Mott Shore Troubles: S46 and S48

[S79 Select bus servi]

The S46 and the S48 have always had a reputation for being high ridership routes on the borough. By the early 1990's these routes had the highest ridership in the city. 

 

A few years later, the S79 had passed their niumbers in terms of ridership. Soon after, the MTA responded by adding additional buses on the route. 

 

The S46 and S48 have had stable ridership but have recently seen a boom in ridership. However, the MTA had kept frequencies the same. When ridership grew, the MTA could not afford to add frequency so the buses continues to be crowded to this day. 

 

Meanwhile, the S79 has seen frequency increase with ridership increase. The MTA was forced to implement SBS on September 2, 2012 because it was decided before the great resession started in 2008.

 

The MTA had started to find a use for the old North Shore Railroad. This study had also started before 2008. Currently, the MTA has revealed the "locally preferred alternative" which states that the MTA must build a Busway on top of the old rails. You can see the latest presentation at: 

http://www.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/NSAA-Presentation

(copy paste).

 

So what's your opinion about this topic?

[checkmatechamp13]

I assume by "city" you mean borough. No way do the S46 & S48 have higher ridership than routes like the B46.

 

As for better frequencies, they actually have done it. A few years ago, the off-peak headways for both routes were changed from 15 minutes to 12 minutes. As far as crowding goes, it can vary, and the thing is that the buses that meet the ferry tend to be more crowded than those that don't.

 

I think it would be better to move this discussion into either this thread, or one of the SI threads (Like the SI proposals 2012 thread)

[error46146]

The link doesnt work

[Mysterious2train]

Meanwhile, the S79 has seen frequency increase with ridership increase. The MTA was forced to implement SBS on September 2, 2012 because it was decided before the great resession started in 2008.

 

 

What do you mean "forced?" The S79 isn't even an SBS route. If the MTA publicly announced that they were making the S79 into a Limited route, it'd be no different operationally, it'd just be without publicity. There might not be some of the minute improvements such as later service into the night but that shouldn't have to be dependent on SBS (same with bus lanes and other "SBS features") Preaching to the choir here, but SBS should dependent on fare machines and that only.

[Acela Express]

No way do the S46 & S48 have higher ridership than routes like the B46.

 

S46 & 48's ridership combined still doesn't compare to the B46's massive waves of people.

[Threxx]

B46 in 2011:15,360,359

 

 

S46 in 2011: 2,134,902

 

 

S48 in 2011: 2,446,163

 

 

Let's even add the S53 and S79: 3,125,735,2,953,107, respectively

 

 

Doesn't compare.

[checkmatechamp13]

The link doesnt work

 

 

It works for me. It should lead you to the North Shore Rail Line discussion thread.

 

S46 & 48's ridership combined still doesn't compare to the B46's massive waves of people.

 

Doesn't compare.

 

 

I don't think I was implying that the ridership was even remotely comparable, so I don't see what the point in these posts was.

 

I said it was lower. I didn't specify how much, but I didn't think it was worth mentioning considering that both those routes have less than 1/5 (each) of the B46 ridership.

[S79 Select bus servi]

Oh whoops. by city, i meant borough.

in 1990, the S46/S48 ridership was higher than the S53 and the S79 local.

 

The S46 gets severely packed between 715-8 in the off-peak direction east of brighton av, even more than in the peak direction.

I mean crowdedwise, not ridershipwise.

For example, in 2011, the S48 was more crowded than the S79. Now the S79SBS attracted many new riders and is now more packed.

[checkmatechamp13]

Ugh. The damn qoute function's screwing up.

 

Oh whoops. by city, i meant borough.

in 1990, the S46/S48 ridership was higher than the S53 and the S79 local.

 

I'm not doubting that, but what's your source?

 

The S46 gets severely packed between 715-8 in the off-peak direction east of brighton av, even more than in the peak direction.

I mean crowdedwise, not ridershipwise.

For example, in 2011, the S48 was more crowded than the S79. Now the S79SBS attracted many new riders and is now more packed.

 

I guess it's because of the I.S.61 kids getting off at Brighton Avenue? Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I think the S96 should also have reverse-peak service. I mean, it would probably help handle the crowds better, because when you leave the ferry terminal, you'd have both the S46 & S96 waiting to handle the passengers (and it would help riders coming off the ferry because they'd have more consistant service out of St. George). So instead of a bus every 10 minutes, you'd have a local & limited every 15 minutes each. And then further down the line along Castleton, the buses would eventually spread themselves out, so you'd end up with more frequent service (headways would be roughly every 7.5 minutes instead of every 10).

 

The only problem is that the S96 might become a "victim of its own success", and get hammered at Victory & Bay (and the ferry terminal for that matter). But I guess if you have a lot of schoolkids, there's probably decent ridership at the local stops to balance it out.

 

I guess while I'm at it, I might as well mention that they should've scheduled buses better with the way they come out of the Teleport & West Shore Plaza. There are times when buses leave the West Shore Plaza on even headways (e.g. A bus every 12 minutes), but some buses divert to serve the Teleport, so at all points north of the Teleport, you end up with a 17 minute headway followed by a 7 minute headway (or something to that effect). Obviously, the vast majority of the ridership is north of the Teleport, so they should just move those buses that are serving both the West Shore Plaza & Teleport back by 5 minutes to maintain even headways along Castleton.

[S79 Select bus servi]

I just used the frequencies of the 1990's

The 53/79 had lower frequencies. Now, as more brooklynites are moving to SI but retaining their brooklyn jobs, they get high ridership.

 

Yes, im all for it for a reverse-peak service. Maybe it should just be limited btwn briton/ferry. Ridership will be balanced prefectly this way.

 

My proposals for new frequency'z are:

S46: 8 12 7 15 40. S96 7 15. 8. 20

12 15 15 20 60. 12. 12

20 10 10 30 60.

 

S48: 8* 10 9 15. 45 S98. 9. 12. 6. 15

20 10 10. 20 45. 30 10 10 60

12 12. 12. 20 45. 15 15

 

In case you didn't know, its kind of crowded during late nights, past bay-victory, youl'd probably have to stand.

 

The S44 is a route that maintains it's ridership.

In renevue trips, it never gets uncrowded, unlike the S4898 when even in the PM peak direction, a bus could be packed, yet the bus behind has7 ppl. This makes the S44 a perfect route to add frequency.

 

* in the off peak direction, the bus would operate every 12 and there'd be no 98 'till 11 AM

[S78 via Hylan]

Not enough ridership for both of those limiteds to run on weekends. If you want to make up ideas like this, put it in the Staten Island Bus Idea/Proposal Thread.

[checkmatechamp13]

The S44 is a route that maintains it's ridership.

In renevue trips, it never gets uncrowded, unlike the S4898 when even in the PM peak direction, a bus could be packed, yet the bus behind has7 ppl. This makes the S44 a perfect route to add frequency.

 

* in the off peak direction, the bus would operate every 12 and there'd be no 98 'till 11 AM

 

 

There's no point in having it go limited to Brighton Avenue. It would just confuse people. You're better off keeping it limited up to Port Richmond Avenue.

 

I don't think midday S46 ridership warrants 15 minute S96 service on top of the existing S46 service. What I would do is reduce the S46 service to run every 15 minutes (rather than every 12), and then add S96 service every 30 minutes (Obviously meeting the ferry). The same thing with the S48.

 

On weekends, the only thing I would add is S98 service during the midday and PM rush. (Same thing. 15 minutes for the S48, 30 minutes for the S98).

 

My general belief is that buses should be timed to meet the ferry, whereever possible, which means the headway of the bus should be a factor of the headway of the ferry (I know, sounding all technical here). Basically, if the ferry is running every 30 minutes, you shouldn't run a bus every 20 minutes. You should give it 15 minute headways, even if the ridership doesn't necessarily justify it because it makes it easier to connect with the ferry (and who knows? Maybe the fact that the connections are easier will result in increased ridership anyway). The same thing goes for 12 minute headways: You should find a way to knock them down to 10 or raise them to 15.

 

The S44 really doesn't need much more service. Are buses crowded at times? Yes, but for the most part, the service is adequate provided buses don't bunch up or anything.

 

And you can't not have S48 service at any point of the day. You need something to cover the local stops.

 

Not enough ridership for both of those limiteds to run on weekends. If you want to make up ideas like this, put it in the Staten Island Bus Idea/Proposal Thread.

 

 

Yeah, a mod should merge this into the SI Proposals thread.

[MattTrain]

I don't know about you, but I find the S46 to be more frequent than the S48, sometimes it takes quite some time for the S48 to even show up.

[checkmatechamp13]

I don't know about you, but I find the S46 to be more frequent than the S48, sometimes it takes quite some time for the S48 to even show up.

 

 

Well, I think it has to do more with reliability rather than frequency. Chances are that those times when you waited a long time for the S48, there's another one close behind. The S46 really doesn't have to deal with a whole lot of traffic in general, just the heavy passenger loads (and the turns, but I don't think that has too much of an effect on reliability), whereas the S48 has to deal with both.

 

I guess that's a fair assessment you made.