SI Express Bus Plan Out!

[B35 via Church]

On ‎3‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 4:10 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Originally, they had the SIM26 running the regular X22 route to Page, and the SIM25 running to Hylan & Woodvale (they call that development "Captain's Quarters") with the SIM2 running straight down Huguenot Avenue and terminating at Hylan Blvd (June 2017 rendition). Then they extended the SIM2/25 to Craig Avenue (October 2017 rendition), and finally, they decided to tweak the SIM2 to have it run up Arden Avenue (March 2018 rendition). Not sure which way to look at it (is it their way of testing the demand for more expansive South Shore-Downtown service, or is it their way to avoid having to create a Downtown variant of the SIM26?)

I don't think there would be much benefit to having the SIM26 supplement the SIM24 on Huguenot Avenue (since the SIM24 has a relatively limited catchment area as-is). I actually like the concept of serving Woodrow Road riders through the cross-streets (Bloomingdale, Rossville, Huguenot, and Arden). The only issue is the large gap between Arden & Arthur Kill (a small portion of which is rectified by offering service on Annadale Road, but still). Local bus-wise, I think there should be some service to at least give them the option of transferring (so they're not literally stranded/car-dependent), but I'm not sure what can be done express bus-wise (The obvious answer is extending a bus from the ETC, but it would literally be for network coverage express bus-wise).

And I agree the Woods of Arden Road stop is a short walk from Arden Avenue (which is on the more direct SIM23 anyway).

Hmm...

Supplementation wasn't the motive; Huguenot is the straightest shot to the West Shore from the south & the distance from Huguenot to Bloomingdale covers enough of that pocket of Woodrow (rd)..... But since you bring it up, I don't see the harm in running the thing along Huguenot b/w Woodrow & Arthur Kill..... I don't see it justifying any less service than whatever they plan on giving the SIM24....

I simply don't like the fact that they took service from off Woodrow rd & added more service along Hylan Blvd (as far as east-west service goes).... Terrible tradeoff IMO..... I'm not too crazy about the locals doing it, but que sera, sera..... You're only going to have more people doing more walking (or driving) to more of these "SIM" routes in general anyway, since the focus was/is on increasing distance b/w stops to try to speed things up......

[EastFlatbushLarry]

On 3/13/2018 at 11:03 PM, JeremiahC99 said:

The Q52 used to operate out of Far Rockaway. Whenever they made the Q52 and Q53 routes into SBS routes, they decided to convert them into articulated bus routes, using 40 articulated new scheme XD60 buses (which were diverted from their planned delivery assignments in Manhattan and Brooklyn). 15 buses are assigned to the Q52 SBS (the other 25 are a time LaGuardia for the Q53 SBS), and since JFK Depot, which like Far Rockaway Depot was a Green Bus Lines Depot, has 30 new scheme XD60’s for the Q10, they decided to move the Q52 SBS there so that maintenance needs are simplified.

Regarding Far Rockaway Depot, it also feels like that no local bus routes operate out of that depot. Usually, there are 52 Orion VII OG hybrid for the Q11, Q21, Q22, Q35, and Q41 (a JFK depot transfer), and out of the 52, ZERO are assigned to Far Rockaway depot. All 52 buses are assigned to the JFK Depot. Those 52 buses are on rotation with the JFK Depot Roster, sine I see Q35 buses with the JFK Depot sticker almost EVERYDAY.

In essence, the Q52 SBS, as well as any other former Green Lines bus route, is based out of JFK AND Far Rockaway Depot (the two depots should be considered a single facility).

 Lord, father God in heaven... Reading is absolutely fundamental. I cannot for the life of me, believe that an intelligent individual went on an unnecessary diatribe about the history of GBL/JFK/Far Rock quoting a blurb out of a well explained & detailed post. If reading was fundamental to you, you would have also read that in my post i stated that i, an employee of NYCTA, understood the reasons & methods of why certain runs & lines cannot emanate from certain depots. The reason i made the point of highlighting the Q8, B13 & SBS Q52 is because although it would make LOGICAL sense to have said runs on said lines emanate from depots closest to the lines terminal, for run on/run off/pull out & pull in purposes, they currently cannot due to all or most depots not currently sharing the same union representation. If that were the case, the swapping of lines & runs throughout NYCTA/MaBSTOA/Bus Company would be significantly easier, which transit management would have a hard on for. You clearly zeroed in on Q52 SBS, and had a point to prove how much knowledge you've acquired on the history of GBL/JFK/Far Rock. Congratulations. Do you feel better now? Oh and for the record, Transit has no desire for JFK/Far Rock to continue operating in it's current fashion. Never in the history of transit authority has one G.S. been responsible for running 2 depots. If they wanted Far Rock to operate as an annex, it's current & future name would include annex in the title. The plan is for the depot to eventually come online with it's own fleet assignments, without sharing it's local fleet with JFK, which transit does not mean to continue going forward. Will mileage swaps still continue between JFK/Far Rock and Baisley? Absolutely. But who knows what fleet assignments Far Rock will get in the future. Please, for love of all things holy & sacred, before unnecessarily rambling on about lord knows what, and what significance did it have to do with the original subject matter, and veering totally off course, take the time to read with understanding. Thank you in advance for never repeating this error in judgment. 

[TheNewYorkElevated]

I like where Byford is going with this re-organization plan of the express buses here. Just needs some tweeks here and there. 

[EastFlatbushLarry]

On 3/13/2018 at 5:00 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

The difference between the X27/28 and the SI routes is that the subway is a more viable alternative for those residents than SI residents. So if you cut the buses back to Downtown, Midtown X28 riders will likely make their way to the  train and take it directly home, and if you have the buses bypass Downtown, many X27 riders will simply take the  as opposed to backtracking to Midtown. So they run a combined route so at least there's the comfort/one-seat ride factor (in exchange for the cost/reliability factor)

I believe we're both saying the same thing, but we're attacking the subject from alternate ends of the spectrum. My point was, if the x27/28 midtown via downtowns were efficiently utilized, (which I've personally listened to ops on those line state otherwise) then keep em running as is. If not, redesign all express lines accordingly since they're "revamping" Staten Island. I'm sure that the express bus riding contingencies of Bay Ridge & Sea Gate would love the attention to detail.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

3 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I believe we're both saying the same thing, but we're attacking the subject from alternate ends of the spectrum. My point was, if the x27/28 midtown via downtowns were efficiently utilized, (which I've personally listened to ops on those line state otherwise) then keep em running as is. If not, redesign all express lines accordingly since they're "revamping" Staten Island. I'm sure that the express bus riding contingencies of Bay Ridge & Sea Gate would love the attention to detail.

X27 and X28 riders spoke loud and clear years ago when the  went messing around with both lines, and I was one of the people that led the charge to help restore both routes on weekends.  Both lines are fine as is.  If the  tries to screw with them, I'll personally start up petitions as I did before and work with the politicians in those neighborhoods as I did previously over the years to get that service back.  The  has tried repeatedly to screw over South Brooklyn and eliminate the X27 and X28.  As someone from South Brooklyn originally, we won't stand for it. I may not live there anymore, but I go there regularly and use the express buses to do so. This is a socio-economic issue, and it was very clear what they were trying to do in general with those 2010 cuts. Screw over middle class areas that they thought they could push over. They cut so many routes in South Brooklyn, and I found the whole thing disgusting.  I targeted not only the X27 and X28, but also the B2, B4, B64 in particular to be restored.  It's not okay for the  to target areas that they feel don't need service and tell them to take a hike.

[Union Tpke]

3 hours ago, TheNewYorkElevated said:

I like where Byford is going with this re-organization plan of the express buses here. Just needs some tweeks here and there. 

This predated Byford.

[Around the Horn]

6 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

X27 and X28 riders spoke loud and clear years ago when the  went messing around with both lines, and I was one of the people that led the charge to help restore both routes on weekends.  Both lines are fine as is.  If the  tries to screw with them, I'll personally start up petitions as I did before and work with the politicians in those neighborhoods as I did previously over the years to get that service back.  The  has tried repeatedly to screw over South Brooklyn and eliminate the X27 and X28.  As someone from South Brooklyn originally, we won't stand for it. I may not live there anymore, but I go there regularly and use the express buses to do so. This is a socio-economic issue, and it was very clear what they were trying to do in general with those 2010 cuts. Screw over middle class areas that they thought they could push over. They cut so many routes in South Brooklyn, and I found the whole thing disgusting.  I targeted not only the X27 and X28, but also the B2, B4, B64 in particular to be restored.  It's not okay for the  to target areas that they feel don't need service and tell them to take a hike.

It was even more of a joke when they implemented the X27B and X28B in an attempt to placate them without reversing the cut... Disgusting.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, Around the Horn said:

It was even more of a joke when they implemented the X27B and X28B in an attempt to placate them without reversing the cut... Disgusting.

There were so many complaints, first about that mess you described, but everyone wanted weekend service. Bay Ridge really was extremely vocal which is why the X27 returned first. The X28 was much harder to restore, but I created a few petitions over the years and all of the politicians I worked with (save one) circulated my petitions and kept hounding the to restore service. It's great to see both services back as they should be.

Senator Golden was relentless and really worked for his constituents. His office was fantastic. Mr. Quaglione and Assemblyman Colton were great as well.

[checkmatechamp13]

On 3/14/2018 at 10:22 PM, Q43 Floral Park said:

I get the SIM26 having roughly the same time without backtracking but I'm still a bit confused. The notion of having all these new Park & Ride SX buses implies that the service pattern (which is only on the X22a) is currently working yet they didn't include it in the new plan. Are people driving to Outerbridge as is?

I looked over the May 2017 study and I expected more information. I get that people will get on whatever comes first when 9 buses have the same stop but some of these routes have standalone portions, run solo or in the opposite direction of other routes on the same street. Seeing the other stops with the high ridership would help. They also didn't mention 2-seat rides, can you transfer from the South Shore buses to the X11/19 at Victory the same way you can on Bronx and Queens expresses?

When I first looked at the SIR schedule, I thought that's what they would expect someone south of the X19 to do. Then common sense kicked in and I realized that means leaving early, driving to a station that has a parking lot/easy street parking (or worse waiting for the S55/56/78), taking the SIR express, the ferry and then you still might have to take the train to work... It also left me wondering if that's the logic why is the X15 is a Downtown route?

 

The thing with the X22A is that there's a very limited amount of service, and you're forced to rely on that one single route (basically, once you decided to park at the Outerbridge lot, you've committed to the X22A with its 30 minute headways, whereas on these routes, you have the regular express buses as a backup, not to mention the local buses in the event you need to return home after rush hour. 

One of the planners mentioned the SIM35 was designed so riders can transfer to Midtown-bound buses at Hylan Blvd or Fingerboard Road (the original plan had it get on the SIE at Clove Road). 

And not sure what the logic of designing the X15 as a Downtown-only route, but the X22/23/24 as Midtown-only routes was. I'm as stumped as you are.

19 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Hmm...

Supplementation wasn't the motive; Huguenot is the straightest shot to the West Shore from the south & the distance from Huguenot to Bloomingdale covers enough of that pocket of Woodrow (rd)..... But since you bring it up, I don't see the harm in running the thing along Huguenot b/w Woodrow & Arthur Kill..... I don't see it justifying any less service than whatever they plan on giving the SIM24....

I simply don't like the fact that they took service from off Woodrow rd & added more service along Hylan Blvd (as far as east-west service goes).... Terrible tradeoff IMO..... I'm not too crazy about the locals doing it, but que sera, sera..... You're only going to have more people doing more walking (or driving) to more of these "SIM" routes in general anyway, since the focus was/is on increasing distance b/w stops to try to speed things up......

4

The question is, considering they're also removing stops, how many more stops would actually end up being serviced? It looks like, even if there was a Woodrow Road route, they would want it to run Bloomingdale-Rossville-Huguenot anyway (stops-wise I mean), since those intersections are about a half mile apart.

18 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I believe we're both saying the same thing, but we're attacking the subject from alternate ends of the spectrum. My point was, if the x27/28 midtown via downtowns were efficiently utilized, (which I've personally listened to ops on those line state otherwise) then keep em running as is. If not, redesign all express lines accordingly since they're "revamping" Staten Island. I'm sure that the express bus riding contingencies of Bay Ridge & Sea Gate would love the attention to detail.

1

True, definitely true.

[B35 via Church]

29 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The question is, considering they're also removing stops, how many more stops would actually end up being serviced? It looks like, even if there was a Woodrow Road route, they would want it to run Bloomingdale-Rossville-Huguenot anyway (stops-wise I mean), since those intersections are about a half mile apart.

...right, and that's the problem.

Anyway, the answer to that question (If we're talking about total stops), would be one (the 3 hypothetical stops you listed, minus the # stops the SIM26 makes at-or-north of Bloomingdale/Woodrow [which is 2]), plus however many stops the SIM24 makes north of Woodrow/Huguenot....

 

[checkmatechamp13]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

...right, and that's the problem.

Anyway, the answer to that question (If we're talking about total stops), would be one (the 3 hypothetical stops you listed, minus the # stops the SIM26 makes at-or-north of Bloomingdale/Woodrow [which is 2]), plus however many stops the SIM24 makes north of Woodrow/Huguenot....

1

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that issue.

That being said, what are your thoughts on the SIM4c basically being the West Shore version of the X1 off-peak? (I asked if they would make sure there were sufficient service levels on that route, and they said they took a good look at that, which implies buses will be running on 12-15 minute off-peak headways as opposed to every 20-30 minutes like the current X10 & X17 off-peak)

The way I see it, it's a win for Gannon Avenue riders and a loss for Richmond Avenue riders (Gannon Avenue riders get the improved frequency and get to bypass Narrows Road, while on Richmond Avenue, the time savings from the improved frequency still aren't offset by the longer travel time via Gannon Avenue vs. the SIE). On a side note, S93 usage in Concord would only increase further, since if you're going to take the S93 and transfer to the SIM1c or train you might as well stay on the bus into Brooklyn and save the fare).

The other thing in the back of my mind is, if this SIM4c runs at these high frequencies, that does weaken the SIM3c to a certain extent (which brings us back to the issue of the whole "North Shore residents heading down to Mid-Island neighborhoods for better express service" issue). Personally, I think sending it to Mariners Harbor (like the current X12) rather than Port Richmond (to provide similar service to the off-peak X10) would boost ridership a little, but still not enough to compensate for that.

[dkupf]

            NYCT wishes to eliminate off-peak express bus service via part of Arthur Kill Road (currently served by the X17), as well as X17’s Tottenville Extension.  The reason for this extension’s poor patronage is that current riders have to endure travel times of two-and-a-half to three hours!  Weekday off-peak service should be maintained via Amboy and Bloomingdale Roads by operating the new SIM26 during these times.   This would reduce travel times by at least half.  Usually, the reduction of travel times by a certain amount of minutes yields a two-fold increase in ridership; the boost in ridership should be sufficient to support the service.

            For the North Shore, NYCT wishes to trade X10 off-peak express bus service via Richmond Road/Victory Blvd/Gannon Ave/Narrows Road for the SIM3C via Deppe Place/Watchogue Road/Victory Blvd.  In turn, the SIM4C would serve Gannon Ave.  But what about Narrows Road?  The SIM3C should serve this corridor as well.  There are two problems with NYCT’s scenario. First, weekday off-peak express bus service via Richmond Ave between Victory Blvd and Deppe Place would be eliminated.  The second is that Victory Blvd and Gannon Ave between Richmond Road and Bradley Ave would have midtown Manhattan express bus service during off-peak hours, but not during the Weekday Peak!  That’s wrong.

            I, however, understand the shift of Weekday PM Peak express bus service in midtown Manhattan from 42nd Street to 34th Street, as that 42nd Street currently compromises the speed and reliability of these services.  (I live in Hell's Kitchen.)

            To summarize, what are NYCT’s ridership and revenue projections?  How many people would have their travel time increase/decrease?  Walking distance increase/decrease?  Transfers added/negated?  SEPTA (Philadelphia), MBTA (Boston), and the TTC (Toronto, Canada) recognizes these factors explicitly, and analyze them quantitatively when evaluating major service changes.  Why doesn’t NYCT?

            I think that the Staten Island Express Bus Redesign is rooted in the corporate culture within NYCT.  Operations Planning (OP) is a division of the Office of Management & Budget (OMB).  The Senior Vice President of this department reports to the Executive Vice President, who then reports to the NYCT President.  The OMB people are accountants.  They only want to cut service, not improve it.  This is why OP should be its own department under the Executive Vice President.

            Which brings us to this question: what would the new Staten Island Express Bus Redesign look like if the accountants weren’t breathing down the service planners’ backs?  This is the plan that Staten Islanders, as well as NYCT’s current and future riders, deserve.

[checkmatechamp13]

3 hours ago, dkupf said:

            NYCT wishes to eliminate off-peak express bus service via part of Arthur Kill Road (currently served by the X17), as well as X17’s Tottenville Extension.  The reason for this extension’s poor patronage is that current riders have to endure travel times of two-and-a-half to three hours!  Weekday off-peak service should be maintained via Amboy and Bloomingdale Roads by operating the new SIM26 during these times.   This would reduce travel times by at least half.  Usually, the reduction of travel times by a certain amount of minutes yields a two-fold increase in ridership; the boost in ridership should be sufficient to support the service.

As usual, no sources are cited when you make this claim. What is this magic threshold in terms of travel time reduction where ridership doubles?

4 hours ago, dkupf said:

            For the North Shore, NYCT wishes to trade X10 off-peak express bus service via Richmond Road  Avenue/Victory Blvd/Gannon Ave/Narrows Road for the SIM3C via Deppe Place/Watchogue Road/Victory Blvd.  In turn, the SIM4C would serve Gannon Ave.  But what about Narrows Road?  The SIM3C should serve this corridor as well.  There are two problems with NYCT’s scenario. First, weekday off-peak express bus service via Richmond Ave between Victory Blvd and Deppe Place would be eliminated.  The second is that Victory Blvd and Gannon Ave between Richmond Road and Bradley Ave would have midtown Manhattan express bus service during off-peak hours, but not during the Weekday Peak!  That’s wrong.

The SIM1C serves the eastern part of the Narrows Road corridor. What you mean is that the SIM3C should serve the Concord neighborhood. While I don't disagree with the idea that the area should have off-peak express bus service, the issue is that buses would have to travel along the service road for a significant distance, not just in the immediate vicinity of Targee Street (especially westbound). Additionally, by entering the SIE at Slosson Avenue, it allows buses to take advantage of the HOV Lane on the SIE.

As somebody who lives between Victory Blvd & Deppe Place, the physical service gap isn't that large (and this comes from somebody who lives in the neighborhood). The issue is the increased travel time from making additional stops along the service road instead of traveling down the SIE (in the HOV lane to boot).

And worse comes to worse, rush hour riders can take the SIM32/33 to Bradley Avenue for the SIM31 for Midtown service. That's like complaining that train Sea Beach riders have access to Broadway local stops on weekends but not during weekday rush hours. 

4 hours ago, dkupf said:

            I, however, understand the shift of Weekday PM Peak express bus service in midtown Manhattan from 42nd Street to 34th Street, as that 42nd Street currently compromises the speed and reliability of these services.  (I live in Hell's Kitchen.)

And is 34th Street really that much better in the PM rush? I'll say that I do tend to agree with the idea that 42nd Street is better in the AM rush, compared to 34th Street.

4 hours ago, dkupf said:

            To summarize, what are NYCT’s ridership and revenue projections?  How many people would have their travel time increase/decrease?  Walking distance increase/decrease?  Transfers added/negated?  SEPTA (Philadelphia), MBTA (Boston), and the TTC (Toronto, Canada) recognizes these factors explicitly, and analyze them quantitatively when evaluating major service changes.  Why doesn’t NYCT?)

According to their projections, 92% of riders who currently have a one-seat ride would continue to have a one-seat ride (up from 86% in their October 2017 proposal). 

4 hours ago, dkupf said:

            I think that the Staten Island Express Bus Redesign is rooted in the corporate culture within NYCT.  Operations Planning (OP) is a division of the Office of Management & Budget (OMB).  The Senior Vice President of this department reports to the Executive Vice President, who then reports to the NYCT President.  The OMB people are accountants.  They only want to cut service, not improve it.  This is why OP should be its own department under the Executive Vice President.

            Which brings us to this question: what would the new Staten Island Express Bus Redesign look like if the accountants weren’t breathing down the service planners’ backs?  This is the plan that Staten Islanders, as well as NYCT’s current and future riders, deserve.

With the reduced travel times, they expect to create more runs involving 2 trips instead of 1, thereby increasing some of the service spans at little to no cost.

[dkupf]

10 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

As usual, no sources are cited when you make this claim. What is this magic threshold in terms of travel time reduction where ridership doubles?

The SIM1C serves the eastern part of the Narrows Road corridor. What you mean is that the SIM3C should serve the Concord neighborhood. While I don't disagree with the idea that the area should have off-peak express bus service, the issue is that buses would have to travel along the service road for a significant distance, not just in the immediate vicinity of Targee Street (especially westbound). Additionally, by entering the SIE at Slosson Avenue, it allows buses to take advantage of the HOV Lane on the SIE.

As somebody who lives between Victory Blvd & Deppe Place, the physical service gap isn't that large (and this comes from somebody who lives in the neighborhood). The issue is the increased travel time from making additional stops along the service road instead of traveling down the SIE (in the HOV lane to boot).

And worse comes to worse, rush hour riders can take the SIM32/33 to Bradley Avenue for the SIM31 for Midtown service. That's like complaining that train Sea Beach riders have access to Broadway local stops on weekends but not during weekday rush hours. 

And is 34th Street really that much better in the PM rush? I'll say that I do tend to agree with the idea that 42nd Street is better in the AM rush, compared to 34th Street.

According to their projections, 92% of riders who currently have a one-seat ride would continue to have a one-seat ride (up from 86% in their October 2017 proposal). 

With the reduced travel times, they expect to create more runs involving 2 trips instead of 1, thereby increasing some of the service spans at little to no cost.

I have read so many mass transit planning studies throughout the years, I've lost count.  When ridership is expected to double, i.e., increase by 100%, the usual estimate would be a travel-time reduction of 50 minutes.

To the best of my knowledge, the SIE's and Gowanus Expressway's HOV lanes are not available for use outside of the weekday rush.  As that these lanes are reversible, they cannot be used outside of these times, except when a maintenance project forces the reduction of lanes.   When this occurs the HOV lanes are opened up to become general-purpose lanes.

You forget that Metrocard has to be used when transferring between bus routes, but not when transferring between most subway lines.  For example, at Herald Square, a Metrocard isn't needed when transferring between the B/D/F/M trains and the N/Q/R/W trains; nor at Grand Central between the 4/5/6 trains, 7 train, and the 42nd Street Shuttle.  But, the same Metrocard has to be used (as well as the free transfer) when walking between the F/Q at the Lexington-63rd Station and the 4/5/6/N/R/W at the 59th-Lexington Station.

For buses only, in Manhattan, 34th Street is faster than 42nd Street, but not by much.

For ridership/revenue/travel time/walking distance/transfer projections, I want each of these numbers and the facts, not percentages.  And, broken down by Weekday/Saturday/Sunday and annualized for all of these three categories.  SEPTA calls this the Comparative Evaluation & Community Benefit Analysis.  The result would produce a Final Benefit Score (FBS)--the higher the number, the higher overall net community benefit.  And, of course, the lower the FBS, the lower the net overall community benefit.

In fact, SEPTA used one of my suggestions for their FY2016 Annual Service Plan.  I suggested to have their Route 128 operate via the Parx Casino, situated in North Philadelphia, instead of having the route serve the cemeteries north of the casino.  The service planners "...projected a net increase of 31 daily weekday passengers...".  According to the FY2018 Annual Service Plan, "...the new segment carried 69 more weekday passengers in Fall 2016 than the old segment did in Fall 2015..."!

For details about SEPTA's Service Standards, go to the SEPTA website (www.septa.org).  On the main page, drag your mouse to the word "Media", and click "Reports".  When you get to the Reports page, scroll down to the bottom of this page to "Other Reports" and click "2016 Service Standards and Process".

When the pdf file pops up, scroll down a few pages to the Table of Contents, and look at "Section 2: Service Standards Process".  You will see a section called "Comparative Evaluation Process for Budget-Related Changes".  Scroll down, and read this section.

For an example, scroll beyond this section to "Section 3: Appendices".  You will see a section called "Comparative Evaluation Example".  Read this section as well.

Afterward, you could scroll to the middle of the Reports page, and read SEPTA's Annual Service Plans from FY2010 to FY2018 at your leisure.

SEPTA is currently compiling the Draft FY2019 Annual Service Plan.  They had two Open Houses at their Headquarters on February 27, 2018, and the Draft should be released to the public, via SEPTA's website, sometime next month.  Public hearings should be conducted in May.  Afterward, the Hearing Examiner should release her/his "Report and Recommendations" by late May or early June.  The SEPTA Board then considers the FY2019 Annual Service Plan, with revisions if necessary, at their June meeting.  If approved, it would be implemented starting Fall 2018 or later.

[checkmatechamp13]

6 hours ago, dkupf said:

I have read so many mass transit planning studies throughout the years, I've lost count.  When ridership is expected to double, i.e., increase by 100%, the usual estimate would be a travel-time reduction of 50 minutes.

To the best of my knowledge, the SIE's and Gowanus Expressway's HOV lanes are not available for use outside of the weekday rush.  As that these lanes are reversible, they cannot be used outside of these times, except when a maintenance project forces the reduction of lanes.   When this occurs the HOV lanes are opened up to become general-purpose lanes.

You forget that Metrocard has to be used when transferring between bus routes, but not when transferring between most subway lines.  For example, at Herald Square, a Metrocard isn't needed when transferring between the B/D/F/M trains and the N/Q/R/W trains; nor at Grand Central between the 4/5/6 trains, 7 train, and the 42nd Street Shuttle.  But, the same Metrocard has to be used (as well as the free transfer) when walking between the F/Q at the Lexington-63rd Station and the 4/5/6/N/R/W at the 59th-Lexington Station.

For buses only, in Manhattan, 34th Street is faster than 42nd Street, but not by much.

For ridership/revenue/travel time/walking distance/transfer projections, I want each of these numbers and the facts, not percentages.  And, broken down by Weekday/Saturday/Sunday and annualized for all of these three categories.  SEPTA calls this the Comparative Evaluation & Community Benefit Analysis.  The result would produce a Final Benefit Score (FBS)--the higher the number, the higher overall net community benefit.  And, of course, the lower the FBS, the lower the net overall community benefit.

1

That doesn't make sense. Saving 10 minutes on a 15 minute commute is different from saving 10 minutes on a 2 hour commute.

The HOV lane on the Staten Island Expressway is bidirectional and 24/7. Aside from the fact that I use the X17 regularly, I was also one of the people who built it. So "your knowledge" is incorrect. The one on the Gowanus is the reversible, rush hour one.

And what's your point? Unless a rider needs to make a second transfer, the use of a MetroCard shouldn't be an issue. If they need to transfer to the subway, they can most likely catch their line in Lower Manhattan. If they don't want to transfer, they can make their way to Watchogue Road for the SIM3, Richmond Avenue for the SIM8, or Bradley Avenue for the SIM31. 

[FLX9304]

On 3/13/2018 at 11:03 PM, JeremiahC99 said:

The Q52 used to operate out of Far Rockaway. Whenever they made the Q52 and Q53 routes into SBS routes, they decided to convert them into articulated bus routes, using 40 articulated new scheme XD60 buses (which were diverted from their planned delivery assignments in Manhattan and Brooklyn). 15 buses are assigned to the Q52 SBS (the other 25 are a time LaGuardia for the Q53 SBS), and since JFK Depot, which like Far Rockaway Depot was a Green Bus Lines Depot, has 30 new scheme XD60’s for the Q10, they decided to move the Q52 SBS there so that maintenance needs are simplified.

Regarding Far Rockaway Depot, it also feels like that no local bus routes operate out of that depot. Usually, there are 52 Orion VII OG hybrid for the Q11, Q21, Q22, Q35, and Q41 (a JFK depot transfer), and out of the 52, ZERO are assigned to Far Rockaway depot. All 52 buses are assigned to the JFK Depot. Those 52 buses are on rotation with the JFK Depot Roster, sine I see Q35 buses with the JFK Depot sticker almost EVERYDAY.

In essence, the Q52 SBS, as well as any other former Green Lines bus route, is based out of JFK AND Far Rockaway Depot (the two depots should be considered a single facility).

What does this have to do with STATEN ISLAND EXPRESS BUS ROUTING???

[Via Garibaldi 8]

51 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

That doesn't make sense. Saving 10 minutes on a 15 minute commute is different from saving 10 minutes on a 2 hour commute.

The HOV lane on the Staten Island Expressway is bidirectional and 24/7. Aside from the fact that I use the X17 regularly, I was also one of the people who built it. So "your knowledge" is incorrect. The one on the Gowanus is the reversible, rush hour one.

And what's your point? Unless a rider needs to make a second transfer, the use of a MetroCard shouldn't be an issue. If they need to transfer to the subway, they can most likely catch their line in Lower Manhattan. If they don't want to transfer, they can make their way to Watchogue Road for the SIM3, Richmond Avenue for the SIM8, or Bradley Avenue for the SIM31. 

Seems like some folks aren't happy with these lines. It will take people more time to reach buses and perhaps transfers will be needed. I'm not sure how this speeds things up.

[FLX9304]

Well at least come August, I would be making a trip whenever these "SIM City" routes go into an effect. The  and the  will have their hands full when they start playing "SIM" games 21 times. How are the people (since the  eliminated the word "customers" in January IIRC) are gonna react. Express bus lovers and transit guys (and girls) will get their first shots on the "SIM" game style bus displays, especially those with "C" at the end. 

[checkmatechamp13]

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Seems like some folks aren't happy with these lines. It will take people more time to reach buses and perhaps transfers will be needed. I'm not sure how this speeds things up.

Same as other major changes. Some will be happy, some will be upset, and some will be indifferent. According to one of the poster boards at the meeting, 92% of riders who have a one-seat ride would continue to have a one-seat ride, so that means 8% of riders will need to transfer to continue their trip.

In terms of the bus stops being eliminated, around 2/3rds of riders would continue using their existing bus stop (therefore it would take them the same amount of time to reach the stop as it does today), and 99.1% would have to walk less than 5 minutes to their new stop. (That 0.1% was probably the X23 along Woodrow and the X17/19 along Drumgoole). And then of course routing-wise, there's the benefits such as direct service from Tottenville to Downtown.

[Future ENY OP]

2 hours ago, FLX9304 said:

Well at least come August, I would be making a trip whenever these "SIM City" routes go into an effect. The  and the  will have their hands full when they start playing "SIM" games 21 times. How are the people (since the  eliminated the word "customers" in January IIRC) are gonna react. Express bus lovers and transit guys (and girls) will get their first shots on the "SIM" game style bus displays, especially those with "C" at the end. 

To me X prefixes are better.  I get it that they are implementing  bus routes rather keeping things NYCT with the X prefixes. This could be apart of the intergration. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

3 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Same as other major changes. Some will be happy, some will be upset, and some will be indifferent. According to one of the poster boards at the meeting, 92% of riders who have a one-seat ride would continue to have a one-seat ride, so that means 8% of riders will need to transfer to continue their trip.

In terms of the bus stops being eliminated, around 2/3rds of riders would continue using their existing bus stop (therefore it would take them the same amount of time to reach the stop as it does today), and 99.1% would have to walk less than 5 minutes to their new stop. (That 0.1% was probably the X23 along Woodrow and the X17/19 along Drumgoole). And then of course routing-wise, there's the benefits such as direct service from Tottenville to Downtown.

That's all fine and good, but that transfer should be discussed. If you have to transfer to a second bus for all trips well that means you can't do anything if you need to take another bus or subway for some reason, except pay another $2.75.

[IAlam]

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

That's all fine and good, but that transfer should be discussed. If you have to transfer to a second bus for all trips well that means you can't do anything if you need to take another bus or subway for some reason, except pay another $2.75.

In that case, the passenger would benefit from using an unlimited card. Or in extreme cases taking the Ferry instead. While there most certainly will be cases of people needing to take the bus to the express bus, to a subway or another bus, it seems the issue has more to do with the current fare structure than with the routes.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, IAlam said:

In that case, the passenger would benefit from using an unlimited card. Or in extreme cases taking the Ferry instead. While there most certainly will be cases of people needing to take the bus to the express bus, to a subway or another bus, it seems the issue has more to do with the current fare structure than with the routes.

Yeah but the passenger may not need an unlimited express bus pass. Lots of people work from home part of the week now. Additionally the people using the express bus generally are doing so to avoid a thousand transfers which is what you get taking a local bus to the ferry and then the subway.

8% seems like a small number until you realize that some 30,000+ plus riders use the express bus daily. I'm not sure of the number on Staten Island but it would to be hundreds of riders affected. That's not a small number in my book.

[checkmatechamp13]

6 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

That's all fine and good, but that transfer should be discussed. If you have to transfer to a second bus for all trips well that means you can't do anything if you need to take another bus or subway for some reason, except pay another $2.75.

Once you're in the subway system, you can pretty much transfer to whatever line you need (e.g. Somebody can take the SIM32 to the SIM31 to the to reach LIC) or they can take the SIM32 to the any north-south subway line to reach the (7). Same thing with the (L). 

A second bus, that's true and I did bring it up with basically a shrug as a response. For that matter if somebody needed to catch a QM or BxM route in Midtown, but they libed on a Downtown-only route, that would be the same issue  (with 2 separate MetroCards they can avoid a second $6.50 charge but they would still have to pay an extra $2.75)

3 hours ago, IAlam said:

In that case, the passenger would benefit from using an unlimited card. Or in extreme cases taking the Ferry instead. While there most certainly will be cases of people needing to take the bus to the express bus, to a subway or another bus, it seems the issue has more to do with the current fare structure than with the routes.

Unless there's a ridiculous amount of traffic (which does happen sometimes), it's not going to be faster to take the ferry over the express bus.

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yeah but the passenger may not need an unlimited express bus pass. Lots of people work from home part of the week now. Additionally the people using the express bus generally are doing so to avoid a thousand transfers which is what you get taking a local bus to the ferry and then the subway.

8% seems like a small number until you realize that some 30,000+ plus riders use the express bus daily. I'm not sure of the number on Staten Island but it would to be hundreds of riders affected. That's not a small number in my book.

It's not "generally". The main issue cited in the survey was speed/travel time, not avoiding transfers.

The 30,000+ riders are those on Staten Island express buses (I believe it's 34,000). Citywide, express ridership is in the low/mid-40,000 range. In any case making a transfer is not the same as not having service.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

7 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Once you're in the subway system, you can pretty much transfer to whatever line you need (e.g. Somebody can take the SIM32 to the SIM31 to the to reach LIC) or they can take the SIM32 to the any north-south subway line to reach the (7). Same thing with the (L). 

A second bus, that's true and I did bring it up with basically a shrug as a response. For that matter if somebody needed to catch a QM or BxM route in Midtown, but they libed on a Downtown-only route, that would be the same issue  (with 2 separate MetroCards they can avoid a second $6.50 charge but they would still have to pay an extra $2.75)

Unless there's a ridiculous amount of traffic (which does happen sometimes), it's not going to be faster to take the ferry over the express bus.

It's not "generally". The main issue cited in the survey was speed/travel time, not avoiding transfers.

The 30,000+ riders are those on Staten Island express buses (I believe it's 34,000). Citywide, express ridership is in the low/mid-40,000 range. In any case making a transfer is not the same as not having service.

Let's see... More transfers equals longer travel times. I know personally from experience. There were times when it would take me two and a half hours via the local bus, ferry and the subway. I switched to the express bus for a faster commute. Of course they're going to put that, but commonsense says that the more times you have to change, the more likely you are to encounter delays.