SI Bus Study sort of up on MTA website

[checkmatechamp13]

A general dispatching issue:

 

At the ferry, there's often the issue of whether buses should be held for an arriving ferry. Hold the buses too long, and you've basically thrown the schedule out the window for the next few hours (depending on the route, some of them have the bare minimum recovery time at the other end, so in addition to inconveniencing intra-island passengers, you're also inconveniencing passengers who need to catch the ferry on the return trip). Send them out too early, and you've pissed off a bunch of ferry riders for nothing.

 

There needs to be a more refined protocol instead of just "Hold all the buses" or "Release all the buses". A few guidelines they should follow:

 

* If there's a lot of recovery time at the other end of the line, that bus should generally be held.

* If there's very little recovery time at the other end of the line, that bus should generally be released (unless the next bus is a full 30 minutes away, but in those cases, I'd almost be inclined to just say screw it and add another bus to the schedule to account for those situations)

* If there's two buses scheduled to meet that ferry, one should be released (the short-turn one if applicable) and the other held.

 

Obviously, each situation is different (if the ferry is 2-3 minutes late as opposed to 10-15 minutes late), and then there's also the individual B/Os operating the lines (some of the B/Os can start the line off 10 minutes late and hustle to the other terminal in time for their return trip. Others start off 10 minutes late and by the time they reach the other terminal, they're 15-20 minutes late), and I'm sure the dispatchers know this.

 

And some of these issues would be rectified with more modernized routes (for example, if the S74 were split at the ETC, and you had a better route structure on the South Shore, you don't have to take into account that one bus goes to Bricktown but the following bus ends at the ETC. The CSI short-turns on the S62 should generally be extended to Travis, since CSI is no longer the heavy stop heading eastbound now that the S93 & ferry shuttle are the main choices of those students).

 

A few examples of bad dispatching I've seen over the years:

 

* A 4PM (weekday) ferry came in a few minutes late and every single 4PM bus was released. My choices at 4:15PM were either an overcrowded S44, overcrowded S46 (both of which had 2-3 4PM buses but only 1 4:15PM bus), or short-turn S62 to CSI (and I live west of Richmond)

 

* A 9:30PM (weekday) ferry came in about 20 minutes late and every single bus was released. The 9:35PM S62 arrival (that heads back to the depot), the 9:30PM S46, S48, and S74 short-turns, every single bus was released (and to add insult to injury, those 10PM buses were held another 5 minutes for a late 10PM ferry. Yeah, they did the right thing to hold those buses at 10PM, but they shouldn't have had every single 9:30PM bus leave).

 

* Just now, there was a 4:30PM arrival that came in late, and every single bus was held. So you had a bunch of pairs of buses leaving at 4:45PM. On a route like the S62 that runs every 30 minutes, it's one thing, but on routes like the S40, S44, S46, and S48 that run every 15 minutes, it's pointless and ruins the schedule for no reason.

 

Also, a few general scheduling issues:

 

* As mentioned before I think the S98 should be an all-day limited heading out over the Goethals Bridge (to either Jersey Gardens, Midtown Elizabeth, or EWR). This will allow for at least two buses heading out to Forest Avenue for every ferry throughout the day.

 

* Not sure about the S96 being an all-day limited (if that were to be the case, I'd cut back the locals to Forest Avenue and have the limiteds serve both the Teleport & West Shore Plaza during the day). At the very least, I think S94 & S96 service should start no later than 3PM from the ferry (as opposed to the current 4PM start time).

 

* Victory Blvd limited-stop service needs to be restructured in the PM rush. Limited-stop service should start around 3:30PM, alternating with the S91 & S92 until the present start of limited-stop service (so the 3:30PM S61 would become an S91, and the S62/66 would handle local passengers, and the 4PM S62 would become an S92 while the S61/66 handle local passengers). During rush hour, I would have an S62 shuttle run the same pattern as it does in the AM: Run to Jewett and then turn around and deadhead back to St. George for another trip (while the reverse-peak S61 is eliminated until after 7PM when those buses need to get back to the depot anyway). The S92 would handle service west of Jewett.

 

I'd also look into eliminating the limited stop at Forest Avenue. Let the S98 handle any riders coming to/from the ferry (which stops closer to the residences in the area). There are very few transfers between the S91/92 and the reverse-peak S48.

 

At some point down the road, I think my restructured S66 should have a limited-stop version as well (maybe give it a couple of extra stops like Forest Avenue and say, Cebra Avenue or Jersey Street if it's not expected to have as many riders as the S91/92)

[S78 via Hylan]

Some of what your ideas are already done from what I've seen such as:

 

-For routes that have double trips, letting one bus go and the other wait for the late ferry:

(The S44 used to do this when there was a 4:00 and 4:01 trip before they converted the 4:00 into an S94. I know this since my B/O friend from YU used to do that run a few picks ago).

 

-Routes with 30 minute headways would get held. The dispatcher would say something along the lines of: "S42/S52, S66, S74/S84 operators, wait for the boat. All other operators you may pick up and go."

 

I also agree with your Victory Blvd limited restructuring. In addition, I would also re-add the 4:30 PM S92 trip since it used to run from 4:30-7:00.

 

The S96 running all day..... Ehhh, I don't really see a need for that. The most I would do is expand the span of service:

AM rush to St. George: 5:30AM-9:00AM, PM rush to West Shore/Teleport: 3:30PM-10:00PM. Also, I would have S96 run limited the full length of Castleton Ave, so buses would skip the Sharpe Av stop. During middays, I have the S46 run 10-12 minute headways instead.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Some of what your ideas are already done from what I've seen such as:

 

-For routes that have double trips, letting one bus go and the other wait for the late ferry:

(The S44 used to do this when there was a 4:00 and 4:01 trip before they converted the 4:00 into an S94. I know this since my B/O friend from YU used to do that run a few picks ago).

 

-Routes with 30 minute headways would get held. The dispatcher would say something along the lines of: "S42/S52, S66, S74/S84 operators(There's a 30 minute interval after the 4:00 trip) wait for the boat. All other operators you may pick up and go."

 

I also agree with your Victory Blvd limited restructuring. In addition, I would also re-add the 4:30 PM S92 trip since it used to run from 4:30-7:00.

 

The S96 running all day..... Ehhh, I don't really see a need for that. The most I would do is expand the span of service:

AM rush to St. George: 5:30AM-8:30AM, PM rush to West Shore/Teleport: 3:30PM-10:00PM. Also, I would have S96 run limited the full length of Castleton Ave. Buses would skip the Sharpe Av stop.

Why is the morning span so short? What about people who don't work 9-5? We have to get out of this 9-5 way of thinking. More and more people work hours outside of that. Something like 05:00 to 12:00 makes sense, this way it is 7 hours of limited stop service each way.

[S78 via Hylan]

Why is the morning span so short? What about people who don't work 9-5? We have to get out of this 9-5 way of thinking. More and more people work hours outside of that. Something like 05:00 to 12:00 makes sense, this way it is 7 hours of limited stop service each way.

You have a point, but from my observations and years of riding the S46/S96, ridership tends to be heavier in the afternoon and into the evening than the morning.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You have a point, but from my observations and years of riding the S46/S96, ridership tends to be heavier in the afternoon and into the evening than morning.

Even so, it could encourage more ridership off-peak. Staten Island now has enough fleet to improve service. No excuses like before.

[checkmatechamp13]

You know I realized the X15 routing on the original map is wrong (so I don't know if their plan involves having the X15 bypass the Richmondtown loop or whether they just copied the original error). 

 

Some of what your ideas are already done from what I've seen such as:

-For routes that have double trips, letting one bus go and the other wait for the late ferry:
(The S44 used to do this when there was a 4:00 and 4:01 trip before they converted the 4:00 into an S94. I know this since my B/O friend from YU used to do that run a few picks ago).

-Routes with 30 minute headways would get held. The dispatcher would say something along the lines of: "S42/S52, S66, S74/S84 operators, wait for the boat. All other operators you may pick up and go."

I also agree with your Victory Blvd limited restructuring. In addition, I would also re-add the 4:30 PM S92 trip since it used to run from 4:30-7:00.

The S96 running all day..... Ehhh, I don't really see a need for that. The most I would do is expand the span of service:
AM rush to St. George: 5:30AM-9:00AM, PM rush to West Shore/Teleport: 3:30PM-10:00PM. Also, I would have S96 run limited the full length of Castleton Ave, so buses would skip the Sharpe Av stop. During middays, I have the S46 run 10-12 minute headways instead.

 

It must be something relatively recent then, because I remember multiple times when they've released all the buses for that boat, including those double buses. If that's the case, I'm glad to see they're being more careful about that.

 

Sure, I can agree with adding back the 4:30PM S92 (and having the S96 skip Sharpe Avenue).

 

For the limited-stop service, my logic was that the S46 generally gets higher ridership north of Forest (and this is coming from the point of view of somebody who lives south of Forest), so it would be a way of adding service to the corridor while distributing it accordingly. But then again, with the different schools at the Teleport, ridership is still higher than it used to be (along South Avenue anyway). 

 

Why is the morning span so short? What about people who don't work 9-5? We have to get out of this 9-5 way of thinking. More and more people work hours outside of that. Something like 05:00 to 12:00 makes sense, this way it is 7 hours of limited stop service each way.

 

The thing is that the ferry stops running every 15 minutes at 9AM. People have been pushing for a 9:15AM ferry, but to no avail. So most of the AM limiteds run only as late as necessary to connect with that 9AM boat.

 

The thing is that later in the morning, the buses generally run quickly. So for example, I remember before I gave up and started taking the express bus, I would catch a 7:15AM S94 bus and catch an 8:15AM ferry. If I caught a 9:15AM bus I would catch a 10:00AM ferry on the S44. 

 

But yeah, I can definitely agree with having limited-stop buses running to connect with the 9:30AM ferry. But later than that, I think a little bit of stop consolidation on the locals would be enough.

 

Also, some of the routings could be straightened out as well. For example, as I mentioned a few pages back on the S74, having it run straight up Targee Street to Van Duzer instead of detouring down Broad would save buses the trouble of going through three traffic lights and be more direct on top of that. (Heading back down, running straight down St. Pauls & Van Duzer would save buses from sitting in the traffic on Bay Street that happens in the early PM rush). I think the S84 should run in the AM rush as well, but even off-peak when the S84 isn't running it would save some time. (The S78 would be the main route handling the Stapleton Houses and get increased service accordingly)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You know I realized the X15 routing on the original map is wrong (so I don't know if their plan involves having the X15 bypass the Richmondtown loop or whether they just copied the original error).

 

 

 

It must be something relatively recent then, because I remember multiple times when they've released all the buses for that boat, including those double buses. If that's the case, I'm glad to see they're being more careful about that.

 

Sure, I can agree with adding back the 4:30PM S92 (and having the S96 skip Sharpe Avenue).

 

For the limited-stop service, my logic was that the S46 generally gets higher ridership north of Forest (and this is coming from the point of view of somebody who lives south of Forest), so it would be a way of adding service to the corridor while distributing it accordingly. But then again, with the different schools at the Teleport, ridership is still higher than it used to be (along South Avenue anyway).

 

 

 

The thing is that the ferry stops running every 15 minutes at 9AM. People have been pushing for a 9:15AM ferry, but to no avail. So most of the AM limiteds run only as late as necessary to connect with that 9AM boat.

 

The thing is that later in the morning, the buses generally run quickly. So for example, I remember before I gave up and started taking the express bus, I would catch a 7:15AM S94 bus and catch an 8:15AM ferry. If I caught a 9:15AM bus I would catch a 10:00AM ferry on the S44.

 

But yeah, I can definitely agree with having limited-stop buses running to connect with the 9:30AM ferry. But later than that, I think a little bit of stop consolidation on the locals would be enough.

 

Also, some of the routings could be straightened out as well. For example, as I mentioned a few pages back on the S74, having it run straight up Targee Street to Van Duzer instead of detouring down Broad would save buses the trouble of going through three traffic lights and be more direct on top of that. (Heading back down, running straight down St. Pauls & Van Duzer would save buses from sitting in the traffic on Bay Street that happens in the early PM rush). I think the S84 should run in the AM rush as well, but even off-peak when the S84 isn't running it would save some time. (The S78 would be the main route handling the Stapleton Houses and get increased service accordingly)

Oh forget about the ferry. Staten Island needs better transportation WITHIN Staten Island. It gIves people a convenient excuse not to use transportation because everything is centered around the ferry. It's crazy. You would think no one needs service within the borough. Doing anything on the island with the local bus is a pain, and for that reason I would opt for car service.

[checkmatechamp13]

Oh forget about the ferry. Staten Island needs better transportation WITHIN Staten Island. It gIves people a convenient excuse not to use transportation because everything is centered around the ferry. It's crazy. You would think no one needs service within the borough. Doing anything on the island with the local bus is a pain, and for that reason I would opt for car service.

 

What, just because you see the word ferry in there, you think it's just about the ferry?

 

I'm saying the buses generally run fairly quick off-peak, and using my trips on the ferry-bound S44/94 as an example. Buses don't start slowing down again until the early PM rush when kids start getting out of school. Should there be reverse-peak limited-stop service in the PM rush? Possibly, but that doesn't have anything to do with service in the late morning.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What, just because you see the word ferry in there, you think it's just about the ferry?

 

I'm saying the buses generally run fairly quick off-peak, and using my trips on the ferry-bound S44/94 as an example. Buses don't start slowing down again until the early PM rush when kids start getting out of school. Should there be reverse-peak limited-stop service in the PM rush? Possibly, but that doesn't have anything to do with service in the late morning.

Nope. Just goes back to what I said.

[Dan1]

What, just because you see the word ferry in there, you think it's just about the ferry?

 

I'm saying the buses generally run fairly quick off-peak, and using my trips on the ferry-bound S44/94 as an example. Buses don't start slowing down again until the early PM rush when kids start getting out of school. Should there be reverse-peak limited-stop service in the PM rush? Possibly, but that doesn't have anything to do with service in the late morning.

 

Oh forget about the ferry. Staten Island needs better transportation WITHIN Staten Island. It gIves people a convenient excuse not to use transportation because everything is centered around the ferry. It's crazy. You would think no one needs service within the borough. Doing anything on the island with the local bus is a pain, and for that reason I would opt for car service.

Staten Island will always be an automobile-based borough. Everyone owns a car (one neighbor owns 4). Everything is spread out and we have no true street grid which makes new local routes difficult to design and implement. The SI Bus Study was supposed to look at employment, shopping  and education centers on SI. I'm guessing the general idea is to redesign existing local routes or start new local routes serving these locations. I guess that's the 3 hospitals, CSI & the Willowbrook state facility, Wagner & St. John's colleges, the SI Mall, etc. Outside of extending the S52 eastward to Richmond Road to serve the ADA-compliant Dongan Hills SIR station I haven't heard of any other proposals. BTW the S52 was supposed to be extended when the Dongan Hills station was made ADA-compliant - almost 20 years ago.

 

Sorry if you've seen this before but I sent an inquiry to the SI Boro Presiden's office about the Bus Study and this was their reply dated 2/3/17 -

 

'Thank you for contacting Borough President James Oddo's office regarding the status of MTA bus study. As you know, we have worked closely with the MTA throughout this complicated process. We met with them several weeks ago, and they are finalizing it so their recommendations can be released to the public. Rest assured, we will alert Staten Islanders via social media when it is released so we can receive feedback. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any questions regarding this issue or any other matter.'

 

Office of Borough President James Oddo

 

No info anywhere since regarding the release of the Bus Study.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Staten Island will always be an automobile-based borough. Everyone owns a car (one neighbor owns 4). Everything is spread out and we have no true street grid which makes new local routes difficult to design and implement. The SI Bus Study was supposed to look at employment, shopping  and education centers on SI. I'm guessing the general idea is to redesign existing local routes or start new local routes serving these locations. I guess that's the 3 hospitals, CSI & the Willowbrook state facility, Wagner & St. John's colleges, the SI Mall, etc. Outside of extending the S52 eastward to Richmond Road to serve the ADA-compliant Dongan Hills SIR station I haven't heard of any other proposals. BTW the S52 was supposed to be extended when the Dongan Hills station was made ADA-compliant - almost 20 years ago.

 

Sorry if you've seen this before but I sent an inquiry to the SI Boro Presiden's office about the Bus Study and this was their reply dated 2/3/17 -

 

'Thank you for contacting Borough President James Oddo's office regarding the status of MTA bus study. As you know, we have worked closely with the MTA throughout this complicated process. We met with them several weeks ago, and they are finalizing it so their recommendations can be released to the public. Rest assured, we will alert Staten Islanders via social media when it is released so we can receive feedback. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any questions regarding this issue or any other matter.'

 

Office of Borough President James Oddo

 

No info anywhere since regarding the release of the Bus Study.

That spread out, lack of a street grid nonsense is a convenient excuse. I live in a neighborhood that also has no street grid, and is very spread out. The difference is people here understand that having neighbors with four cars is not conducive long term. It leads to tons of congestion and pollution. There you have people that will drive to the store when they can walk because God forbid you walk on Staten Island and get exercise. I used to walk to the express bus sometimes on nice days and people were friendly along Slosson Avenue when someone was actually outside of their house, but they were always surprised that anyone would dare walk. You could tell by the look on their face. I would smile as if to say, yes I know it's weird, but I actually do like a little exercise. When at the supermarket, I was always shocked by the amount of obese people who would scurry to their cars for fear of being seen without one. Even I get caught up in it. I gained about 10 pounds at one point because I would start taking car service everywhere on Staten Island, even to the express bus on weekdays and weekends. I would walk while in Manhattan but still. Once I realized what was going on, I made changes to correct it, but it just shows a culture on the island that is dangerous.

[checkmatechamp13]

Staten Island will always be an automobile-based borough. Everyone owns a car (one neighbor owns 4). Everything is spread out and we have no true street grid which makes new local routes difficult to design and implement. The SI Bus Study was supposed to look at employment, shopping  and education centers on SI. I'm guessing the general idea is to redesign existing local routes or start new local routes serving these locations. I guess that's the 3 hospitals, CSI & the Willowbrook state facility, Wagner & St. John's colleges, the SI Mall, etc. Outside of extending the S52 eastward to Richmond Road to serve the ADA-compliant Dongan Hills SIR station I haven't heard of any other proposals. BTW the S52 was supposed to be extended when the Dongan Hills station was made ADA-compliant - almost 20 years ago.

 

Sorry if you've seen this before but I sent an inquiry to the SI Boro Presiden's office about the Bus Study and this was their reply dated 2/3/17 -

 

'Thank you for contacting Borough President James Oddo's office regarding the status of MTA bus study. As you know, we have worked closely with the MTA throughout this complicated process. We met with them several weeks ago, and they are finalizing it so their recommendations can be released to the public. Rest assured, we will alert Staten Islanders via social media when it is released so we can receive feedback. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any questions regarding this issue or any other matter.'

 

Office of Borough President James Oddo

 

No info anywhere since regarding the release of the Bus Study.

 

You mean proposals from the MTA itself, or proposals from the community?

 

Yeah, I can believe that the S52 extension was the only thing proposed by the MTA, But proposals put forth by the community that would've provided local service to Goethals Road North/Fahy Avenue/Lamberts Lane, Osgood/Mosel Avenue, Huguenot Avenue, sustainable weekend service for neighborhoods such as New Brighton, Westerleigh, Great Kills, Arden Heights, etc. Have you ever heard about those?

 

Yes, it's definitely important to provide adequate access to major employment, shopping, and educational centers, but at the same time, where are those people coming from? Yeah, some are coming from out of the borough (so they can take buses from St. George or Bay Ridge), but most are coming from residential areas within Staten Island. 

[Dan1]

You mean proposals from the MTA itself, or proposals from the community?

 

Yeah, I can believe that the S52 extension was the only thing proposed by the MTA, But proposals put forth by the community that would've provided local service to Goethals Road North/Fahy Avenue/Lamberts Lane, Osgood/Mosel Avenue, Huguenot Avenue, sustainable weekend service for neighborhoods such as New Brighton, Westerleigh, Great Kills, Arden Heights, etc. Have you ever heard about those?

 

Yes, it's definitely important to provide adequate access to major employment, shopping, and educational centers, but at the same time, where are those people coming from? Yeah, some are coming from out of the borough (so they can take buses from St. George or Bay Ridge), but most are coming from residential areas within Staten Island. 

I meant MTA proposals. I only used the S52 as an example because it's been proposed forever and IIRC was one of the reasons that the Dongan Hills station was picked for wheelchair access. I was the SI Tech meeting last year where a few of those proposals were handed out. What's a little annoying is that the MTA never even issued a preliminary Bus Study report.

 

From the SI Bus Study Public Workshop 2/9/2016 - MTA and non-MTA items:

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/7b338933-001c-49eb-974f-b5b99d121cc8

[checkmatechamp13]

I meant MTA proposals. I only used the S52 as an example because it's been proposed forever and IIRC was one of the reasons that the Dongan Hills station was picked for wheelchair access. I was the SI Tech meeting last year where a few of those proposals were handed out. What's a little annoying is that the MTA never even issued a preliminary Bus Study report.

 

From the SI Bus Study Public Workshop 2/9/2016 - MTA and non-MTA items:

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/7b338933-001c-49eb-974f-b5b99d121cc8

 

I agree, and I was there as well. From what I remember (and what the timeline said), they were supposed to publish an interim report in June 2016 and release the final report by December 2016. Now we're almost halfway through 2017 with no news other than basically a leaked sketch of their plan.

[Dan1]

I agree, and I was there as well. From what I remember (and what the timeline said), they were supposed to publish an interim report in June 2016 and release the final report by December 2016. Now we're almost halfway through 2017 with no news other than basically a leaked sketch of their plan.

And I wouldn't pay much attention to that leaked sketch. Very little detail, not even street names. While it appeared to be on an MTA-related site, it didn't look 'official'.

[bobtehpanda]

Looks like it was real.

 

http://www.silive.com/news/2017/06/staten_island_express_bus_overhaul.html#incart_river_home

 

More details here:

 

http://www.silive.com/news/2017/06/see_it_staten_island_express_b.html#incart_2box_silive-homepage-featured

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Interesting.  I can tell you right now a lot of Staten Islanders don't take the subway and don't want to.  I expect to hear a lot of feedback.

[Dan1]

Looks like it was real.

 

http://www.silive.com/news/2017/06/staten_island_express_bus_overhaul.html#incart_river_home

 

More details here:

 

http://www.silive.com/news/2017/06/see_it_staten_island_express_b.html#incart_2box_silive-homepage-featured

Guess so!

MTA official release: http://www.mta.info/SIExpressBus

[paulrivera]

FINALLY, some progress at the ol' MTA.

 

But I wonder what residents of Tompkinsville and Silver Lake (and this other neighborhood on south central SI that I can't make out) think about losing express bus service...

 

The x21 looks to be a goner also. Between the M104 and the x21, they really don't like serving 42nd Street around the U.N. don't they?

[checkmatechamp13]

Interesting.  I can tell you right now a lot of Staten Islanders don't take the subway and don't want to.  I expect to hear a lot of feedback.

 

Yeah, it's only a lot because Staten Island has a lot of express bus riders in general. I can tell you at the first stop in Manhattan you'll see half of a full bus get off to catch the subway.

 

FINALLY, some progress at the ol' MTA.

 

But I wonder what residents of Tompkinsville and Silver Lake (and this other neighborhood on south central SI that I can't make out) think about losing express bus service...

 

The x21 looks to be a goner also. Between the M104 and the x21, they really don't like serving 42nd Street around the U.N. don't they?

 

Tompkinsville is not served by any express buses. Tompkinsville goes no further west than Cebra Avenue (I'd really be inclined to say Jersey Street). That whole area that the X30 would be cut back from is basically Silver Lake (hence the name of the park) or maybe New Brighton depending on who you ask. Forest & Brighton I'd say is the eastern border of Randall Manor.

 

Of course, Clove & Victory is Sunnyside but that would still have the X14.

 

In any case, the X30 is barely used in that area. Whenever I take the S92 up Victory (I actually had to take it today), I never see anybody turn down the S92 at the stops it shares with the X30 (which basically indicates that demand for travel to Manhattan is basically satisfied by local buses, because the X30 takes even longer, having to backtrack through Staten Island). I never paid attention to how crowded X16 buses were heading the other way (or how many people boarded them) but I have to imagine it was more than the number boarding the X30.

 

As for the X21, the Staten Island portion looks like it's being kept (so it'll start at Hylan & Richmond, go up Richmond & Arthur Kill, then go straight to Manhattan and terminate at (it looks like) 57th & 6th with the other "via NJ" express buses.

 

Not sure which neighborhood in south-central SI would be losing express service. The X23 portion along Woodrow Road is within walking distance of other routes, and I can't tell if the X15 bypassing Richmondtown was a carryover error from the fact that they have it bypassing Richmondtown under the current situation (it doesn't. It runs down Wilder, Clarke, etc)

 

Anyway, as for my thoughts on the express portion of the study (since the article says the local part will be released at some undetermined future date):

 

Whose genius idea was it to extend the X31 to Annadale? Downtown service is sparse enough as is once you get west of the ETC, and they basically want to make the X19 the only Downtown route serving the deep South Shore? (Aside from that, as we discussed earlier, the X31 shouldn't be running any further than the SI Mall anyway). With all the Midtown routes in the area (the X21 that they want to prop up so much), what's the point? If anything, I would see if the X17A could get a little more ridership by being extended further down Annadale (or better yet, just have a Downtown express route running straight down Arden as a counterpart to the X19)

 

As I mentioned before, that 4% number has to be a fudged number based off rush hour figures (when the vast majority of express routes are Downtown-only or Midtown-only anyway). And still nothing about off-peak service.

[Around the Horn]

At what point will we see the changes made to each individual route? I see this overall map, but there is no key showing which particular lines are going where.

[checkmatechamp13]

Check the Staten Island Advance article. It says which routes will be created from portions of which existing routes (I mean, it basically looks like my description I posted earlier)

 

On a side note, I see two FAQs that weren't in the original site that was leaked. One was "What about weekend and off-peak service?" and the other one was "Are there recommendations for the local bus routes?". I guess they looked at the comments on this thread (and the corresponding Subchat one) and saw that a lot of us were asking that question.

[checkmatechamp13]

Now one thing that I'm definitely concerned about is how they're going to go about adding off-peak service. In their report, they mention that 42% of current express riders go Downtown, and 54% of riders go to Midtown. Now even if I think those numbers are BS, that indicates that (they feel) there's a heavier tilt in ridership towards Midtown over Downtown, and I'm worried they might try to skew service towards Midtown.

 

The thing is that Staten Island is physically closer to Downtown (obviously), so it's easier to for a Midtown rider to catch a bus Downtown than it is for a Downtown rider to head up to Midtown to catch a bus, only to end up heading back south towards Staten Island. Also, there's more options in terms of subway lines (going across 23rd gets you the and maybe the , whereas going Downtown basically gets you every line except the 6th Avenue Line). 

 

I can picture them running their versions of the X1 (ETC-Downtown via Hylan) and X7 (ETC-Midtown via Father Capodanno & FDR Drive) off-peak. In that case, I'd still rather see the majority of service concentrated on the X1, rather than some attempt at an even split.

 

With the way they say "a selection of routes", it indicates that they want to do away with separate peak/off-peak service patterns. So I can picture them dividing up the X10's ridership between the X11 & X12 off-peak (with the way they talk about buses remaining on highways, I wouldn't be shocked if they said screw you to people living around Concord and just had them make their way to the X1 via the S53/93)

 

In terms of weekday ridership, the busiest SI express routes are the X17, X1, X10, X22, X12/42, X5, X7, X2, and X15. So like I mentioned, I'm basically willing to bet the X7 would run off-peak, the X22 would run off-peak, and I have a hunch the X17J would run off-peak as well. (Now the question is: Are they really going to leave the entire South Shore with basically just the X22 to Midtown off-peak?)

 

Funny how they labeled the Checkpoint (Arthur Kill & WSE) as a Park & Ride (as far as I know, people just park on the street around there) but they left out actual Park & Rides at Princes Bay & Great Kills. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1. Yeah, it's only a lot because Staten Island has a lot of express bus riders in general. I can tell you at the first stop in Manhattan you'll see half of a full bus get off to catch the subway.

 

 

 

2. Of course, Clove & Victory is Sunnyside but that would still have the X14.

 

In any case, the X30 is barely used in that area. Whenever I take the S92 up Victory (I actually had to take it today), I never see anybody turn down the S92 at the stops it shares with the X30 (which basically indicates that demand for travel to Manhattan is basically satisfied by local buses, because the X30 takes even longer, having to backtrack through Staten Island). I never paid attention to how crowded X16 buses were heading the other way (or how many people boarded them) but I have to imagine it was more than the number boarding the X30.

1. That's likely because the express buses aren't going to their final destination.  I'm aware of the people that get off and take the subway, but there are plenty that don't.  When I worked on the Upper West Side and Chelsea, I would take the subway either because there was no express bus or because the express bus I was on didn't go to where I was going.  Paying $6.50 is a rip off if people who would normally take one bus.  I've said it before and I'll say it again.  More transfers means more chances of commuters being screwed over by a delay of some sort.  Given how horrid the subways have been of late, the last thing we should be doing is literally forcing more people onto a system that clearly can NOT handle it, leading to more delays and more issues.  I also foresee some people saying the hell with it and driving in and I don't blame them.  The whole point of the express bus was to give people who lived in two fare zones a quick way to and from Manhattan and now they expect people to pay $6.50 and then have another transfer who previously didn't.  I don't have a problem with them restructuring the Staten Island portions and eliminating stops, but they should not just have Midtown and Downtown service with nothing in between.  Given the amount of feedback on Silive, many agree with what I'm saying here.

 

2. I would disagree with you on that. In the AM, that depends on what buses you are taking.  The earlier ones (meaning the first buses in the morning) can be VERY crowded before it even reaches say Forest and Clove, so obviously someone uses those buses.  Additionally, I would often take the X30 near to the Randall Manor/Silver Lake area and found people still using it, so I don't necessarily agree with it being removed from that area.  That means that anyone along Victory Blvd would have to either take a long walk up and down those hills or take a local bus or drive.  This plan will definitely put more cars on the road, but as usual, the doesn't think things through.  As for the X16, it got usage in Randall Manor and Silver Lake, particularly the apartments there on Victory Blvd.

[Union Tpke]

Yes, it turned out it was the real thing. I am glad I found it so we could discuss it several weeks before it was intended to be released.