Jump to content


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

Staten Island Bus Proposal Thread 2012-2013

Recommended Posts

Obviously, what I'm typing here is nothing to be embarrassed of, but I'm technically not supposed to be on this site in school....

I see....

 

 

But anyway, for the bus route over the Goethals Bridge, I would have it go to Downtown Elizabeth for all the connections available....

 

Besides, the route could always continue on to the JG Mall after having served Downtown Elizabeth.

That makes sense, if you know/realize how much demand there is for all those other NJT routes that serve downtown Elizabeth.... Personally, I don't..... As far as having it connect w/ the rail, that part I'll give you....

 

The second statement here though I don't agree with.... if it's a route (the 98 in your plans) coming from SI, it would have to be an either-or situation (JG or downtown elizabeth) because you still have to serve foster av, etc. w/i SI.....

 

 

* S52: Well, I'd think the SIR would beat any of those routes to the ferry. ;)

 

In any case, the thing is that for the riders coming off the S74, the S52 might serve more areas, but for the people in Grant City, taking away the S51 would make it harder to reach the whole South Beach area. I mean, they could take the S74 to the S52, or they could walk back to Hylan Blvd, but what's the point when you could just bring the S51 right to them, since it's a fairly short distance?

 

And for the Arrochar reroute, the S52/S53 already share a short stint along Sand Lane. I've seen passengers transfer from St. George-bound S52s to Port Richmond-bound S53s where the buses were at the same stop (I think it was Sand Lane & McClean Avenue). I'm not sure if a same-stop transfers exists the other way, though.

You mean there are plenty riders traveling from Grant City to/around Fr. cap. itself..... Didn't know that....

Of the times I tend to see the 51, buses empty out at hylan (heading north) and noticably pickup up at hylan (heading towards the ferry).... If it's simply for coverage purposes, the 51 can be left alone..... if you're justifying the (high enough) usage w/i grant city as to why the 51 should be kept there, that's a whole different story...... The latter is more along the lines of my commentary regarding that route....

 

as for that 52 reroute I posted, yes there's a connection after both buses turn off mcclean (wasn't implicating there wadn't any connection & that pax don't xfer b/w the 2 routes)... What I'm getting at is, the 1st stop in SI on the 53 coming from brooklyn (along lily pond) is a popular stop.... and my thinking is, if the 52 also stops there, it could encourage more usage on the route... as opposed to the connection the two routes currently have..... Basically what I'm alluding to is, why not have the 51, 52, and 53 in that area (lily pond, etc).....

 

 

And I don't think the extra S59 bus per hour should be added. Generally, the buses don't get too crowded except for once in a blue moon, or certain particular runs (around say, 7AM going southbound).....

 

I mean, as of right now, everybody flocks to the S44/S59 because they're more frequent than the S89, and you see the result in the levels of crowding. Generally, none of the buses are crushloaded, but you'll see an S44 (more often than an S59) with a decent number of standees and then behind it you'll see an S89 with less than 10 people, and it's not like the ridership is all concentrated at the local stops.

You're kind of reinforcing my point here.....

You said everyone flocks to the 44/59 (which is true)..... the key thing to consider is the backslash in that.....

 

What I'd try to accomplish is, with that extra service/hour on the 59, you'd have more ppl. seeking the 59, than even having to consider that long/wieldy 44 route..... I'd focus on enhancing the 59 in making it "the" prevalent north/south route along richmond av.... as opposed to riders having to put up w/ questionable service on the 44 & questionable service on the 59 (lol)...... Let the riders east of richmond av worry about the 44.... I don't find that route to be a suitable supplement for richmond av service..... Never did.

 

 

S53/79/93: What's your take then? I mean, the only other thing would be to try to ensure better connections between the (N) & (R), but that's just not going to happen.

To be honest with you, striving to make better connections b/w the N & R on the RTO side of things makes more sense to me than extending the SI routes to 59th......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

elizbeth to SI yeah that is what NJT is for extend #62 after NJT SPLITS IT or 57 to stimulate ridership or extend NJT 52/58 or the 40 line to stimulate more ridership ohh B35 111 runs like crap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) That makes sense, if you know/realize how much demand there is for all those other NJT routes that serve downtown Elizabeth.... Personally, I don't..... As far as having it connect w/ the rail, that part I'll give you....

 

The second statement here though I don't agree with.... if it's a route (the 98 in your plans) coming from SI, it would have to be an either-or situation (JG or downtown elizabeth) because you still have to serve foster av, etc. w/i SI.....

 

2) You mean there are plenty riders traveling from Grant City to/around Fr. cap. itself..... Didn't know that....

Of the times I tend to see the 51, buses empty out at hylan (heading north) and noticably pickup up at hylan (heading towards the ferry).... If it's simply for coverage purposes, the 51 can be left alone..... if you're justifying the (high enough) usage w/i grant city as to why the 51 should be kept there, that's a whole different story...... The latter is more along the lines of my commentary regarding that route....

 

as for that 52 reroute I posted, yes there's a connection after both buses turn off mcclean (wasn't implicating there wadn't any connection & that pax don't xfer b/w the 2 routes)... What I'm getting at is, the 1st stop in SI on the 53 coming from brooklyn (along lily pond) is a popular stop.... and my thinking is, if the 52 also stops there, it could encourage more usage on the route... as opposed to the connection the two routes currently have..... Basically what I'm alluding to is, why not have the 51, 52, and 53 in that area (lily pond, etc).....

 

3) You're kind of reinforcing my point here.....

You said everyone flocks to the 44/59 (which is true)..... the key thing to consider is the backslash in that.....

 

What I'd try to accomplish is, with that extra service/hour on the 59, you'd have more ppl. seeking the 59, than even having to consider that long/wieldy 44 route..... I'd focus on enhancing the 59 in making it "the" prevalent north/south route along richmond av.... as opposed to riders having to put up w/ questionable service on the 44 & questionable service on the 59 (lol)...... Let the riders east of richmond av worry about the 44.... I don't find that route to be a suitable supplement for richmond av service..... Never did.

 

4) To be honest with you, striving to make better connections b/w the N & R on the RTO side of things makes more sense to me than extending the SI routes to 59th......

 

1) Well, I guess it's just a matter of perference as to whether it's more important to serve a major mall or provide more connections.

 

And I think you're still in the Brooklyn mindset. ;) The S98 goes down Forest Avenue, not Foster Avenue.

 

2) I was mentioning more that it should be around for connectivity purposes, not necessarily that there were large numbers of riders using it in that manner. I mean, you'd have a bunch of north-south service in the area (SIR, S74/76, S78/79) and nothing going east-west. But seeing as you were just pointing out that it has low usage and not actually advocating to eliminate that part, then I guess it's an argument over nothing.

 

And yeah, I see what you're saying with the S52. It makes sense having it serve a major stop like that.

 

3) I know, but my point was that you could accomplish the same thing (shifting riders away from the S44) by making the S89 more attractive.

 

The thing about the S44 is that it has a better connection with the S46 for people going towards Mariners' Harbor, because nobody's going to want to go all the way up to Port Richmond & Castleton and deal with the extra lights, plus the traffic on the short stint along Forest Avenue, when they could just make their lives easier and go to Walker & Morningstar. I think the S48 connection is better-used, but still, don't underestimate the usage of the S46 transfer, especially when it comes to schoolkids. Me personally, I definitely prefer the S44 (for trips in general)

 

And now that I think about it, that's where the S89 comes in, since it goes down Morningstar Road and offers the same transfer as the S44. There's no need to beef up S59 service when you could make the S89 more attractive and have it serve a group that the S59 doesn't serve. (Plus, in addition to streamlining those routes, since you have a lot of S89s deadheading to get to Bayonne, you might as well put them in service, even if it's just north of the SI Mall, to make the route even more attractive).

 

By the way, my logic for the street I chose (the "back" of Ring Road) was because it was closer to the residential area by Marsh Avenue (compared to the current S44/59 route), but it doesn't have to deal with school buses along Marsh Avenue, and is also easier for mall patrons to access.

 

4) Alright, then.

 

As for the S89, it really wasn't made to get much ridership along Richmond Av, but overally I've seen it get more people in the reverse peak direction even if it's just a few extra riders. I know by using it myself during the afternoons when I'm traveling in SI.

 

Not really. In fact, the only time when I would say ridership is really lagging along Richmond Avenue is northbound in the PM rush. In the peak direction, you have all the riders going to/from the HBLR (and I think a lot of them get on at the ETC), and southbound in the AM rush, you have a lot of schoolkids (and a lot of regular riders as well) who use it to get to the schools by Marsh Avenue (plus other schools on Richmond Avenue like I.S.72). But northbound in the PM rush, most of the ridership goes to the local routes. There have been times when I was literally the only one on the bus. I usually take the S89 to get to school, and it's give-or-take a seated load. Sometimes there are delays and there can be a lot of standees (to the point where the B/O has to ask people to move back), but that's just once in a blue moon.

 

Of course, the crowding can vary based on the trip. You can see in the schedule that sometimes there is "bunching" on the schedule (I know in the PM rush southbound, there's an instance of an 8 minute gap and then an 18 minute gap, so obviously you can picture the crowding levels there). Along Richmond Avenue itself, it depends on how it's scheduled in relation to the S59/S94, and also how it was timed to meet the HBLR (was it the bus after the 8 minute gap or the 18 minute gap?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) Well, I guess it's just a matter of perference as to whether it's more important to serve a major mall or provide more connections.

 

And I think you're still in the Brooklyn mindset. ;) The S98 goes down Forest Avenue, not Foster Avenue.

 

2) I was mentioning more that it should be around for connectivity purposes, not necessarily that there were large numbers of riders using it in that manner. I mean, you'd have a bunch of north-south service in the area (SIR, S74/76, S78/79) and nothing going east-west. But seeing as you were just pointing out that it has low usage and not actually advocating to eliminate that part, then I guess it's an argument over nothing.

 

And yeah, I see what you're saying with the S52. It makes sense having it serve a major stop like that.

 

3) I know, but my point was that you could accomplish the same thing (shifting riders away from the S44) by making the S89 more attractive.

 

The thing about the S44 is that it has a better connection with the S46 for people going towards Mariners' Harbor, because nobody's going to want to go all the way up to Port Richmond & Castleton and deal with the extra lights, plus the traffic on the short stint along Forest Avenue, when they could just make their lives easier and go to Walker & Morningstar. I think the S48 connection is better-used, but still, don't underestimate the usage of the S46 transfer, especially when it comes to schoolkids. Me personally, I definitely prefer the S44 (for trips in general)

 

And now that I think about it, that's where the S89 comes in, since it goes down Morningstar Road and offers the same transfer as the S44. There's no need to beef up S59 service when you could make the S89 more attractive and have it serve a group that the S59 doesn't serve. (Plus, in addition to streamlining those routes, since you have a lot of S89s deadheading to get to Bayonne, you might as well put them in service, even if it's just north of the SI Mall, to make the route even more attractive).

 

By the way, my logic for the street I chose (the "back" of Ring Road) was because it was closer to the residential area by Marsh Avenue (compared to the current S44/59 route), but it doesn't have to deal with school buses along Marsh Avenue, and is also easier for mall patrons to access.

 

1) yeh, I was still thinkin about the post in the brooklyn thread I replied to, before my last reply in this thread (about a foster av route or w/e)......

 

Anyway, yes, that's what it boils down to.... either sending buses from that part of SI to NJT Elizabeth or JG.....

 

 

2) Well, we were basically making viewpoints from two different stances.... I guess for all intents & purposes, you're right - the MTA may as well leave the S51 there.... I was thinking more along the lines of making the route a little more efficient, but connectivity borough-wide is more a problem on the island than inefficient routes.....

 

 

3) On the contrary... there's no need to further promote the S89 when there's less people heading out to Bayonne, as opposed to Port Richmond......

 

For the purposes of having fewer folks dependent on the 44 along richmond av, I would enhance 59 service first....

For the purposes of providing quicker access to major areas along/around richmond av, that's where the S89 comes into play.....

 

I'm sorry, but the 59 is far more vital to SI than the 89 is.....

Always saw the 89 as a commuter type route - It really has no business panning south of ETC....

Edited by B35 via Church

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrary... there's no need to further promote the S89 when there's less people heading out to Bayonne, as opposed to Port Richmond......

 

For the purposes of having fewer folks dependent on the 44 along richmond av, I would enhance 59 service first....

For the purposes of providing quicker access to major areas along/around richmond av, that's where the S89 comes into play.....

 

I'm sorry, but the 59 is far more vital to SI than the 89 is.....

Always saw the 89 as a commuter type route - It really has no business panning south of ETC....

 

 

But the S89 is going to run anyway. You might as well get more usage out of it instead of adding service to the S59 while still leaving (relatively) empty S89s rolling around. And like I said, there are some areas better-served by the S89 compared to the S59 (I mean, the S59 doesn't do much good for anybody east of the MLK Expressway, once it gets north of Forest Avenue. They're better served by the S89)

 

And if we're talking peak direction, the S89 actually does get more riders going to Bayonne, compared to S59 riders in Port Richmond. Reverse-peak, it's a different story, but even then, don't underestimate the amount of riders it can get at Morningstar Road & Walker Street (southbound). And like you said, the S89 serves to provide quicker (though sometimes not as fast as you might think. I've been on S44s that went nonstop from Richmond Hill Road to Victory Blvd) access to major stops, but that doesn't mean it can't serve a dual purpose.

 

In any case, I don't see the harm in doing the streamlining I mentioned to at least attempt to get more riders on the S89. And if that doesn't work, then S59 service should be improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the S89 is going to run anyway. You might as well get more usage out of it instead of adding service to the S59 while still leaving (relatively) empty S89s rolling around. And like I said, there are some areas better-served by the S89 compared to the S59 (I mean, the S59 doesn't do much good for anybody east of the MLK Expressway, once it gets north of Forest Avenue. They're better served by the S89)

 

And if we're talking peak direction, the S89 actually does get more riders going to Bayonne, compared to S59 riders in Port Richmond. Reverse-peak, it's a different story, but even then, don't underestimate the amount of riders it can get at Morningstar Road & Walker Street (southbound). And like you said, the S89 serves to provide quicker (though sometimes not as fast as you might think. I've been on S44s that went nonstop from Richmond Hill Road to Victory Blvd) access to major stops, but that doesn't mean it can't serve a dual purpose.

 

In any case, I don't see the harm in doing the streamlining I mentioned to at least attempt to get more riders on the S89. And if that doesn't work, then S59 service should be improved.

 

 

The S59 should be improved either way. The S89 serves mainly as a commuter route as B35 said and I don't see that changing mainly because politicians fought for the S89 for years down Richmond Avenue for the purpose that it serves now and now here you come with your bright ideas on how to f*ck up the line and have it serve other purposes because it just needs so much more riders... <_< It's the equivalent of your grand idea to have express buses pick up riders within the boroughs that aren't going to or from Manhattan.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The S59 should be improved either way. The S89 serves mainly as a commuter route as B35 said and I don't see that changing mainly because politicians fought for the S89 for years down Richmond Avenue for the purpose that it serves now and now here you come with your bright ideas on how to f*ck up the line and have it serve other purposes because it just needs so much more riders... <_< It's the equivalent of your grand idea to have express buses pick up riders within the boroughs that aren't going to or from Manhattan.

 

 

See, this is exactly what I was talking about. :angry: You criticize my ideas without even looking at them. I want you to point out exactly what is wrong with my plan to have all the buses take the same path behind the mall, which I distinctly recall you complaining about why the S89 takes a different path from the S44 & S59 (and then somebody brought up the park-and-ride behind the mall) in order to encourage S89 ridership. You distinctly complained about how you have crowded buses and empty buses running behind each other, and now I come up with a solution to fix that and you have the gall to criticize me without offering anything of substance????? In case you didn't realize, I use that line practically every day, so I know all about the ridership habits.

 

And in case you didn't realize, you've been taking express buses within one borough. "Oooooh, the express bus is so much safer, so I'm going to take the X10 to Manor Road instead of the S62". I didn't realize it was an unofficial policy already, and once you told me that, I dropped the idea, so you can stop with the stupid comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See, this is exactly what I was talking about. :angry: You criticize my ideas without even looking at them. I want you to point out exactly what is wrong with my plan to have all the buses take the same path behind the mall, which I distinctly recall you complaining about why the S89 takes a different path from the S44 & S59 (and then somebody brought up the park-and-ride behind the mall) in order to encourage S89 ridership. You distinctly complained about how you have crowded buses and empty buses running behind each other, and now I come up with a solution to fix that and you have the gall to criticize me without offering anything of substance????? In case you didn't realize, I use that line practically every day, so I know all about the ridership habits.

 

And in case you didn't realize, you've been taking express buses within one borough. "Oooooh, the express bus is so much safer, so I'm going to take the X10 to Manor Road instead of the S62". I didn't realize it was an unofficial policy already, and once you told me that, I dropped the idea, so you can stop with the stupid comments.

 

 

I talked about SPACING of the local bus routes along Richmond Avenue, not any of this crappola you're bringing up, and not just with the S89 either. All routes along Richmond Avenue need to be better spaced. What good is your idea to "straighten out" the S89 if you screw over S59 riders in the process??

 

As for your express bus comment, interborough usage is FOR US express bus riders, period. It does not happen on the Riverdale express buses, though I do do it on the BxM18 on occasion if I don't want to put up with the sardine can subways coming from Downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I talked about SPACING of the local bus routes along Richmond Avenue, not any of this crappola you're bringing up, and not just with the S89 either. All routes along Richmond Avenue need to be better spaced. What good is your idea to "straighten out" the S89 if you screw over S59 riders in the process??

 

As for your express bus comment, interborough usage is FOR US express bus riders, period. It does not happen on the Riverdale express buses, though I do do it on the BxM18 on occasion if I don't want to put up with the sardine can subways coming from Downtown.

 

 

And how does this screw over S59 riders? So they have to live with the current headways (and just so you know, "they" includes me). Big deal. It's not like the buses are super-crowded and aside from that there's still the S44. Besides, a lot of S59 riders would benefit from this as well. If you're at the SI Mall and have to go to Forest Avenue, you're forced to take a local bus (S44 or S59). Now you have the option of taking a limited bus which means your wait could be shorter and aside from that your trip will be slightly faster. You tell me exactly what's wrong with what I said.

 

If improving the S89 has to come at the expense of S59 riders, then you know what? Improving the S59 has to come at the expense of S44 riders. You know why? Because the more people ride the S59, the fewer people ride the S44 and the less service the S44 will get. (This isn't what I believe, but it's poking holes in your logic). So the same way an improvement to the S59 doesn't have to be at the expense of S44 riders is the same way an improvement to the S89 doesn't mean it will be at the expense of S59 riders,

 

And for the express buses, just give it up already. It wasn't even a serious idea in the first place (in the sense that I wasn't putting all my energy into defending it) and aside from that, I already conceeded it wasn't a good idea. But if it's so "ridiculous" then you should never use another express bus for intraborough travel again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how does this screw over S59 riders? So they have to live with the current headways (and just so you know, "they" includes me). Big deal. It's not like the buses are super-crowded and aside from that there's still the S44. Besides, a lot of S59 riders would benefit from this as well. If you're at the SI Mall and have to go to Forest Avenue, you're forced to take a local bus (S44 or S59). Now you have the option of taking a limited bus which means your wait could be shorter and aside from that your trip will be slightly faster. You tell me exactly what's wrong with what I said.

 

If improving the S89 has to come at the expense of S59 riders, then you know what? Improving the S59 has to come at the expense of S44 riders. You know why? Because the more people ride the S59, the fewer people ride the S44 and the less service the S44 will get. (This isn't what I believe, but it's poking holes in your logic). So the same way an improvement to the S59 doesn't have to be at the expense of S44 riders is the same way an improvement to the S89 doesn't mean it will be at the expense of S59 riders,

 

And for the express buses, just give it up already. It wasn't even a serious idea in the first place (in the sense that I wasn't putting all my energy into defending it) and aside from that, I already conceeded it wasn't a good idea. But if it's so "ridiculous" then you should never use another express bus for intraborough travel again.

 

 

Simple... There's something called the S94... The S89 serves a purpose and it isn't for the SI Mall... If folks want serious "speed" they've got the express buses near by that they can use from the city or they can simply take the S89 down and transfer to a local bus. Either way your idea won't fly with the local politicians like Molinaro...

 

As for my express bus comment it works just fine so long as WE express bus riders use it. Your idea to have non express bus riders using it was what was ridiculous and still is. The few folks that actually use it on Staten Island is miniscule compared to what you were proposing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple... There's something called the S94... The S89 serves a purpose and it isn't for the SI Mall... If folks want serious "speed" they've got the express buses near by that they can use from the city or they can simply take the S89 down and transfer to a local bus. Either way your idea won't fly with the local politicians like Molinaro...

 

As for my express bus comment it works just fine so long as WE express bus riders use it. Your idea to have non express bus riders using it was what was ridiculous and still is. The few folks that actually use it on Staten Island is miniscule compared to what you were proposing.

 

 

First of all, what makes you think Molinaro would oppose this? It makes all the local buses more convenient for the people who live behind the mall, gives more options for people who take transit to the mall, and could potentially increase overall ridership. What's there to oppose? Or is it just because it's one of my ideas? Maybe if another user proposed the same idea, you'd be behind it, right?

 

And what the hell are you bringing express buses into the conversation for? If somebody lives along Richmond Avenue and wants to get to the mall, how the hell does an express bus help them? This isn't for riders going to Manhattan at all. This is for intra-SI riders.

 

And this has nothing to do with "speed". This has to do with frequency. Sure, the S89 is a little faster if you want to reach Forest Avenue or something, but if it runs every 30 minutes reverse-peak, the few minutes you save by taking it will be eaten up by the longer wait, and that's why everybody goes to the S44 & S59 in the front of the mall. But if you make it easier to take the S89 by putting it there with the S44 & S59, then more people will take it and riders overall will benefit.

 

And what the hell are you talking about? I said it was on specific routes where the local service was crappy(I posted it up here before I read it. If you want to accuse me of making a "ridiculous" proposal, you're going to have to search for it, since you're the one accusing me. Try Straphangers.org as well.

 

If you live along Huguenot Avenue and you have to walk 1/2 mile to the S56 that runs every 30 minutes, don't you think it would be better if you at least had the option of taking an express bus to get you to your destination faster. Yeah, I realize it wouldn't work, but it's not as "ridiculous" as you're making it out to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, what makes you think Molinaro would oppose this? It makes all the local buses more convenient for the people who live behind the mall, gives more options for people who take transit to the mall, and could potentially increase overall ridership. What's there to oppose? Or is it just because it's one of my ideas? Maybe if another user proposed the same idea, you'd be behind it, right?

 

First of all, drop the first of all crappola... Molinaro and the rest of the politicians would reject this for the reason I mentioned before. They sold the (MTA) on the S89 as a commuter alternative to relieve stress on folks using express buses and so on. That's what the S89 is there for, period. If you're so concerned about limited stop service, more S94s could be run.

 

And what the hell are you bringing express buses into the conversation for? If somebody lives along Richmond Avenue and wants to get to the mall, how the hell does an express bus help them? This isn't for riders going to Manhattan at all. This is for intra-SI riders.

 

lol... You're very slow I see... You don't think folks use the express bus within Staten Island who want to avoid the riff raff on the local buses? I've seen quite a few people do it on the X10 and X12. They're not supposed to but they do it.

 

And this has nothing to do with "speed". This has to do with frequency. Sure, the S89 is a little faster if you want to reach Forest Avenue or something, but if it runs every 30 minutes reverse-peak, the few minutes you save by taking it will be eaten up by the longer wait, and that's why everybody goes to the S44 & S59 in the front of the mall. But if you make it easier to take the S89 by putting it there with the S44 & S59, then more people will take it and riders overall will benefit.

 

BS it doesn't... You've brought up the S89 on a number of occasions about how it is faster and all of that. Also, if it only runs 30 minutes just because you have it there doesn't mean folks are going to flock to it. Most people will just take whatever bus comes first. Same thing goes with the subway.

 

And what the hell are you talking about? I said it was on specific routes where the local service was crappy(I posted it up here before I read it. If you want to accuse me of making a "ridiculous" proposal, you're going to have to search for it, since you're the one accusing me. Try Straphangers.org as well.

 

If you live along Huguenot Avenue and you have to walk 1/2 mile to the S56 that runs every 30 minutes, don't you think it would be better if you at least had the option of taking an express bus to get you to your destination faster. Yeah, I realize it wouldn't work, but it's not as "ridiculous" as you're making it out to be.

 

 

And just like you realize that it wouldn't work you should realize that it's a ridiculous idea. You have this habit of trying to change routes and make them serve multiple purposes to try to "maximize" as if the planners at the (MTA) are so stupid that they haven't thought about these things. Express bus service was NOT made for intra-borough commuting. It is supposed to be for travel TO & FROM Manhattan!! Now a person like me finds ways around that. Perfect example is me taking the X10 to the city and transferring to the BM3. It is more convenient and quicker to do that than to use the S53 and then walk to the B4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) First of all, drop the first of all crappola... Molinaro and the rest of the politicians would reject this for the reason I mentioned before. They sold the (MTA) on the S89 as a commuter alternative to relieve stress on folks using express buses and so on. That's what the S89 is there for, period. If you're so concerned about limited stop service, more S94s could be run.

 

2) lol... You're very slow I see... You don't think folks use the express bus within Staten Island who want to avoid the riff raff on the local buses? I've seen quite a few people do it on the X10 and X12. They're not supposed to but they do it.

 

3) BS it doesn't... You've brought up the S89 on a number of occasions about how it is faster and all of that. Also, if it only runs 30 minutes just because you have it there doesn't mean folks are going to flock to it. Most people will just take whatever bus comes first. Same thing goes with the subway.

 

4) And just like you realize that it wouldn't work you should realize that it's a ridiculous idea. You have this habit of trying to change routes and make them serve multiple purposes to try to "maximize" as if the planners at the (MTA) are so stupid that they haven't thought about these things. Express bus service was NOT made for intra-borough commuting. It is supposed to be for travel TO & FROM Manhattan!! Now a person like me finds ways around that. Perfect example is me taking the X10 to the city and transferring to the BM3. It is more convenient and quicker to do that than to use the S53 and then walk to the B4.

 

 

1) Well, it's not my fault there are multiple reasons why you're wrong. You have a better way for me to list out my reasons? How about I try bullet points?

 

* The S89 is not for people going to Manhattan. It's for riders working in Jersey City and Hoboken, so it's supposed to relieve any of the express bus lines. I told you explicitly before and for some reason, you accepted that, and now you're denying that. You said something like "Oh, well express bus riders aren't going to make a bunch of transfers just to save a little bit of money", and I said that it actually costs extra over the express bus, and you have to make all the transfers in addition to that. You don't believe me? Do the math. Compare the costs of a year's worth of express bus passes ($2,600) to the cost of the S89 + HBLR + PATH (I'm too lazy to do the math right now)

 

If you want to search for a thread from back when the S89 was first created, I remember somebody else also mentioned that it's for riders in Jersey City and Hoboken (but of course, I already know that seeing that I use the route every day).

 

And the last time I checked, the S94 doesn't run limited down Richmond Avenue (and like I said, limited-stop service was not my concern)

 

2) So tell me then. It's 5PM and you're at the SI Mall going to say, Forest Avenue. What express bus could you possibly take? The X17 stops at about 16:15 I believe, so you can't take that, so what else is there besides the local bus?

 

3) No. In fact I mentioned it a few posts up how it's specifically not that much faster than the local buses. See post #155: http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/topic/34584-staten-island-bus-service-proposalsideas-thread-2012/page__st__140?do=findComment&comment=537858

 

"And like you said, the S89 serves to provide quicker (though sometimes not as fast as you might think. I've been on S44s that went nonstop from Richmond Hill Road to Victory Blvd) access to major stops, but that doesn't mean it can't serve a dual purpose."

 

And you're not understanding me. As of now, they can't take the S89 if it comes first because it stops on the opposite side of the mall. I'm not suggesting that everybody going north from the SI Mall wants limited-stop service, but I'm saying it would give riders options. Of course, the S44 & S59 run more frequently, so it's more likely that you'll catch one of those than the S89, but still.

 

Let me give you an example. Let's say that within a 30 minute timeframe, you have 160 people going northbound from the mall. (Let's just use that as an example). As of now, you have the S44 & S59 running every 15 minutes each, so that's 4 buses that will come in that 30 minute timeframe, so that should be about 40 people getting on each bus (160/4), plus whoever gets on at the regular portions of the route. If you had the S89 running along the same street as the S44 & S59, you'd have an extra 1 bus thrown into the mix, which would mean that the average bus would have 32 passengers instead of 40. So instead of being on a bus with 40 other people and getting to see a nearly empty S89 breeze by, you'd be on a bus with 32 other people and if an S89 passed, the load would be more or less the same as yours

 

Now keep in mind that this is assuming the buses are spaced perfectly evenly. Sometimes, there might be a delay (maybe by the Yukon Depot) and the S89 can come in and save the day, since it has the capacity for additional crowds (moreso than the S44 and S59 would)

 

4) OH MY GOD!!! Would you drop it already? I said to keep the express buses as is and stopped supporting that idea a long time ago. This is in no way related to discussing the Richmond Avenue routes so there's no point in bringing it up. And aside from that, why are you on that BS "Oh, they can take the express bus if they want speed for intra-SI commuting" if it's the exact example of the idea you oppose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The S59 should be improved either way. The S89 serves mainly as a commuter route as B35 said and I don't see that changing mainly because politicians fought for the S89 for years down Richmond Avenue for the purpose that it serves now and now here you come with your bright ideas on how to f*ck up the line and have it serve other purposes because it just needs so much more riders...

 

Simple... There's something called the S94... The S89 serves a purpose and it isn't for the SI Mall... If folks want serious "speed" they've got the express buses near by that they can use from the city or they can simply take the S89 down and transfer to a local bus.

 

Yeah, I just don't see the point of trying to make more out of the S89 than what it is.

 

 

 

But the S89 is going to run anyway. You might as well get more usage out of it instead of adding service to the S59 while still leaving (relatively) empty S89s rolling around. And like I said, there are some areas better-served by the S89 compared to the S59 (I mean, the S59 doesn't do much good for anybody east of the MLK Expressway, once it gets north of Forest Avenue. They're better served by the S89)

 

And if we're talking peak direction, the S89 actually does get more riders going to Bayonne, compared to S59 riders in Port Richmond. Reverse-peak, it's a different story, but even then, don't underestimate the amount of riders it can get at Morningstar Road & Walker Street (southbound). And like you said, the S89 serves to provide quicker (though sometimes not as fast as you might think. I've been on S44s that went nonstop from Richmond Hill Road to Victory Blvd) access to major stops, but that doesn't mean it can't serve a dual purpose.

 

In any case, I don't see the harm in doing the streamlining I mentioned to at least attempt to get more riders on the S89. And if that doesn't work, then S59 service should be improved.

...and I don't see the harm in wanting to improve service on the 59.

 

 

Not that it matters to me, but it's clear you're exuding a bias.... The double talking here - You're makin a point out of "still" (which implicates that they're currently) relatively empty 89's running about, but yet go on to tell me that I shouldn't underestimate reverse peak usage @ morningstar & walker... What levels of ridership are you trying to portray to me that it gets.... Do the buses get good usage overall or not?

 

This notion that the 89 should be improved before the 59 - the latter, whose service is what it is partly b/c the 44 also runs along about 1/2 the 59's route.....It all boils down to the MTA being frugal - Which is a big deal.....

 

The 59 is more important than the 89 along richmond av (and for the borough itself); always has been.... All the 89 is, is a commuter version of the 59 that goes on to serve the HBLR station..... The riders that use the current 89 within SI is "dual purpose" enough for that route.....

 

Furthermore, just because the 59 doesn't serve that specific area west of the mlk expwy. like the 89 does, doesn't mean (more of a) purpose should be made out of a commuter route.... You seem to be of this belief that improving the 59 automatically equates to the degradation of the 89.....

 

I beg to differ.....

Hell, you said it yourself - The buses are gonna run anyway....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Yeah, I just don't see the point of trying to make more out of the S89 than what it is.

 

2) ...and I don't see the harm in wanting to improve service on the 59.

 

Not that it matters to me, but it's clear you're exuding a bias.... The double talking here - You're makin a point out of "still" (which implicates that they're currently) relatively empty 89's running about, but yet go on to tell me that I shouldn't underestimate reverse peak usage @ morningstar & walker... What levels of ridership are you trying to portray to me that it gets.... Do the buses get good usage overall or not?

 

This notion that the 89 should be improved before the 59 - the latter, whose service is what it is partly b/c the 44 also runs along about 1/2 the 59's route.....It all boils down to the MTA being frugal - Which is a big deal.....

 

The 59 is more important than the 89 along richmond av (and for the borough itself); always has been.... All the 89 is, is a commuter version of the 59 that goes on to serve the HBLR station..... The riders that use the current 89 within SI is "dual purpose" enough for that route.....

 

Furthermore, just because the 59 doesn't serve that specific area west of the mlk expwy. like the 89 does, doesn't mean (more of a) purpose should be made out of a commuter route.... You seem to be of this belief that improving the 59 automatically equates to the degradation of the 89.....

 

I beg to differ.....

Hell, you said it yourself - The buses are gonna run anyway....

 

 

1) Well, there's a difference between "not seeing the point" and calling an idea "ridiculous" (this is directed at him, not you)

 

2) Well, that was more referring to the PM, reverse-peak buses (and of course, my area of expertise is north of the SI Mall). Let me elaborate.

 

* My brother used take the Richmond Avenue buses to school (he eventually got fed up with it and just snuck on the school bus). He's complained about S89 buses actually flagging him (of course, there was space in the back, and other times when he gave up getting in through the front after dipping in the MetroCard so he ran to the back and went in through there). I attribute this to the elimination of the school buses adding a bunch of students to the local buses, but even before, the buses still got a decent load, when I used to take the bus to school (so this is southbound in the AM. BTW, the reason I mentioned my brother first was because his was a more recent experience)

 

* I leave later, and when I take the S89, it has a seated load, give or take. When there's a big delay, it can actually get crowded to the point where you're asking people to move back, but that's rare. (So this is northbound in the AM).

 

* Southbound in the PM, it varies based on the specific trip. I've seen buses with like 1/3 of a seated load, and I've seen buses that were full to the point where the B/O was asking people to move back (the riders said it was because there were 3 HBLR trains worth of passengers on the bus, plus I think it came before the S59 & S94, so that definitely didn't help). Generally, the buses at the height of rush hour are more crowded than the buses at the tail end of it (this goes for the AM as well, but I think it holds a bit more true for the PM). At the stops along Richmond Avenue, you always have the people who go "Oh, this bus goes to the back of the mall?" but generally there aren't a whole lot of people who do that. On average, I'd say that it's more or less a seated load, but keep in mind that this is on the North Shore, and pulling out of Richmond & Monsey (I like to use the techincal term for the Richmond & Forest stop) is generally as crowded as it gets.

 

* And now we come to the main point of the argument, which is northbound in the PM. As you probably know, a lot of the shoppers come out at this time (moreso than the 3 other time periods I mentioned). Since the S44 & S59 are more frequent than the S89, everybody and their mother is taking those routes over the S89, leaving the S89 empty. Here's a recent trip where I actually paid attention to the number of people getting on & off (and keep in mind that I too would've gone for the S44 & S59, but I timed myself for a specific S89 trip)

 

- When the bus pulled into Marsh Avenue/Windham Loop, there were 3 people onboard. One person got off and I got on (3 people)

 

- At Marsh Avenue/Westport Street, one person got on (4 people)

 

- At Richmond Avenue/Richmond Hill Road, one person got on and one got off (4 people)

 

- We bypassed Rockland Avenue, and at Victory Blvd, 6 people got on and nobody got off (10 people)

 

- At Morani Street, I got off and one person got on (10 people)

 

At that time of the afternoon, the S44s & S59s have at least a few standees each (assuming they come evenly spaced, or else you might end up with one seated load and one that's pretty crowded), and yet here's an S89 that carried 10 people. Now, is it the worst thing in the world if the buses have a few standees? No, but what's the point when you could have the S89 help out? And aside from that it helps cut down the wait time as well.

 

Basically, southbound in the AM, nobody's going to the SI Mall because it isn't even open yet. In fact, the S89 better serves the schools along Marsh Avenue, so people aren't hesitant about taking it.

 

Northbound in the AM, the HBLR riders provide a good portion of the ridership, so there's no real problem filling the buses (I mean, they have to take the S89 if they're going to Bayonne). Plus, you got some students that go to school in Port Richmond that also contribute to the ridership. Since a lot of the students live along Richmond Avenue, it doesn't matter what route the S89 takes by the SI Mall for them. (I mean, I do have some friends who live by the SI Mall and take the S89, but most students live further north. I'd guess a lot of the students in there either go to one of the schools on Marsh Avenue or take the S61 to Wagner HS.) But keep in mind that those students, as well as everybody else who lives by Marsh Avenue (and uses transit) would prefer it if the S44 & S59 buses serve "their" side of the SI Mall instead of going to the front where nobody lives, since it saves them the trouble of having to walk all the way across the mall parking lots and everything to reach the bus. (And of course, nobody's going to the mall in the AM rush)

 

Southbound in the PM, you have some people going to the SI Mall, but since all of the buses stop at the same stop, there's no problem reaching the S89. If you don't mind coming in through the "back" of the mall (which is really more or less the same distance to the buses at the "front" of Ring Road), then it's no real problem if the S89 comes first.

 

But northbound in the PM, like I said, the problem is the poor frequencies of the S89, which wouldn't be a problem except that the stop is seperate from the S44 & S59, which is why nobody uses it coming from the SI Mall (plus, having to cross Marsh Avenue doesn't help)

 

Plus, you have the same problem (to a certain extent) going southbound. You have the S59 & S79 running frequently at the front of the mall, and the S55 & S56 running infrequently at the back of the mall (and plus, like I said, the S59 & S79 don't serve the residences along Marsh Avenue). So anybody going to the ETC is going to take the S59 & S79 (I mean, I know there aren't a whole lot of passengers just going to the ETC, but still, it can't hurt to give the S55 & S56 more ridership while giving the passengers more frequent service). For riders going to Eltingville, they tend to go towards the S59 & S79 because of the more frequent service, rather than going to the back of the SI Mall for the S89. I mean, like I said, peak direction ridership isn't too shabby, but it still can't hurt to boost it a little bit and more importantly, give riders more options.

 

So basically, the plan is to have all of the routes serving the SI Mall take the "back" of Ring Road. I was originally planning on having them all take Marsh Avenue (basically, the S44 & S59 would take the S89 route, and the S79 would take the S55 & S56 route), but I figured there might be traffic problems at times with the schools there and all that, so it would be better to have them take Ring Road, but there would still be easy access for the people living by Marsh Avenue.

 

Since all the routes would be on the same travel path, it would maximize options:

* If you want the northern part of Richmond Avenue, you have the option of the S44/S94 & S59/S89

* If you want the ETC, you have the option of the S55/S56/S59/S79/S89

* If you want the Eltingville area, you have the option of the S59/S79/S89

* (Not that really anybody would consider this, since the S61/S91 is much faster), but if you want St. George, you have the S44/S94 & S61/S91

 

So if one bus goes missing or comes late, the effect isn't as bad.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Well, it's not my fault there are multiple reasons why you're wrong. You have a better way for me to list out my reasons? How about I try bullet points?

 

* The S89 is not for people going to Manhattan. It's for riders working in Jersey City and Hoboken, so it's supposed to relieve any of the express bus lines. I told you explicitly before and for some reason, you accepted that, and now you're denying that. You said something like "Oh, well express bus riders aren't going to make a bunch of transfers just to save a little bit of money", and I said that it actually costs extra over the express bus, and you have to make all the transfers in addition to that. You don't believe me? Do the math. Compare the costs of a year's worth of express bus passes ($2,600) to the cost of the S89 + HBLR + PATH (I'm too lazy to do the math right now)

 

If you want to search for a thread from back when the S89 was first created, I remember somebody else also mentioned that it's for riders in Jersey City and Hoboken (but of course, I already know that seeing that I use the route every day).

 

And the last time I checked, the S94 doesn't run limited down Richmond Avenue (and like I said, limited-stop service was not my concern)

 

Sorry to tell you but there are people that do use the connection to go to Manhattan. I know first hand but here is a link that shows this...

 

http://statenislandusa.com/2007/jointfare.html

 

Some folks don't care about the cost. If you work in Manhattan and don't want to sit in traffic on the express bus, the S89 connection is one that some use and that is another reason folks use it. It's like me. A few times a week I will use MetroNorth because with the Hudson Rail Link, which is only 5 minutes from my apt. to the Spuyten Duyvil station, it allows me to get into my office well under an hour. This morning I left my apt. at 08:36, walked to Riverdale Av and 236th & had a few minutes to spare before the 08:42 shuttle came. We got to the Spuyten Duyvil station at 08:48 or so and the train was there at 08:56. We got into Grand Central around 09:20 or so and I made a stop at the bank and was still opening the door to my office before 09:30, so door to door and less than an hour with two connections. Yeah it costs me an additional $7.50 each time but it's not like I can't afford it and it's only a few days a week when I know traffic may not be so good, so it's worth spending the extra $15.00 or $20.00 a week and still buying my $50.00 Express Bus Plus card since I get to sleep in later and leave my apt. later too. Coming home and on the weekends I still use the express bus exclusively.

 

 

2) So tell me then. It's 5PM and you're at the SI Mall going to say, Forest Avenue. What express bus could you possibly take? The X17 stops at about 16:15 I believe, so you can't take that, so what else is there besides the local bus?

 

I didn't say anything about the SI Mall... I just said that folks use the express bus within Staten Island. In the city though plenty of folks will use the express bus from say Midtown to Downtown if they can't get a cab or whatever. Me personally I've used it in the city coming from my office to go to meet up with friends or whatever down in the Village or in Chelsea or even Downtown. I've done it with the X28, X10, X1, BxM18 and the X7 too and I've seen other express bus riders do it as well. It all depends on where you're going. The express bus won't be ideal for every situation but there are times when it is and when it is, you use it.

 

3) No. In fact I mentioned it a few posts up how it's specifically not that much faster than the local buses. See post #155: http://www.nyctransi...140#entry537858

 

"And like you said, the S89 serves to provide quicker (though sometimes not as fast as you might think. I've been on S44s that went nonstop from Richmond Hill Road to Victory Blvd) access to major stops, but that doesn't mean it can't serve a dual purpose."

 

And you're not understanding me. As of now, they can't take the S89 if it comes first because it stops on the opposite side of the mall. I'm not suggesting that everybody going north from the SI Mall wants limited-stop service, but I'm saying it would give riders options. Of course, the S44 & S59 run more frequently, so it's more likely that you'll catch one of those than the S89, but still.

 

You can go back and forth, but you've mentioned in some instances how the S89 was faster, but even so what would be the point of waiting 30 minutes anyway if the bus isn't that fast? And AGAIN, the bus is NOT meant to be for multi-usage!! Get it through your head already. You're obsessed with trying to show me your point which I clearly understand. I'm telling you your idea won't fly period. Read the link that I posted above. The purpose of the route is to serve as a commuter LINK or shuttle for folks who work in NJ and Manhattan. That's like saying oh the Hudson Rail Link shuttles could be fuller so why don't we extend them to make more stops... <_< What you don't think about is that if those S89s start becoming delayed because of your "glorious" extension, you're going to have some pissed off people if they can't catch their train. Our Hudson Rail Link shuttles are scheduled to link up with the MetroNorth trains so if that doesn't happen you better believe folks would be very pissed having to wait another 20 - 30 minutes for the next one, especially paying damn there $10.00 between the ticket for the train and $2.25 for the shuttle bus.

 

Let me give you an example. Let's say that within a 30 minute timeframe, you have 160 people going northbound from the mall. (Let's just use that as an example). As of now, you have the S44 & S59 running every 15 minutes each, so that's 4 buses that will come in that 30 minute timeframe, so that should be about 40 people getting on each bus (160/4), plus whoever gets on at the regular portions of the route. If you had the S89 running along the same street as the S44 & S59, you'd have an extra 1 bus thrown into the mix, which would mean that the average bus would have 32 passengers instead of 40. So instead of being on a bus with 40 other people and getting to see a nearly empty S89 breeze by, you'd be on a bus with 32 other people and if an S89 passed, the load would be more or less the same as yours

 

Now keep in mind that this is assuming the buses are spaced perfectly evenly. Sometimes, there might be a delay (maybe by the Yukon Depot) and the S89 can come in and save the day, since it has the capacity for additional crowds (moreso than the S44 and S59 would)

 

This is NOT about loading or any of that. The purpose of the S89 is to link up with the rail in NJ. Period. End of story. People are paying a premium for the service and that is why your idea will not fly. You want folks to pay for commuter service and pack their buses up with non rail link folks because you're not happy that buses are full enough... Give me a break. When you get a job and start working professionally maybe you'll get a clue. No way in hell am I paying over $200.00 a month to be told that I now have to risk missing my rail connection because some people think that the bus should be more crowded. There would be a serious uproar and rightfully so.

 

4) OH MY GOD!!! Would you drop it already? I said to keep the express buses as is and stopped supporting that idea a long time ago. This is in no way related to discussing the Richmond Avenue routes so there's no point in bringing it up. And aside from that, why are you on that BS "Oh, they can take the express bus if they want speed for intra-SI commuting" if it's the exact example of the idea you oppose?

 

 

No I won't drop it because you are obsessed with seeing every bus filled to capacity. Sorry to tell you but in the real world some buses will just NOT be packed to the rafters and you're just going to have to live with that. As for the intra-borough comment, EXPRESS BUS RIDERS can do it because not many of us do it. We pay a premium for our service so yeah we can do it. It's not for every Joe Blow though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Sorry to tell you but there are people that do use the connection to go to Manhattan. I know first hand but here is a link that shows this...

 

http://statenislandu.../jointfare.html

 

2) I didn't say anything about the SI Mall... I just said that folks use the express bus within Staten Island.

 

3) You can go back and forth, but you've mentioned in some instances how the S89 was faster, but even so what would be the point of waiting 30 minutes anyway if the bus isn't that fast? And AGAIN, the bus is NOT meant to be for multi-usage!! Get it through your head already. You're obsessed with trying to show me your point which I clearly understand. I'm telling you your idea won't fly period. Read the link that I posted above. The purpose of the route is to serve as a commuter LINK or shuttle for folks who work in NJ and Manhattan. That's like saying oh the Hudson Rail Link shuttles could be fuller so why don't we extend them to make more stops... <_< What you don't think about is that if those S89s start becoming delayed because of your "glorious" extension, you're going to have some pissed off people if they can't catch their train. Our Hudson Rail Link shuttles are scheduled to link up with the MetroNorth trains so if that doesn't happen you better believe folks would be very pissed having to wait another 20 - 30 minutes for the next one, especially paying damn there $10.00 between the ticket for the train and $2.25 for the shuttle bus.

 

4) This is NOT about loading or any of that. The purpose of the S89 is to link up with the rail in NJ. Period. End of story. People are paying a premium for the service and that is why your idea will not fly. You want folks to pay for commuter service and pack their buses up with non rail link folks because you're not happy that buses are full enough... Give me a break. When you get a job and start working professionally maybe you'll get a clue. No way in hell am I paying over $200.00 a month to be told that I now have to risk missing my rail connection because some people think that the bus should be more crowded. There would be a serious uproar and rightfully so.

 

5) No I won't drop it because you are obsessed with seeing every bus filled to capacity. Sorry to tell you but in the real world some buses will just NOT be packed to the rafters and you're just going to have to live with that. As for the intra-borough comment, EXPRESS BUS RIDERS can do it because not many of us do it. We pay a premium for our service so yeah we can do it. It's not for every Joe Blow though.

 

 

1) All that says is that you can reach Manhattan. That doesn't mean that significant numbers of people actually do that. The primary point is to reach Jersey City and Hoboken. I mean, if you're going from Walker Street to Lower Manhattan, the S89 is probably faster than making your way down to the X10 or X12, and there may be those who find it more reliable than dealing with traffic, but they are in the minority.

 

2) Well why bring it up if we're discussing service to the SI Mall from the Richmond Avenue corridor?

 

3) That's the exact point I'm making. It would at least give riders a shot at catching the bus. If it comes before an S44 or S59, great. If not, oh well.

 

And the bus isn't meant to be multiusage??? Tell that to the groups of schoolkids who get on at Monsey Place (Forest Avenue). Hell, tell that to myself and all the schoolkids who use it to go to school in Port Richmond. Are you serious???

 

And where the hell did I mention anything about an extension???? I said I'd have it take a slightly different route down Ring Road instead of Marsh Avenue, which actually avoids traffic. And aside from that, there's close to a 10 minute cushion for riders going to the HBLR and the trains generally run fairly frequently.

 

4) Where the hell do you get $200 from? It's like $64 for the HBLR ticket and about $90 for the MetroCard (assuming you only travel weekdays and don't have a need for the Unlimited MetroCard). I already said that the primary market is riders going to Jersey City and Hoboken, so don't add in anything for the PATH.

 

And I already said the HBLR runs fairly frequently (and aside from that, buses generally have a nice cushion when connecting with the trains: http://mta.info/nyct/bus/schedule/staten/s089cur.pdf): Here, check the schedule: http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/bus/T0100.pdf

 

You have a train roughly every 10 minutes (Sometimes they bunch of the trains a little bit because they have the local/express service, but the largest gap I'm seeing is 12 minutes and there's only a couple of those). Yeah, it's not the Lexington Avenue Line where the trains run like water, but it's definitely a decent frequency.

 

And aside from that, the main "extra crowds" would be during the PM rush going northbound. Ya know, that time when the S89 drivers leave the terminal late so they don't have to worry about getting ahead of schedule.

 

5) Yes, and I specifically said that they would pay the full $5.50 (Look it up if you don't believe me) As for the "packed to the rafters" comment, I guess it's alright to have empty S89s and crowded S44s & S59s, right? Because they're local riders, so they're not "affluent" enough to matter to you. Meanwhile, the S89s have the capacity and also to cushion time built into the schedule to handle the crowds, but that doesn't matter, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) All that says is that you can reach Manhattan. That doesn't mean that significant numbers of people actually do that. The primary point is to reach Jersey City and Hoboken. I mean, if you're going from Walker Street to Lower Manhattan, the S89 is probably faster than making your way down to the X10 or X12, and there may be those who find it more reliable than dealing with traffic, but they are in the minority.

 

You don't know that. You just swore up and down that riders aren't using that connection to get to Manhattan. I KNOW they are because I remember when the S89 first came out... There was plenty of talk about some folks switching from the express bus and instead opting to use the S89 to the rail for the precise reason that I mentioned.

 

2) Well why bring it up if we're discussing service to the SI Mall from the Richmond Avenue corridor?

 

No, not we're... You are... The thread is about SI Bus Service proposals, not the SI Mall, so it's not like I'm bound to discuss the SI Mall.

 

3) That's the exact point I'm making. It would at least give riders a shot at catching the bus. If it comes before an S44 or S59, great. If not, oh well.

 

And the bus isn't meant to be multiusage??? Tell that to the groups of schoolkids who get on at Monsey Place (Forest Avenue). Hell, tell that to myself and all the schoolkids who use it to go to school in Port Richmond. Are you serious???

 

And where the hell did I mention anything about an extension???? I said I'd have it take a slightly different route down Ring Road instead of Marsh Avenue, which actually avoids traffic. And aside from that, there's close to a 10 minute cushion for riders going to the HBLR and the trains generally run fairly frequently.

 

Look I don't know how much more clearer I can make this but when Molinaro and the rest of the politicians came up with the S89 proposal to the (MTA) they sure as hell weren't thinking about school kids. I remember the whole press conference and the stated purpose of the route. They were thinking about COMMUTERS, as in working professionals. It's ridiculous that you can sit here and b*tch and moan when you've got two other friggin local buses running down Richmond Avenue. The S89 is separate for a reason and it runs the hours that it does for a reason... The school kids using it has nothing to do with its main purpose. Just so happens that they can get access to the bus, but it was not made primarily with them in mind.

 

4) Where the hell do you get $200 from? It's like $64 for the HBLR ticket and about $90 for the MetroCard (assuming you only travel weekdays and don't have a need for the Unlimited MetroCard). I already said that the primary market is riders going to Jersey City and Hoboken, so don't add in anything for the PATH.

 

I don't care what it costs. It's a premium fare, period and the primary market is for commuters going to NY AND NJ. You're going to tell me and you don't even use the damn thing (outside of the S89). I considered using it myself, so I know what I'm taking about.

 

And I already said the HBLR runs fairly frequently (and aside from that, buses generally have a nice cushion when connecting with the trains: http://mta.info/nyct...ten/s089cur.pdf): Here, check the schedule: http://www.njtransit...f/bus/T0100.pdf

 

You have a train roughly every 10 minutes (Sometimes they bunch of the trains a little bit because they have the local/express service, but the largest gap I'm seeing is 12 minutes and there's only a couple of those). Yeah, it's not the Lexington Avenue Line where the trains run like water, but it's definitely a decent frequency.

 

No body cares about that. At rush hour you want to catch the bus or train that the bus is scheduled to link up with period. You're paying a premium price for a reason. Not to sit around and wait and BS because a few people think that the bus should serve more people.

 

And aside from that, the main "extra crowds" would be during the PM rush going northbound. Ya know, that time when the S89 drivers leave the terminal late so they don't have to worry about getting ahead of schedule.

 

Aside from nothing... Those riders want to get home and they're paying a premium for it. You're not convincing someone who is paying a premium to have their routes changed which could elongate their commute and if you think they're going to go for it, bring up the idea to Molinaro and see what he says. Everybody except for you knows the purpose of the S89, but you're obsessed with this nonsense about getting buses fuller. Those folks near ETC would certainly have a few choice words for you since they esp. wanted the service, with the X1 sometimes being a commute well over 2 hours just one way.

 

5) Yes, and I specifically said that they would pay the full $5.50 (Look it up if you don't believe me) As for the "packed to the rafters" comment, I guess it's alright to have empty S89s and crowded S44s & S59s, right? Because they're local riders, so they're not "affluent" enough to matter to you. Meanwhile, the S89s have the capacity and also to cushion time built into the schedule to handle the crowds, but that doesn't matter, right?

 

 

Who cares... The idea is ridiculous so drop it already.

 

And yes it is quite alright. The (MTA) needs to add more service on the S44 and S59 and they refuse. When I wanted a quicker commute from the S48 to the ferry to the subway, I shelled out more money and started taking the express bus. That's the way it is. Service is geared on Staten Island for the middle class and upper middle class and that isn't changing because they're the ones who vote the politicians in office, not the poor local bus riders, whether you like it or not. Money=power.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Checkmate, this is directed at you (in response to [post #165]).... No need for me to quote the full post just to say this little bit.

 

But yeah, even though I don't agree w/ the idea, I won't necessarily use that adjective (ridiculous) to define it.... There's a reason why I (purposefully) didn't comment on the specifics of it..... My commentary regarding altering the 89 & improving service along richmond av is simply one more of priority.... I won't quote the whole post, but I'll say that was a good breakdown/illustration of your stance......

 

 

 

 

No, not we're... You are... The thread is about SI Bus Service proposals, not the SI Mall, so it's not like I'm bound to discuss the SI Mall.

In his defense, I was talking about Richmond av......

 

BUT......

 

Well why bring it up if we're discussing service to the SI Mall from the Richmond Avenue corridor?

To be honest, I was talking about improving the S59 service in its totality....

Although it defines a significant portion of the corridor's usage, my comments/concern weren't limited to people just traveling to/from the mall....

 

 

Now you two can get back to discussing what y'all were discussing.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the S79 is going full SBS this fall, will this mean that the S59 will get service increases? I just want some thoughts from those who are more knowledgeable about the borough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the S79 is going full SBS this fall, will this mean that the S59 will get service increases? I just want some thoughts from those who are more knowledgeable about the borough.

 

 

http://mta.info/news/stories/?story=684

 

The article on the (MTA) website states that the S59 and S78 will provide local stop service, but it doesn't indicate if they'll see increased service or not. In any event, both routes are rather long and get pretty crappy headways and the S78 has run TERRIBLE for years. I believe it had 20 minute headways before the Bricktown extension, or at least it had it during certain times of the day and yet you'd see S78s running back to back, and I've seen it on several occasions along Hylan Blvd. Since the switch to Bricktown they appear to have bumped up headways to 15 minutes since it now serves that shopping area which has received positive feedback, but some folks haven't been thrilled completely with the S78 and S74 changes. Ideally they should add service to one or both routes, but we'll have to wait and see. I would imagine they may add a bus or so more an hour but I don't see anything more than that. They want folks to use the S79SBS but if there is enough outcry from the community they may be forced to add service. Aside from that I don't see the S78 having enough ridership to get headways increased up from 15 minutes. Maybe the S59 will get more service though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) You don't know that. You just swore up and down that riders aren't using that connection to get to Manhattan. I KNOW they are because I remember when the S89 first came out... There was plenty of talk about some folks switching from the express bus and instead opting to use the S89 to the rail for the precise reason that I mentioned.

 

2) No, not we're... You are... The thread is about SI Bus Service proposals, not the SI Mall, so it's not like I'm bound to discuss the SI Mall.

3) Look I don't know how much more clearer I can make this but when Molinaro and the rest of the politicians came up with the S89 proposal to the (MTA) they sure as hell weren't thinking about school kids. I remember the whole press conference and the stated purpose of the route. They were thinking about COMMUTERS, as in working professionals. It's ridiculous that you can sit here and b*tch and moan when you've got two other friggin local buses running down Richmond Avenue. The S89 is separate for a reason and it runs the hours that it does for a reason... The school kids using it has nothing to do with its main purpose. Just so happens that they can get access to the bus, but it was not made primarily with them in mind.

 

4) I don't care what it costs. It's a premium fare, period and the primary market is for commuters going to NY AND NJ. You're going to tell me and you don't even use the damn thing (outside of the S89). I considered using it myself, so I know what I'm taking about.

 

5) No body cares about that. At rush hour you want to catch the bus or train that the bus is scheduled to link up with period. You're paying a premium price for a reason. Not to sit around and wait and BS because a few people think that the bus should serve more people.

 

6) Aside from nothing... Those riders want to get home and they're paying a premium for it. You're not convincing someone who is paying a premium to have their routes changed which could elongate their commute and if you think they're going to go for it, bring up the idea to Molinaro and see what he says. Everybody except for you knows the purpose of the S89, but you're obsessed with this nonsense about getting buses fuller. Those folks near ETC would certainly have a few choice words for you since they esp. wanted the service, with the X1 sometimes being a commute well over 2 hours just one way.

 

7) Who cares... The idea is ridiculous so drop it already.

8) And yes it is quite alright. The (MTA) needs to add more service on the S44 and S59 and they refuse. When I wanted a quicker commute from the S48 to the ferry to the subway, I shelled out more money and started taking the express bus. That's the way it is. Service is geared on Staten Island for the middle class and upper middle class and that isn't changing because they're the ones who vote the politicians in office, not the poor local bus riders, whether you like it or not. Money=power.

 

 

1) No, read the article that you posted. It mentioned nothing about former express riders. It just mentioned that its ridership surpassed that of 8 express routes. Are there some people who use it to reach Manhattan? I'm sure there are. Are they any significant number? No. Do you want me to personally interview every S89 rider to see where their destination is to prove my point?

 

2) Yeah, and you're commenting on a specific proposal which has to do with service near the SI Mall. Why the hell are you bringing express buses into this.

 

3) It doesn't make a difference to me because I already have the benefit of having all the buses at the same stop. My travels are usually in the northern direction, so it doesn't make much of a difference to me either way. But what's wrong from wanting the people at the SI Mall to enjoy the same benefit I do?

 

And according to JAzumah, out of the 1,000 S89 riders, 600 of them are intra-SI riders, who are simply using it as a supplement to the Richmond Avenue locals. The majority (maybe not the vast majority) of S89 riders aren't using it to get to Bayonne.

 

4) What the hell are you talking about? It's the same $2.25 as the other local buses. The MTA isn't getting that $65 a month or whatever that they pay to NJT for the HBLR pass.

 

And it's my home route. Obviously I use it primarily to go to school, but that's ridiculous to assume I've never used it to get to Bayonne (and on that note, have you actually used it to reach Bayonne? I don't care what you were "considering" doing. I want to know if your two feet walked off the S89 and onto that bridge that leads to the platform of the 34th Street HBLR station.) There are times when I had to go to Newark or Jersey City and I used the S89 because it was faster than going through Manhattan (in fact, I've posted about the time I used it to reach the #308, but that wasn't the only time I used it), so you could cut the crap.

 

5) Yeah, and I highly doubt there is going to be that major a delay that you'll miss the HBLR train. Did you know that all of the S89 buses during the time period I describe (PM rush, northbound) run 5 minutes late to avoid getting ahead of schedule? And I've rode them starting from Eltingville as well and it had nothing to do with any delays. It just had to do with the driver not wanting to get ahead of schedule.

 

And aside from that, what will it take? An extra 2-3 minutes at most to pick up the extra people at the SI Mall? And you avoid a couple of traffic lights so you could probably make up the time right there. Either that, or leave 3 minutes late instead of 5 minutes late.

 

6) I guarantee you a handful of riders at most switched from the express bus to the S89 at the ETC. And aside from that, I'm talking reverse-peak. Yeah, they're going to drive to the ETC, catch the S89 to get to Jersey City and then what? How are they going to get home?

 

7) I already dropped it and YOU KEEP BRINGING IT UP.

 

8) Yes, so that situation should continue when it benefits absolutely nobody, right? It doesn't benefit S89 riders. It doesn't benefit S44 & S59 riders. Nobody. Nadie. Nessuno. It doesn't even save the MTA any money.

 

And again with the express buses. Tell me what express bus goes from the SI Mall to Port Richmond? Or connects to the S46 for Mariners' Harbor riders. Huh? This has absolutely nothing to do with riders going to Manhattan.

 

1) Checkmate, this is directed at you (in response to [post #165]).... No need for me to quote the full post just to say this little bit.

 

But yeah, even though I don't agree w/ the idea, I won't necessarily use that adjective (ridiculous) to define it.... There's a reason why I (purposefully) didn't comment on the specifics of it..... My commentary regarding altering the 89 & improving service along richmond av is simply one more of priority.... I won't quote the whole post, but I'll say that was a good breakdown/illustration of your stance......

 

2) In his defense, I was talking about Richmond av......

 

BUT......

 

To be honest, I was talking about improving the S59 service in its totality....

Although it defines a significant portion of the corridor's usage, my comments/concern weren't limited to people just traveling to/from the mall....

 

Now you two can get back to discussing what y'all were discussing.....

 

 

1) Well, as I said the ThrxxBus below, when the S79 gets +SBS+ this fall, it might be a moot point because the S59 might get improved anyway. I mean, the S79 +SBS+ and S89 leave local riders in Eltingville with just the S59.

 

2) But still, what the hell do express buses have to go with anything? Whether we're discussing all the Richmond Avenue routes, or just the SI Mall area, or just the S59, there was no point in him bringing it up.

 

Since the S79 is going full SBS this fall, will this mean that the S59 will get service increases? I just want some thoughts from those who are more knowledgeable about the borough.

 

 

According to the MTA, it will. This is only speculation, but I'm guessing off-peak service would probably be improved to every 15 minutes (instead of 20) and maybe rush hour service would be improved to every 12 minutes instead of 15.

 

http://mta.info/news...ries/?story=684

 

The article on the (MTA) website states that the S59 and S78 will provide local stop service, but it doesn't indicate if they'll see increased service or not. In any event, both routes are rather long and get pretty crappy headways and the S78 has run TERRIBLE for years. I believe it had 20 minute headways before the Bricktown extension, or at least it had it during certain times of the day and yet you'd see S78s running back to back, and I've seen it on several occasions along Hylan Blvd. Since the switch to Bricktown they appear to have bumped up headways to 15 minutes since it now serves that shopping area which has received positive feedback, but some folks haven't been thrilled completely with the S78 and S74 changes. Ideally they should add service to one or both routes, but we'll have to wait and see. I would imagine they may add a bus or so more an hour but I don't see anything more than that. They want folks to use the S79SBS but if there is enough outcry from the community they may be forced to add service. Aside from that I don't see the S78 having enough ridership to get headways increased up from 15 minutes. Maybe the S59 will get more service though.

 

 

On the committee meetings booklet, they said they'd add $300,000 worth of service to those routes (I assume that's total. Not $300,000 each)

 

And the S78 has always run every 15 minutes (or at least for as long as I can remember), even before the extension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) No, read the article that you posted. It mentioned nothing about former express riders. It just mentioned that its ridership surpassed that of 8 express routes. Are there some people who use it to reach Manhattan? I'm sure there are. Are they any significant number? No. Do you want me to personally interview every S89 rider to see where their destination is to prove my point?

 

I know what it says. I posted it to show that folks DO use it use to get to Manhattan, despite your beliefs and as I said, one purpose of the route was to give riders in that corridor the option of not having to use the express bus if they wanted a quick commute. I refuse to argue with you about how many because that is irrelevant since that was not the point that I was disputing.

 

2) Yeah, and you're commenting on a specific proposal which has to do with service near the SI Mall. Why the hell are you bringing express buses into this.

 

Just stop already.

 

3) It doesn't make a difference to me because I already have the benefit of having all the buses at the same stop. My travels are usually in the northern direction, so it doesn't make much of a difference to me either way. But what's wrong from wanting the people at the SI Mall to enjoy the same benefit I do?

And according to JAzumah, out of the 1,000 S89 riders, 600 of them are intra-SI riders, who are simply using it as a supplement to the Richmond Avenue locals. The majority (maybe not the vast majority) of S89 riders aren't using it to get to Bayonne.

 

Okay enough already. You believe in the damn proposal, propose it then and stop going on and on to me about it. I already stated my reasons why and you keep INSISTING upon forcing it down my throat. What's important isn't what I think but rather what your elected officials think and if you really believe that they'll support it then go on ahead and propose it then. :lol: I personally don't think so though.

 

4) What the hell are you talking about? It's the same $2.25 as the other local buses. The MTA isn't getting that $65 a month or whatever that they pay to NJT for the HBLR pass.

 

And it's my home route. Obviously I use it primarily to go to school, but that's ridiculous to assume I've never used it to get to Bayonne (and on that note, have you actually used it to reach Bayonne? I don't care what you were "considering" doing. I want to know if your two feet walked off the S89 and onto that bridge that leads to the platform of the 34th Street HBLR station.) There are times when I had to go to Newark or Jersey City and I used the S89 because it was faster than going through Manhattan (in fact, I've posted about the time I used it to reach the #308, but that wasn't the only time I used it), so you could cut the crap.

 

I've stated my reasons against it now stop going on and on already. I'm not going to argue every simple damn point with you. Go propose it already and let's see what happens since you feel that it is so needed.

 

5) Yeah, and I highly doubt there is going to be that major a delay that you'll miss the HBLR train. Did you know that all of the S89 buses during the time period I describe (PM rush, northbound) run 5 minutes late to avoid getting ahead of schedule? And I've rode them starting from Eltingville as well and it had nothing to do with any delays. It just had to do with the driver not wanting to get ahead of schedule.

 

And aside from that, what will it take? An extra 2-3 minutes at most to pick up the extra people at the SI Mall? And you avoid a couple of traffic lights so you could probably make up the time right there. Either that, or leave 3 minutes late instead of 5 minutes late.

 

6) I guarantee you a handful of riders at most switched from the express bus to the S89 at the ETC. And aside from that, I'm talking reverse-peak. Yeah, they're going to drive to the ETC, catch the S89 to get to Jersey City and then what? How are they going to get home?

 

You just don't get it... The politicians don't give a rat's @ss about the people that you're so concerned about. They don't vote for them and they know that, but go on ahead and propose it to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) I know what it says. I posted it to show that folks DO use it use to get to Manhattan, despite your beliefs and as I said, one purpose of the route was to give riders in that corridor the option of not having to use the express bus if they wanted a quick commute. I refuse to argue with you about how many because that is irrelevant since that was not the point that I was disputing.

 

2) Just stop already.

 

3) Okay enough already. You believe in the damn proposal, propose it then and stop going on and on to me about it. I already stated my reasons why and you keep INSISTING upon forcing it down my throat. What's important isn't what I think but rather what your elected officials think and if you really believe that they'll support it then go on ahead and propose it then. :lol: I personally don't think so though.

 

4) I've stated my reasons against it now stop going on and on already. I'm not going to argue every simple damn point with you. Go propose it already and let's see what happens since you feel that it is so needed.

 

5) You just don't get it... The politicians don't give a rat's @ss about the people that you're so concerned about. They don't vote for them and they know that, but go on ahead and propose it to them.

 

 

1) Ooooh, big deal. So the handful of riders using it to get to Manhattan matter, but the 60% of the riders who do use it within SI don't matter?

 

2) No, you stop. You're talking about my S89 proposal and then out of nowhere you bring express buses into this??? Tell me what express bus goes from the SI Mall to Port Richmond, huh?

 

3) I already have my hands full with the other stuff I'm trying to get passed and besides that, I have a life outside of discussing transit.

 

And I've refuted every single reason you brought up because none of them make any sense whatsoever. At least B35 admitted that it's just a matter of priorities and he would prefer the S59 get more service before the S89 gets promoted more, and he could see my reasoning behind it. You're just critzicizing the idea for no reason. You're lucky I haven't found the time to look through the SI Proposals Thread in 2010 because I'd find the part where you admitted it was a good idea and you'd look like an idiot.

 

4) Yeah, and none of them make any sense whatsoever.

 

5) Who cares what they think? It could be a terrible idea and they'd go for it or it could be a good idea and they wouldn't go for it. You're talking about a borough president who doesn't want bus lanes or TSP along Hylan Blvd. Yeah, they're the people who matter, but they aren't the ultimate judge of what's a good idea or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Ooooh, big deal. So the handful of riders using it to get to Manhattan matter, but the 60% of the riders who do use it within SI don't matter?

 

They have MULTIPLE options already along Richmond Avenue which you refuse to accept. I've stated what the S89 is for. If you don't want to accept that that's your problem not mine. I'm satisfied with the S89 routing the way that it is. All I stated was that the buses could be more spread apart in terms of how they run down Richmond Avenue.

 

2) No, you stop. You're talking about my S89 proposal and then out of nowhere you bring express buses into this??? Tell me what express bus goes from the SI Mall to Port Richmond, huh?

I clarified myself already in previous posts. You're clearly hard of reading. <_<

 

3) I already have my hands full with the other stuff I'm trying to get passed and besides that, I have a life outside of discussing transit.

 

And I've refuted every single reason you brought up because none of them make any sense whatsoever. At least B35 admitted that it's just a matter of priorities and he would prefer the S59 get more service before the S89 gets promoted more, and he could see my reasoning behind it. You're just critzicizing the idea for no reason. You're lucky I haven't found the time to look through the SI Proposals Thread in 2010 because I'd find the part where you admitted it was a good idea and you'd look like an idiot.

 

Well suite yourself then. Just stop going on an on about it already if you're not going to move forward with it. Waste of time... And big deal if you do find the post... Last time I checked I'm allowed to change my point of view...

 

4) Yeah, and none of them make any sense whatsoever.

Of course they don't because I disagree with them, so they automatically don't make any sense. How dare anyone disagree with checkmate... <_<

 

5) Who cares what they think? It could be a terrible idea and they'd go for it or it could be a good idea and they wouldn't go for it. You're talking about a borough president who doesn't want bus lanes or TSP along Hylan Blvd. Yeah, they're the people who matter, but they aren't the ultimate judge of what's a good idea or not.

 

 

Well I guess you don't plan on proposing this idea then... In that case there is no point in discussing this any further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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