Would An Overnight Bus Network Work For Staten Island (And Eventually NYC)?

[Lil 57]

I think that it might be beneficial to have an overnight bus network pilot in Staten Island for the . A lot of cities have overnight bus networks that combine portions (and sometimes the entity) of multiple daytime bus routes and provide service to areas during the night at decent frequencies. For Example In SI, overnight routes can be numbered in the S3xx series and run to more places overnight. This can be done during the SI redesign for local buses.

Suggestions for overnight routes:

S346: St. George to the Amazon facility via Castleton. (every 30 mins)

S348: Current S48 routing. (every 30 mins)

S351: Current S51 routing, then S76 routing to Oakwood, to provide overnight service to the New Dorp Beach area. (every 30 mins)

S353: Current S53 routing. (every 40 mins)

S354: S40 routing from St. George to Broadway, then S54 routing to the New Dorp SIR Station, S54 would also be restored on weekends to at least Seaview Hospital from W. New Brighton. (every 30 mins)

S359: S40 routing to Port Richmond Ave, then S59 routing to Hlyan/Richmond, using Marsh Ave instead of Ring Road. (every 30 mins)

S361: Route between the ETC and Port Richmond via the S61 and the S57 routes. (every 60 minutes)

S362: S62 routing to Travis, then hops on the WSE to service West Shore Plaza and possibly the Hotels on South Ave. (every 30 mins)

S374: Current S74 routing if the S74 is split at the ETC during the day. (every 30 mins)

S378: Current S78 routing if the S78 is split during the day. Will also take the S52 routing from St. George to Tompkins Ave to cover New Brighton overnight. (every 30 mins)

S379: S79 local routing, however traveling via the SIM5/6 routes between the ETC and Hylan/Nelson. (Every 40 mins)

*The SIM1C and a SIM4C/SIM33C combo from Midtown to Huguenot via Gannon/Richmond called the SIM4N would also run overnights every 60 mins.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Lil 57

[Deucey]

But there’s already 24/7 bus service in the city, and on SI.

Notwithstanding that: on SI practically everything of interest closes by midnight, and there isn’t a lot of travel by us North Shore folks to South Shore destinations, I don’t think an OWL network would actually work (even though your S378 would mean I wouldn’t have to walk up the stairs at St Peters to go home - which is a plus); and lest we forget,  was/is looking at reducing overnight service to hourly.

Now in Manhattan, if there was an OWL system duplicating subway service, that could work for both actual subway shutdowns and enhancing customer safety.

[Lil 57]

1 hour ago, Deucey said:

But there’s already 24/7 bus service in the city, and on SI.

Notwithstanding that: on SI practically everything of interest closes by midnight, and there isn’t a lot of travel by us North Shore folks to South Shore destinations, I don’t think an OWL network would actually work (even though your S378 would mean I wouldn’t have to walk up the stairs at St Peters to go home - which is a plus); and lest we forget,  was/is looking at reducing overnight service to hourly.

Now in Manhattan, if there was an OWL system duplicating subway service, that could work for both actual subway shutdowns and enhancing customer safety.

But remember, there are still people trying to get home overnight and areas like Richmond Ave/Bradly Ave and Manor Road have no nearby bus service to get. In Manhattan, an overnight network could work and can also have more overnight Crosstown Coverage, for example, there is no overnight crosstown service from 42nd street and 79th street. I'll come up with new routes tonight for Manhattan.

[B35 via Church]

Define "work".

[Lil 57]

Just now, B35 via Church said:

Define "work".

Beneficial, and more coverage.

[B35 via Church]

Rather vague answer, but regardless, then the question becomes:

Why does there have to be a combination of routes for there to be some specific overnight bus network in SI (or any other borough)?

The routes themselves exist & the issue with overnight service has very little to do with coverage... The issue, at best, are shortened spans on the current routes.... I would look into increasing the spans on some of these routes that aren't 24/7 that could perhaps use overnight service, instead of drumming up a network specific to overnight service that involves d*cking around with the current routes & being cute with route nomenclatures for them..... That's just how I see it...

[Deucey]

11 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Rather vague answer, but regardless, then the question becomes:

Why does there have to be a combination of routes for there to be some specific overnight bus network in SI (or any other borough)?

The routes themselves exist & the issue with overnight service has very little to do with coverage... The issue, at best, are shortened spans on the current routes.... I would look into increasing the spans on some of these routes that aren't 24/7 that could perhaps use overnight service, instead of drumming up a network specific to overnight service that involves d*cking around with the current routes & being cute with route nomenclatures for them..... That's just how I see it...

To be fair, every place offering OWL service either short lines a daytime route or combines multiple routes, so @Lil 57 isn’t off the mark in concept with SI. It’s just on SI the market for that isn’t St George to below the SIE. It’d really be a nicer idea to have OWL circulators below the SIE - could reduce drunk driving down there.

But north shore? Aside from S44 stopping at midnight, and S52 stopping at 1 and leaving Jersey St and points east miles away from a bus line, our service doesn’t suck all that much.

[B35 via Church]

46 minutes ago, Deucey said:

To be fair, every place offering OWL service either short lines a daytime route or combines multiple routes, so @Lil 57 isn’t off the mark in concept with SI. It’s just on SI the market for that isn’t St George to below the SIE. It’d really be a nicer idea to have OWL circulators below the SIE - could reduce drunk driving down there.

But north shore? Aside from S44 stopping at midnight, and S52 stopping at 1 and leaving Jersey St and points east miles away from a bus line, our service doesn’t suck all that much.

I'm not questioning the existence of the concept, I'm questioning the implementation of that concept for this city.....

[Lil 57]

Here are my recommendations for a Manhattan Owl Network.

Manhattan:

M301: M103 to 125th street, then takes M101 routing to its northern terminal. (Every 20 mins)

M302: M1 Routing from SoHo to 110th Street, then M2 routing. (Every 30 mins)

M305: M5/M55 combo with an extension to 220th street via the M100. (Every 30 mins)

M307: M11 routing form Abingdon SQ to 106th street, then M7 routing. (Every 20-30 mins)

M310: M10/M20 combo. (Every 20-30 mins)

M314: M14D routing, alternative buses go via Ave A. (Every 30 mins. Every 60 mins for each branch)

M315: M15 routing with an extension to Randalls/Wards Island via the M35. Alternative buses terminate at 126th street. (Every 30 mins SF-126th. Randalls/Wards extension served every 60 mins)

M321: M21 routing to the FDR Drive, then M22 routing to the WFC. (Every 60 mins)

M323: M23 SBS routing from Chelsea Piers to the FDR Drive, then takes the M34A SBS routing to 34th Street, then continues on 34th Street and ends at the Javits Center (M34 SBS Stop). (Every 30 mins)

M342: Starts at the UN and takes 42nd street to 12th Ave, then takes M50 routing to 49th Street/1st Ave. (Every 30 mins)

M357: Starts at Brodway/72nd Street, takes M57 routing to 1sr Ave, then goes via the M31 to 92nd Street. (Every 30 mins)

M360: Starts at 41st Street (M104 Terminal). Takes Broadway to MLK Blvd. Then Travels via the M60 SBS to LaGuardia Airport. (Every 15-20 mins)

M379: Starts at East End Ave/80th Street. Then takes the M79 SBS Routing to Broadway, turns on 86th Street and then takes the M86 SBS routing to 92nd Street (M86 SBS terminal). (Every 40 mins)

M396: Starts at 97th Street/1st Ave and then takes the M96 routing to Broadway. Stays on Broadway until 16th Street and takes the M116 routing to its eastern terminal. (Every 40 mins)   

Edited March 18, 2019 by Lil 57

[Orion6025]

30 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

M22 routing to the WFC. (Every 60 mins)

That's a bit overkill. Just run it up to greenwich to allow riders to transfer to/from the 7th ave/bway line and be done with it. No one's going over to BPC around 2 am. Frankly i would advocate for an m9 variant over an m22 variant because it covers more ground than the m22, while still largely serving the same markets as the m22, save for the eastern end of madison street (but it could be argued the nighttime m21 sort of takes care of that... sort of..). Once this hypothetical m9 reaches city hall, it can either terminate there or run a block over to Church street to hit up the A/E/2 at that Park Place-Chambers Street (IND)-World Trade Center complex thing. Less runtime and mileage to get to greenwich under the m22 version, while still serving close to the same fundamental markets and then some, while still hitting up all the major subway lines (I know it's missing the 1... however with the 2 running local at night, riders have PLENTY of chances to transfer to a 1).

Only major disadvantage is that this means the nighttime m21 cannot be paired with anything (and before anyone suggests the m8, that would be a waste of money... the route has nightlife, but that potential clientele doesn't seem to give two s#its about the bus!). This is a bit of a wacky idea, but perhaps the m21 could be paired with that m7/11 thing? Just run it up 6th/7th to 14 street, cross over a few blocks and pick up the m11 route from there.

44 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

M310: M10/M20 combo. (Every 20-30 mins)

not saying the m10 is a bad choice, but why that over saint nich? Subway duplication?

 

32 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

via the M35

Why is serving randalls necessary at night? I get there are some... -institutions- down south but do they justify nighttime bus service?

[Lil 57]

11 hours ago, Orion6025 said:

That's a bit overkill. Just run it up to greenwich to allow riders to transfer to/from the 7th ave/bway line and be done with it. No one's going over to BPC around 2 am. Frankly i would advocate for an m9 variant over an m22 variant because it covers more ground than the m22, while still largely serving the same markets as the m22, save for the eastern end of madison street (but it could be argued the nighttime m21 sort of takes care of that... sort of..). Once this hypothetical m9 reaches city hall, it can either terminate there or run a block over to Church street to hit up the A/E/2 at that Park Place-Chambers Street (IND)-World Trade Center complex thing. Less runtime and mileage to get to greenwich under the m22 version, while still serving close to the same fundamental markets and then some, while still hitting up all the major subway lines (I know it's missing the 1... however with the 2 running local at night, riders have PLENTY of chances to transfer to a 1).

Only major disadvantage is that this means the nighttime m21 cannot be paired with anything (and before anyone suggests the m8, that would be a waste of money... the route has nightlife, but that potential clientele doesn't seem to give two s#its about the bus!). This is a bit of a wacky idea, but perhaps the m21 could be paired with that m7/11 thing? Just run it up 6th/7th to 14 street, cross over a few blocks and pick up the m11 route from there

That might be possible, but I wanted to give Manhattan the most covrage as possible. There are still people that live in BPC. But my M310 would serve BPC so that might work. Many an M21/M9 combo to 29th Street might work?

 

11 hours ago, Orion6025 said:

not saying the m10 is a bad choice, but why that over saint nich? Subway duplication?

 

I thought that the M20 was made after they split the M10. That's why I chose an M10/M20 combination instead of St. Nick.

 

11 hours ago, Orion6025 said:

Why is serving randalls necessary at night? I get there are some... -institutions- down south but do they justify nighttime bus service?

Right now, there in no public transportation service of any kind overnight on that island. The mental people might not be leaving the island overnight, but there are workers on the island that are left stranded overnight after the last M35. A combination with the M15 would fix this since I don't think there's enough ridership on the M35 alone to justify overnight service.

Edited March 18, 2019 by Lil 57

[Orion6025]

2 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

There are still people that live in BPC.

True, but the area really quiets down at night. To the point that the M20/M10 combo can easily handle BPC solo.

2 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

Many an M21/M9 combo to 29th Street might work?

That would involve splicing the M9 in half practically. Unless the bus does some balloon loop, the M9 is going to either have to serve the section north of Houston or the section south if it's to be combined with the M21.

2 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

The mental people might not be leaving the island overnight, but there are workers on the island that are left stranded overnight after the last M35.

Fair enough, I suppose maybe a few random trippers could be extended out there (Ex. working with the institutions to determine what 2 times overnight that a bus would be most useful).

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

With respect to Manhattan, I think adding overnight service on current routes would be much better than devising a whole separate overnight network with a new set of routes.

Edited March 18, 2019 by BM5 via Woodhaven

[Lil 57]

7 minutes ago, Orion6025 said:

Fair enough, I suppose maybe a few random trippers could be extended out there (Ex. working with the institutions to determine what 2 times overnight that a bus would be most useful).

Well with the M315, half of the buses will serve Randall's the others will end at 126th so every 60 mins Randall's will be served.

[Lil 57]

3 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

With respect to Manhattan, I think adding overnight service on current routes would be much better than devising a whole separate overnight network with a new set of routes.

Maybe not all routes will have to be modified overnight, but I think that combing crosstown routes overnight can give more crosstown coverge. There is no overnight crosstown service between 42nd and 79th street. Combos like the M31/M57, M23/M34, and M96/M116 will provide more coverage overnight without the  having to spend too much money. An M15/M35 overnight combo could also work for reasons stated above.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

12 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

Maybe not all routes will have to be modified overnight, but I think that combing crosstown routes overnight can give more crosstown coverge. There is no overnight crosstown service between 42nd and 79th street. Combos like the M31/M57, M23/M34, and M96/M116 will provide more coverage overnight without the  having to spend too much money. An M15/M35 overnight combo could also work for reasons stated above.

Running combo routes like that suggests means that you're running these buses either in a uni-directional loop.  Not only are you cutting service in one direction, but if you were to run bi-directional loops, you might as well provide the buses on the current routes, since the time savings are minimal. Lastly, I don't see how all of this is necessary to provide more overnight coverage. You can solve some of these by just adding service or noting a late night extension/diversion (such as for the M23 and M31) without needing to relabel the routes separately. 

Also, there's zero demand for service to Randall's Island during the overnight hours. Workers' shifts are already scheduled around the times the bus stops/starts, and vice-versa.

[Lil 57]

3 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Running combo routes like that suggests means that you're running these buses either in a uni-directional loop.  Not only are you cutting service in one direction, but if you were to run bi-directional loops, you might as well provide the buses on the current routes, since the time savings are minimal. Lastly, I don't see how all of this is necessary to provide more overnight coverage. You can solve some of these by just adding service or noting a late night extension/diversion (such as for the M23 and M31) without needing to relabel the routes separately

I wouldn't be running them in a loop, it would be more of a U shape pattern. So it will still be bi drectional.

[BrooklynBus]

An overnight network would definitely work for Brooklyn. The danger is that the MTA probably would want the overnight network to be the daytime network to reduce coverage. 

[Mtatransit]

Honestly I just need the overnight bus routes to connect. Say for example the Q1 runs every hour waits until the scheduled  train comes into 179 St, leaves Jamaica-179th, and say have timed connections along the routes (Q27 at Springfield). This way passengers could transfer with little to no waiting. Too often you would run above ground from the subway and see the bus pull away and the next one is 40-60 min away. They have holding lights for buses at Coney Island, I think its time for more

[B35 via Church]

On ‎3‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 5:39 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Lastly, I don't see how all of this is necessary to provide more overnight coverage. You can solve some of these by just adding service or noting a late night extension/diversion (such as for the M23 and M31) without needing to relabel the routes separately. 

I don't see coverage as being the issue with overnight service.... There's a fine line between being synergetic & being frugal.... Overnight service (levels) are what they are & you don't need people waiting any longer for buses because they're too busy running over the river & through the woods & back....

e.g. There's nothing suggesting that the M60 should run to PABT... or service even running into Randalls/Wards Islands... or service even running in Battery Park City (running the M22 into more of BPC would benefit more people than the M20 would anyway... If I'm a BPC patron, there's no way in hell I'm waiting for a bus coming from the frickin Polo Grounds) during those hours.....

There's nobility & then there is overkill....

 

7 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

Honestly I just need the overnight bus routes to connect.....

Quoted & Enlarged for Emphasis.

[Lil 57]

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

e.g. There's nothing suggesting that the M60 should run to PABT... or service even running into Randalls/Wards Islands... or service even running in Battery Park City

The M360 would of also replaced the M104 overnight. With the Randall's island comment, I just wanted to have full time transportation service to Randall's. Same with BPC.

[JeremiahC99]

1 hour ago, Lil 57 said:

With the Randall's island comment, I just wanted to have full time transportation service to Randall's.

Randalls Island service needs a complete overhaul. For its completely simple: the M35 route, which circles the island to and from Harlem, would be eliminated. In its place, the M100 bus along 125th Street would be extended to the Island, with layover at the Southwestern corner of the Island (around the Charles Gay Loop). Service would run every 6 minutes, providing more frequent service to the island.

For overnight service to the Island, there would be M100 shuttles running from the Island to Amsterdam Avenue, every 20 minutes, with holding lights installed at intersecting subway stations to hold M60 SBS, M100, and M101 buses for arriving trains, allowing for seamless service to the island.

In fact, with any overnight bus network, holding lights would have to be installed at every overnight subway hub such as St. George in Staten Island, Flatbush Junction in Brooklyn, to name a few, to ensure seamless connections between subways, SI Ferry (for St. George), and buses during these times.

[MysteriousBtrain]

17 minutes ago, JeremiahC99 said:

Randalls Island service needs a complete overhaul. For its completely simple: the M35 route, which circles the island to and from Harlem, would be eliminated. In its place, the M100 bus along 125th Street would be extended to the Island, with layover at the Southwestern corner of the Island (around the Charles Gay Loop). Service would run every 6 minutes, providing more frequent service to the island.

For overnight service to the Island, there would be M100 shuttles running from the Island to Amsterdam Avenue, every 20 minutes, with holding lights installed at intersecting subway stations to hold M60 SBS, M100, and M101 buses for arriving trains, allowing for seamless service to the island.

In fact, with any overnight bus network, holding lights would have to be installed at every overnight subway hub such as St. George in Staten Island, Flatbush Junction in Brooklyn, to name a few, to ensure seamless connections between subways, SI Ferry (for St. George), and buses during these times.

The M100 dosen't need any extensions. Nor do a majority of the routes in Manhattan. In fact, there should be more focus on splitting routes rather than extending them.

 

Yes the main focus is overnight service but let's be real. Who would want to get drunk at a bar all the way in midtown and would be willing to take a bus that probably does a 1-2hr trip instead of an Uber in 30 min when you live in Staten Island

Edited March 21, 2019 by MysteriousBtrain

[JeremiahC99]

17 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

The M100 dosen't need any extensions. Nor do a majority of the routes in Manhattan. In fact, there should be more focus on splitting routes rather than extending them.

 

Yes the main focus is overnight service but let's be real. Who would want to get drunk at a bar all the way in midtown and would be willing to take a bus that probably does a 1-2hr trip instead of an Uber in 30 min when you live in Staten Island

The M35 is one hell of a useless service, as it only goes from Harlem to Randalls Island and back. Not very useful. In addition, the M100 extension has been discussed multiple times. The most recent was a 2012 study for 125th Street: http://www.nyc.gov/html/brt/downloads/pdf/2012-12-03-sbs-125th-workshop-summary.pdf.

My proposal is now revised as to have M100 service between Inwood-220th Street and 2nd Avenue, which is the last stop over the bridge, operate every 4 minutes and service over the bridge to Randalls Island operate every 8 minutes. In other words, SERVICE WOULD ALTERNATE BETWEEN SECOND AVENUE AND RANDALLS ISLAND. This would ensure that service in Washington Heights and Harlem is not affected by traffic over the bridge (I know someone is going to ask me how bridge traffic can affect the M100 with this new extension). However, that aside, the M100 extension to Randalls Island would make service more efficient than the current patter of running a useless Randalls Shuttle (M35) and eliminate problems at 125 and Lex, another issue bought up in 2012. Night service to Randalls can be complimented by M100 shuttles to Amsterdam Avenue.

For an overnight bus network, our current network is fine. The only thing I would add are the holding lights at certain hubs, this making the commute more seamless. Maybe a few more routes without overnight service can be added, but that's for another topic.

[Lil 57]

22 minutes ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

The M100 dosen't need any extensions. Nor do a majority of the routes in Manhattan. In fact, there should be more focus on splitting routes rather than extending them.

 

Yes the main focus is overnight service but let's be real. Who would want to get drunk at a bar all the way in midtown and would be willing to take a bus that probably does a 1-2hr trip instead of an Uber in 30 min when you live in Staten Island

Saves money, also how about the people coming home from work? What if you lived on Richmond Ave and did a late shift in the city and had to pay for a cab to get home every night. That's why an S59 via Richmond Terrace to the ferry would be much better than an S40 running overnight. The western part of the S40 is <10 mins from the S46 and the S48 overnight.

Edited March 21, 2019 by Lil 57