You're running on the assumption that since I wouldn't have S62's (or your S62/S93 combo) serving Travis, I would suggest some "S60" type of route or something & it's not the case..... I generally don't propose dinky shuttles anyway & the last borough that they should exist on is on Staten Island......

Not just about the S93 in and of itself, but I'd rather see more neighborhoods connected to Bay Ridge rather than St. George. I can't stand doing the "ferry shuffle" from either end (whether it's coming off the subway in Manhattan or the bus on Staten Island). Not to say the  train runs perfectly, but I'll take that over the ferry any day. The main issue is, like I said, the traffic going over the bridge during rush hour (which is when the ferry runs the most frequently, so the advantage of the bridge is cancelled out). So in other words, even if the service ran less frequently than the current S62 off-peak, it would still result in them being better-served IMO.

As for your proposed route, that would be way too indirect for Travis riders, and overserve the "whole lot of nothing" portion of South Avenue IMO. For those trying to get to Richmond Avenue, it would be too indirect, especially for those heading south (e.g. to the SI Mall), and for anything beyond it, it would still be indirect (e.g. If you had it take over my proposed S66, then you're going back down to Victory. If you have it head up towards the North Shore (e.g. Forest Avenue), then you run into the same issues you have with the current S44 & S46). Also, that would leave nothing between Signs & Richmond (which is a fairly dense residential neighborhood. Matter of fact, back in high school, some of my friends would get on the S92 for a short hop to Richmond Avenue from Signs Road or Dinsmore Street, which is too far to reasonably walk, especially with the fact that there's no continuous sidewalk in that area)

If it were up to me, I would have the S46 run every 10 minutes north of Forest, and 20 minutes south of it to the West Shore Plaza for most of the day (Current service is every 12-15 minutes for the whole route for most of the day). Since the West Shore Plaza isn't particularly busy (So not too many people would be negatively affected by the diversion), buses would still dip down to serve the Teleport, which is where I would have a branch of the (Victory Blvd route that continues past CSI, whether it's the S62 or S93) terminate, roughly every 30 minutes. Some extra S46 trippers would run during school hours and that would be it.

[B35 via Church]

12 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Not just about the S93 in and of itself, but I'd rather see more neighborhoods connected to Bay Ridge rather than St. George. I can't stand doing the "ferry shuffle" from either end (whether it's coming off the subway in Manhattan or the bus on Staten Island). Not to say the  train runs perfectly, but I'll take that over the ferry any day. The main issue is, like I said, the traffic going over the bridge during rush hour (which is when the ferry runs the most frequently, so the advantage of the bridge is cancelled out). So in other words, even if the service ran less frequently than the current S62 off-peak, it would still result in them being better-served IMO.

As for your proposed route, that would be way too indirect for Travis riders, and overserve the "whole lot of nothing" portion of South Avenue IMO. For those trying to get to Richmond Avenue, it would be too indirect, especially for those heading south (e.g. to the SI Mall), and for anything beyond it, it would still be indirect (e.g. If you had it take over my proposed S66, then you're going back down to Victory. If you have it head up towards the North Shore (e.g. Forest Avenue), then you run into the same issues you have with the current S44 & S46). Also, that would leave nothing between Signs & Richmond (which is a fairly dense residential neighborhood. Matter of fact, back in high school, some of my friends would get on the S92 for a short hop to Richmond Avenue from Signs Road or Dinsmore Street, which is too far to reasonably walk, especially with the fact that there's no continuous sidewalk in that area)

If it were up to me, I would have the S46 run every 10 minutes north of Forest, and 20 minutes south of it to the West Shore Plaza for most of the day (Current service is every 12-15 minutes for the whole route for most of the day). Since the West Shore Plaza isn't particularly busy (So not too many people would be negatively affected by the diversion), buses would still dip down to serve the Teleport, which is where I would have a branch of the (Victory Blvd route that continues past CSI, whether it's the S62 or S93) terminate, roughly every 30 minutes. Some extra S46 trippers would run during school hours and that would be it.

So do I - I just don't happen to think Travis is one of them....

What I'm getting from your last two posts is that Travis folks tend to seek Richmond av before anything else.... Had it not been for the advent of Bricktowne, I would've had no problem/concern with extending the S55 or the S56 to Travis (with alterations elsewhere along the route [before it even hits the mall], which I believe we spoke about before)... For the sake of the network, I would've chosen that over a] the current S62 to Travis (to be perfectly honest) & b] having a route running out of Travis to serve West Shore Plz. & the Teleport, en-route to other areas east of Richmond av... Yes, the latter is indirect, but you showed inquisitiveness on how I would do such a thing - so I obliged....

As far as actual S46 service, while I haven't thought about how much (less) service West Shore Plz. should get, I've always thought there should be more short turns throughout the day.....