NSAA Final Report

[S79 Select bus servi]

Let me summarize the 100+ p page report with only the nessesary info:

 

Busway alternative:

- Elevators at most stops

- Off-Board fare collection

- SBS style routing on south av

- 6 years to build

Frequency-

Rt. Peak. WKend Nite

1. 10 30. 60

2. 10. 15. 60

53. 9. 10. 40

54. 30. 30

57. 10. 30

59. 10. 20. 60

Rail. 15. 30. 60

S40/S90 eliminated

S46/S96 ends at Elm Park

S48/S98 extended down Holland Hook

 

 

 

 

[S79 Select bus servi]

I'll post the TSM alternative soon. Meanwhile, go to mta.info/planning/nsaa and click on the final report at the bottom of the page

[checkmatechamp13]

I think this should just be merged with the North Shore Rail Line Discussion.

 

In any case, I'm just SMH at the whole report. They're going completely out of their way to serve the Teleport, and their work was so sloppy it's not even funny. For example, on the TSM alternative (which would just be improved bus service), they have the S53 listed as being extended to South Avenue via the S46 route (which would mean Richmond Terrace has no service west of Port Richmond Avenue, while 2 routes run along Walker Street, Brabant Street, etc), but on the map, they have it listed as running along Richmond Terrace. And of course, they're so focused on serving the Teleport they screw over the regular SI riders. If you live west of Port Richmond Avenue, you lost the S40 and have no fast route from Mariners' Harbor/Arlington to St. George.

 

And of course, they didn't use any common sense when they made that S99 route. They say it would take 37 minutes from St. George to the West Shore Plaza while running along Forest Avenue, but only making stops along South Avenue. You could probably make it in less than 37 minutes if you routed it along Richmond Terrace, which is quicker than Forest Avenue, and you'd serve regular bus riders to boot.

 

And I highly doubt you're going to get that many reverse-commuters that you'd be able to fill up that X21. You'd be better off using those buses to beef up regular reverse-peak service on the X10 & X17 for the regular riders. If need be, find a way to provide a connection from Richmond Avenue to the Teleport, but don't dedicate all this unnecessary service to it.

 

I'll post the TSM alternative soon. Meanwhile, go to mta.info/planning/nsaa and click on the final report at the bottom of the page

 

 

http://www.mta.info/mta/planning/nsaa/

[Quill Depot]

Thanks for link...

[Q43LTD]

I don't like look of this

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Well the current S40 would be split in three.

I think the S1/2, S54, S57, and S59 all on Richmond Terrace is overkill, right?

[qjtransitmaster]

I think this should just be merged with the North Shore Rail Line Discussion.

 

In any case, I'm just SMH at the whole report. They're going completely out of their way to serve the Teleport, and their work was so sloppy it's not even funny. For example, on the TSM alternative (which would just be improved bus service), they have the S53 listed as being extended to South Avenue via the S46 route (which would mean Richmond Terrace has no service west of Port Richmond Avenue, while 2 routes run along Walker Street, Brabant Street, etc), but on the map, they have it listed as running along Richmond Terrace. And of course, they're so focused on serving the Teleport they screw over the regular SI riders. If you live west of Port Richmond Avenue, you lost the S40 and have no fast route from Mariners' Harbor/Arlington to St. George.

 

And of course, they didn't use any common sense when they made that S99 route. They say it would take 37 minutes from St. George to the West Shore Plaza while running along Forest Avenue, but only making stops along South Avenue. You could probably make it in less than 37 minutes if you routed it along Richmond Terrace, which is quicker than Forest Avenue, and you'd serve regular bus riders to boot.

 

And I highly doubt you're going to get that many reverse-commuters that you'd be able to fill up that X21. You'd be better off using those buses to beef up regular reverse-peak service on the X10 & X17 for the regular riders. If need be, find a way to provide a connection from Richmond Avenue to the Teleport, but don't dedicate all this unnecessary service to it.

 

 

 

http://www.mta.info/mta/planning/nsaa/

 

I like the x21 good use of x11s but if x10&17 need reverse why not just convert their DHs into revenue done.

[checkmatechamp13]

Well the current S40 would be split in three.

I think the S1/2, S54, S57, and S59 all on Richmond Terrace is overkill, right?

 

 

They wouldn't all be on Richmond Terrace, but they would be on the busway (and the S53 would probably use the busway as well to reach Arlington)

 

I like the x21 good use of x11s but if x10&17 need reverse why not just convert their DHs into revenue done.

 

 

Well, the thing that's stupid is that they say this new service will come from Midtown. Why are they using X11 deadheads when they could be using the deadheads from a Midtown route?

 

In any case, the Teleport doesn't warrant its own seperate service. If they really want to provide some service for reverse commuters, they should run those trips as X22 trips. Have them go through NJ, serve the Teleport, and then continue down to the South Shore. At least then, you provide some benefit to reverse-peak SI riders.

 

I don't think there's any demand for service from Manhattan to the West Shore Plaza, so the X22 shouldn't bother looping around and serving it. It's basically a shopping mall that they put out in the middle of nowhere, and nobody's going to be traveling all the way from Manhattan to take a retail job at one of the stores.

 

On a side note, I don't see what the point of having the X21 exit at Richmond Avenue is. It would have to make a U-turn to reach Goethals Road North, when they could just do it the easy way by having it exit at South Avenue.

 

For the getting rid of time points on the limited-stop routes, service is too infrequent to do that. They say "To the extent that passengers arrive randomly at bus stops without consulting the schedule, there would be no increase in passenger waiting time.", but the problem is that when you're dealing with 15 minute headways, passengers are looking at the timetable.

 

I don't think bus lanes are needed on that part of Victory Blvd (between Forest & Royal Oak). There's usually very little traffic there, except maybe by the Clove Road intersection itself. You'd be taking away parking for no good reason.

[Nova RTS 9147]

Just skimmed through the report, and it reads like they decided on BRT some time ago and the other alternatives were merely formalities.

[S79 Select bus servi]

Well the MTA should build a "bus parking lot" in Manhattan to store all the peak express buses form the outer boroughs between the morning and the afternoon so they don't have them coming back to the boroughs as NOT IN SERVICE buses just to waste money.

 

They can use this cash to increase service.

 

The only problem i see with this plan is where could they build the parking lot in a place as crowded as Manhattan?

 

BTW, the mta said if they build a brt, the buses would be articulated.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Well the MTA should build a "bus parking lot" in Manhattan to store all the peak express buses form the outer boroughs between the morning and the afternoon so they don't have them coming back to the boroughs as NOT IN SERVICE buses just to waste money.

 

They can use this cash to increase service.

 

The only problem i see with this plan is where could they build the parking lot in a place as crowded as Manhattan?

 

BTW, the mta said if they build a brt, the buses would be articulated.

 

Well some buses are already stored at the top of Quill Depot.