Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

Suffolk County Draft Plan Released


Recommended Posts


Basically, it's a modified (and greatly improved IMO) version of the Frequency-Based plan. For starters, all of the fixed routes (including the lower ridership hourly routes) run 5am - 10pm weekdays, 6am - 10pn Saturdays, and 6am - 8pm Sundays. Personally, I think that span extension is even more important than the boost in frequency. It really sucks to be stranded after missing a 7pm bus. 

The 77 is turned into an hourly route from Patchogue - North Bellport rather than a 30 minute route from Patchogue to Brookhaven Memorial Hospital. (Sort of a concentrated version of the present-day 7B Bellport branch)

The Patchogue - Port Jefferson corridor is split between two hourly routes: The present-day S61 (relabeled 55) via NY-112, and the 53 (a combination of the present-day S63, 6B, and S60). Those routes interline with the 51, which takes the long way around (via Ronkonkoma, Smith Haven, and Stony Brook) which runs every 30 minutes. On evenings and weekends, the 55 interlines with the 51, with a timed transfer to the 53.

The 10 is a combination of the present-day 1A and S25. I would've liked to see it swing up to Farmingdale to replace the old N72, but at least it maintains some general coverage in this corridor.

The S66 runs hourly from Patchogue to Riverhead, with extra weekday short-turns providing 30 minute headways from Patchogue to Mastic. 

Hopefully they can get the LIRR on board and have consisistent clockface schedules that allow for easy coordination with the buses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took the time to look through the draft, and while personally there were a few items I really liked, I wasn't overall too fond of this plan at large. I think it goes way too far in many instance with the ridership model by obliterating large chunks of the system area. I get try to expand ridership, but to do it in a way which leaves many areas without bus service, I just can't agree with. Here are my comments. If I had enough time on my hand, I would map it out, but hopefully any route modifications and suggestions are clear enough. 

Routes:

S2 - Generally speaking, this and the S4 are some of the better proposals in the plan IMO. The only thing I would consider is maybe to retain the coverage version of this route, with the branching via Oak Street and Montauk Highway, between Amityville and Babylon. I don't know if Montauk Highway west of Babylon up to Amityville really warrants 30 minute service, and I wouldn't leave Oak Street with nothing either.  

S4 - So this is essentially an S33 to Smith Haven Mall. Even though it is quite lengthy, I do like this route and how it's structured, and it helps improve connectivity for sure. I wouldn't change this route at all. 

S5 - I have an issue with the lack of a route operating down most of Deer Park Avenue. If anything, the 30 minute route should be on Deer Park Avenue. As for Tanger Outlets, the S4 and S12 both operate there and cross Deer Park Avenue. So while it may be a trip generator, I think you could get away with allowing transfers because of the combined frequency of both routes. Additionally, I think the S5 going out to Central Islip is a bit too much, with the S4 there. Here's how I would do it:

  • S3 (from original coverage proposal) - every 60 minutes
    • WKDYS: 5 AM - 10 PM
    • SAT: 6 AM - 10 PM
    • SUN: 7 AM - 8 PM
  • S29 (Babylon LIRR to WWM - No GSB) - every 60 minutes
    • WKDYS: 6:30 AM - 6:30 PM
  • S5 (Babylon LIRR to Tanger Outlets via Udall Road, or to SCC if enough funds available) - every 60 minutes
    • WKDYS: 5 AM - 10 PM
    • SAT: 7 AM - 10 PM
    • SUN: 8 AM - 8 PM

This would maintain existing coverage on Udall Road and still provide frequent service along Deer Park Avenue throughout most of the day. 

S6 - I guess since the route doesn't stop at Ronkonkoma, serving Central Islip LIRR would be the next best thing if they're gonna send it via MacArthur Airport. Generally speaking it's a good route. My only point of concern is that the route between Sun Vet Mall and Patchogue is definitely a time saving measure, but how much would it impact existing ridership by not running down Broadway Avenue and Montauk Highway?

S7, S11 - I'm not too fond of the routes of either of these routes between Bay Shore and Brentwood. Yeah I get they're frequent routes and they're making due with the resources available, but it's too winding. One of the two routes (I'm leaning towards the S7) should go straight down Brentwood Road, and have that be the frequent route. The other, I would have branching between 5th Avenue (existing S41) and Broadway/Commack Road (existing 3B) between Brentwood and Bay Shore.

So this is what I had in mind:

  • S7 via Brentwood Road between Brentwood and Bay Shore (existing S45), existing headways and frequencies
  • S11 between Hauppauge and Bay Shore, via Broadway & Commack Road, every 60 minutes instead of every 30 minutes on proposed service hours
  • S13 between Hauppauge (Weekday Daytime) or Brentwood (evenings and weekends) to Bay Shore, via 5th Avenue
    • WKDYS: 5:30 AM - 9:30 PM (service to/from Hauppauge ends with the 6:30 PM buses)
    • SAT: 6 AM - 10 PM
    • SUN: 7 AM - 8 PM

S10 - I'm not really too thrilled on this particular combination of routes (the 1A and S25), and I think the circuitous route in Babylon could potentially deter ridership away (even though I know it does that to serve GSB). I do think that something should have served Herzel Boulevard, and something near the route 109 corridor. As was mentioned, I think this should have gone to Farmingdale instead, but I do agree with retaining parts of the 1A for coverage purposes. 

S12 - I don't have too much of an issue with this route, with the exception of it's route between Tanger Outlets and Southern State Parkway. I think it's a bit weird they would choose Howells Road. Since the S5 I had in mind would be rerouted off Commack Road and onto Udall Road (close to Howells Road), what I would do is have the S12 operate via Commack Road and Bay Shore Road between Tanger Outlets and the Southern State Parkway. It would hit more areas and retain more coverage.

S17 - Not too much of a fan of this route for various reasons. The terminal on Montauk Highway is rather abrupt, and it does tend to directly miss the commercial areas to the west along Montauk Highway. Also I don't see it as an adequate replacement for the S42 and 3C. Even if it has 30 minute service on weekdays, it's just not walkable from NYS 111 or Connetquot Avenue. Here's what I would have done instead, route-wise:

  • S17 - Bay Shore LIRR or Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway (Islip) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carelton Ave, Wheeler Rd (every 60 min)
    • WKDYS & SAT: 5:00 AM - 10:00 PM
    • SUN: 7:00 AM - 8:00 PM
  • S18 - Bay Shore LIRR or Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway (Islip) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, NYS 111, Suffolk Ave, Wheeler Rd (every 60 min), with service after 6:30 PM on weekdays and all day weekends terminating at Central Islip station to connect with the Pulse as service is less frequent. 
    • WKDYS: 5:30 AM - 9:30 PM 
    • SAT: 7:00 AM - 10:00 PM
    • SUN: 9:00 AM - 8:00 PM

There would also be a Connetquot Ave route to preserve coverage on segments of the S45 and 3C.

  • S19 - Smithtown LIRR to Montauk Highway & Union Avenue, via Hauppauge Road, Wheeler Road, Suffolk Avenue, Lowell Avenue, Connetquot Ave
    • WKDYS: 6 AM - 9 PM
    • SAT: 7 AM - 7 PM

S47 (Elimination) - I can't really comment on this route, as I've never seen in actual service. Anyone know how ridership was? Sounds a bit distract IMO, but perhaps ridership wasn't the best.

S51 - This is a combination of several routes, which I suppose isn't that bad. I think such a route could do decent, especially since it increases direct access to Stony Brook. Although interlining with the S53 & S55 sounds rough, and could put a dent on the reliability if not enough recovery time was provided (particularly those S51/S55 or S55/S51 trips). 

S52 - I suppose I don't have too much of an issue with this route existing as proposed. I'm indifferent to the route that it takes between Ronkonkoma and Central Islip, but it is what it is. However, I don't know if this should be a frequent route. If anything, I would have suggested using those resources on the S55 instead, which I think would get more ridership with such headways. 

S53 - I'm presuming that the route north of Middle Country Road is to retain coverage in that area, although I don't know exactly how beneficial that would loom for riders. Also, if the S6 is serving Waverly Ave, I would have the S53 route take the present 7A alignment instead in North Patchogue and Patchogue. It retains coverage. 

S55 - Route is more or less similar to the current S61, which is a decent route. I'm not too thrilled though that it's not a frequent route, while the S52 (current 6A/S60 Gordon Heights segment) was proposed as one. As I mentioned earlier, I would have the S55 be a frequent route, while the S52 being a standard route. If the frequent service is given to the S55, I would also consider having a branch down Old Town Road in order to serve as a better alternative to the S60 than the proposed S53 is in that area. Service from Port Jefferson to Coram and points south on NYS 112 would have frequent service.

S57/S59 (Elimination) - Part of the S57 and S59 routes are going to be taken over by the S51 (and MacArthur by the S6), but I don't agree with having nothing from Ronkonkoma to Sayville. There should be north-south coverage in that area. I would have it operate between Ronkonkoma LIRR and Sayville via McArthur Airport (although certainly to Montauk Highway, I would consider operating it to the Fire Island Ferry Terminal). 

Such a route would be a mix of the two segments. I would have it operate via Ocean Avenue, NYS 454, MacArthur Airport, Johnson Avenue, Sunrise Highway, Smithtown Avenue, Terry Road, Tariff Street, Railroad Avenue (if only to Montauk Highway), Middle Road, and Foster Avenue (if extended to the Fire Island Ferry). If the route operated to the ferry terminal, I would have it coordinated with the ferry arrivals/departures. This route would operate from 6 AM to 9 PM on Weekdays, and from 7 AM to 8 PM on Saturdays. 

S58 - I don't agree with taking the route away from SCCC Selden, and there's no need to send it to Brentwood when one could either use the S52 and transfer at Central Islip, or transfer at Smith Haven for the S4 (which is apparently timed, based on the map). I don't know if that was their way of preserving a connection from Smithtown to Hauppauge and Brentwood (since the S45 was gutted), but it's not necessary IMO. I would have retained something on NYS 111 between Hauppauge and Smithtown (see the S19 proposal in the S17 comments). 

Also, given that the S56, 6B, S63, and S62 routes were either eliminated or diverted away from Middle Country Road, I seriously cannot believe that this route was not considered to be a frequent route. Here's how I would have done it:

  • S58 - Huntington Square Mall to Riverhead via Middle Country Road, SCCC Selden (every 60 minutes) 
    • WKDYS: 5 AM - 10 PM
    • SAT: 6 AM - 10 PM
    • SUN: 7 AM - 8 PM
  • S56 - Kings Park to Riverhead (Weekdays) or Coram (Saturdays), every 60 minutes
    • WKDYS: 6:30 AM - 5:30 PM
    • SAT: 9:30 AM - 5:30 PM

S62 Elimination - I can't agree with this at all, it leaves a huge swath of areas without any service. I would try to retain the route between Smith Haven Mall and Riverhead (in compensation for having the S58 remain on its current headways, see my S58 comments above), and the very least I would find tolerable is retaining the Port Jefferson - Riverhead section (and have it over the S58 serve the sections along the 8A route, which would be discontinued). 

S66 - While I agree with it being a frequent route, I don't agree just routing buses adjacent to Montauk Highway, because South Country Road isn't that close as one thinks (and there's a lack of connectivity even if one tried). I would have the S66 split between Montauk Highway and South Country Road, to not strand riders who live near South Country Road. I also would have considered having frequent service operate out to Riverhead. 

S77 - I'm personally indifferent to this routing, I don't mind it coverage-wise. 

S92 - It seems they really don't want to touch this route, LOL. I would have considered splitting it at Riverhead, on top of potentially having frequent service on the southern split. 

Southampton Microtransit - So I suppose they're expanding the service hours so that it also runs on weekends. Cool I suppose.

East Hampton/Montauk Microtransit - I can somewhat understand having microtransit as a replacement for the 10A, but I'm opposed to having such a service replace the 10B & 10C. Although the 10C may have lower rider counts purely on number, that doesn't necessarily reflect in terms of riders per bus (since buses run like every 3 hours or so). Additionally, Montauk Highway is the only roadway linking between Amagansett and Montauk, so you might as well provided fixed service for riders who need it, if those service hours are going to be provided for such a service.

I may have missed, but I don't know if they mention how many resources they're allocating for this service area. However, I don't believe they would be able to keep up with only one operator at a time, so I would actually have the 10B and 10C routes restructured and operate similar to the NICE Elmont Flexi route. So there would be a fixed route element, but there would still be an on-demand element of it too. Here's how I would do it:

(Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays, and Holidays from May 31st to Labor Day)

  • 10B: East Hampton - Springs Loop, every 60 minutes 
    • WKDYS: 6:30 AM - 7:30 PM
    • SAT: 8:30 AM - 6:30 PM
  • 10C: East Hampton - Montauk Lighthouse, every 2 hours (No Service to Dock, riders can use the free Hampton Hopper Montauk Loop)
    • DAILY: 6:30 AM - 7:30 PM
  • 10D: East Hampton - Bridgehampton, every 60 minutes
    • DAILY: 6:30 AM - 8:30 PM

(All Other Times)

  • 10B: East Hampton - Springs Loop, every 60 minutes 
    • WKDYS: 6:30 AM - 7:30 PM
    • SAT: 8:30 AM - 6:30 PM
  • 10C: East Hampton - Montauk Dock, every 2 hours 
    • DAILY: 6:30 AM - 7:30 PM
  • 10D: East Hampton - Bridgehampton, every 60 minutes
    • DAILY: 6:30 AM - 8:30 PM

The 10B route I would modify slightly so that it serves Pantigo Place along the way towards East Hampton LIRR station, instead of the way it currently does. Additionally, with such a reroute, only one bus would be needed on the 10B loop, so it would be possible to split the 10B into two routes and have one bus on each segment providing 60 minute service. 

Service on the 10C would be made more frequent through fairly simple rescheduling within Montauk. Buses will still operate via the Montauk Loop, but with one layover only at the Dock. Riders would be able to stay on the bus to ride past the Dock if their destination is past it. The 10C would have on-demand stops at Sole East Resort, Industrial Road & Second House Road, Gurney's Star Island Resort (Except Friday, Sat, Sun, Holidays during Summer), Montauk Downs State Park (Except Friday, Sat, Sun, Holidays during Summer), and Ditch Plains (Friday, Sat, Sun, Holidays during Summer Only).

The 10D would have on-demand stops at East Hampton Airport, Wainscott School, and Sagaponack USPS Office, and would use mini-buses.

The 10B, 10C, and 10D will all meet-up at East Hampton LIRR, and a new pulse would be added so that riders can connect between those three routes and the S92. 

Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BM5 via Woodhaven

For the S2, I assume you mean west of GSB Shopping Center. I'd personally leave it as proposed, especially considering that west of Copiague, you're a short walk from the S4 (I wouldn't be strongly opposed to it, though)

For the S5, I agree that it should be split up into hourly routes (the whole segment from SCCC to Central Islip pretty duplicates the S4 and S7). I'd have the S3 run straight up Deer Park Avenue and end at Huntington Square Mall. (If you think about it, you're pretty much set with the connections. You have the S7 to SCCC & Brentwood, the S6 to Hauppauge, Central Islip, and Walt Whitman Mall, and the H10 to Huntington/Huntington Station. The H40 is also an option to Walt Whitman Mall if you get off at Elwood Road). 

I'd have the S5 run up Udall Road and end at Deer Park LIRR station (or Heartland Industrial Park if there's enough time in the schedule). For service directly from Tanger Outlets to Babylon, I'd have a short-turn S3 (taking Grand Blvd-Deer Park Avenue). And yes, for the S12, I'd have it run down Commack Road-Bay Shore Road to expand the coverage provided there (just like your idea)

Doing some rough calculations, you'd need 6 buses to run half-hourly service on the proposed S5. My plan would require 2 buses for the full S3, 1 bus for the S5, and 1 bus for the S3 short-turn. So you'd have two buses left over for something else (probably restoring the S62 from Riverhead to Port Jefferson)

For the S6, I think it's more to due to trying to make up some of the time with resulting from the airport deviation and the Central Islip timepoint, without having to use an extra bus. Hopefully it shouldn't be too bad, considering its a timed transfer at Patchogue.

Islip Avenue is served more so by the S11 on Broadway than by the S17 on Carleton Avenue. (That's also part of the reason why Broadway has service every 30 minutes). I'd have the S17 end at the Islip LIRR station (via Union Blvd. Riders can walk to Montauk Highway if they need the S2 transfer, especially since those aren't timed). The bulk of the ridership on that part of the present-day 3C is around Boulevard Avenue, which is within walking distance of the Lowell Avenue part of the S17.

For the Bay Shore - Brentwood routes, the fact that both of them meander a bit makes it a bit easier to schedule timed transfers to the S12. If the S7 ran straight down Brentwood Road, you'd still have to schedule the S12 to leave when the S11 branch arrived (especially for the Broadway branch). Plus there's the issue of the Broadway branch covering for Islip Avenue (though in your case, you'd give it its own separate route)

I just realized the S11/S17 interline is probably to connect riders on both routes to both the Dennison Building & NYS Building (the different parts of the county office complex are unfortunately not walkable to each other despite their proximity). That, and an easy connection for any S17 riders seeking the industrial part of Hauppauge on the western end)

I think the interline in Port Jefferson will go alright. Right now it takes about 25 minutes to go from Patchogue to Ronkonkoma (no Gateway diversion), 15 minutes to Smith Haven, and 45 minutes to get to Port Jefferson LIRR. Then 45 minutes to get back down to Patchogue (let's assume the Granny Road diversion being bypassed is reinvested in the rest of the schedule). That's 130 minutes, which means you need 5 buses for 30 minute headways, with 10 minutes of layover on each end.

I think the reasoning for the S52 getting frequent service over the S55 is the fact that the S52 connects to the Ronkonkoma Branch (whereas the S55 only connects to the infrequent Greenport Branch). So for someone in Coram looking to get to Manhattan, they'll most likely head to the Ronkonkoma Branch (even though the S55 connects to three LIRR branches, none of them is as frequent as the Ronkonkoma Branch). It's a shame they didn't go through with building the Mid-Suffolk Yard out in Yaphank. Would've helped the folks in Medford (and connecting bus passengers) a great deal. 

I think the other (small) thing in favor of the S52 is that riders can use it to travel between SCCC & Coram Plaza, so if you just miss the S55, the S53 to the S52 (or S58) will likely get you to Coram Plaza before the next S55 would've, and vice versa for S53 riders seeking SCCC). Unfortunately, it doesn't do anything for riders in Medford or other parts of the NY-112 corridor.

I think the lack of north-south service in the Sayville-Ronkonkoma corridor is to further prop up ridership on the frequent routes, and further emphasize the timed transfer hubs. (In other words, a timed transfer between two 30 minute routes should generally be quicker than a one-seat ride on a meandering hourly route)

For the S58, I actually didn't realize it was bypassing SCCC...good catch! In any case, I don't think it's too bad. The S52 & S53 connect to the S58 for anyone who needs the S58 specifically (likely for points east of Coram, since the S52 makes most of the same connections for those heading westbound). The other thing to consider is the timing at the transfer points. The S58 has to make (timed) connections at Riverhead, Smith Haven, and Brentwood, and the diversion to SCCC might throw that off. 

My first instinct for the S58 running to Brentwood was that they wanted to have a bus connecting Riverhead to every LIRR branch, to make up for the minimal LIRR service out there (S66 for Montauk and S58 for Port Jefferson & Ronkonkoma). But you're right that they probably also wanted a bus from Hauppauge to the Port Jefferson Branch.  

For the S77, I would extend it to South Country Road, which would make it accessible to Bellport proper. I think they were being overly cautious with the runtime (the present-day S68 does Patchogue-Bellport in 20 minutes. The S77 would take a longer route, but along higher-speed streets, so it should be possible to make a round-trip within an hour, with a few minutes of layover time on each end)

For the 10C microtransit route, I think the idea is that you'd be able to get the ride at a time more suitable for you, rather than having to wait at a fixed time. (So if the bus is normally scheduled to pass 10 minutes before you get off work at 5pm, you could schedule a trip to pick you up between 5pm & 5:30pm for example).

Edited by checkmatechamp13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

A single bus from Port Jeff -> SBU -> LIRR Ronkonkoma -> Patchogue? Sign me up.

I wonder if the bus + LIRR at Ronkonkoma will end up being faster than changing at Huntington.

It'll definitely be better than being stuck in a 3 hour gap between trains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

S2 - Great idea, currently the S40 has decent service between Patchogue and Babylon, however, the current S20 service is terrible west of it. I am okay with them cutting service along Oak Street and redirecting all service on Montauk Highway. Montauk Highway is further from the LIRR. SCT had it too good for too long by essentially having Nassau subsidizing Montauk Highway service. Plus S10 covers that area slightly. Also, I noticed they timed this route with a 15 minute offset at Bayshore with the other routes, great idea.


S5 - If they are having a timed connection with the S4 why do they have it continue to Central Islip? So pax connecting at the CI pulse can have a direct service to Babylon? Seems pretty wasteful to me having two buses traveling between CI and Brentwood at the same time every 30 minutes, and SCT offers 2 free transfers anyways


S51- This route makes total sense. The northern part of the route serves PJ + combined with Stony Brook (and the S69 night Loop), serving the student ridership going to Smith Haven Mall, as well as PJ Village proper. It removes duplication between SH Mall and PJ. It does remove service to NY 347 though, therefore missing the shopping center with Walmart there. That is a tough tradeoff, if it were up to me I would like to see continued service on the 347, through some sort of loop SHM - PJ -SB - SHM. But that will add two extra buses if we were to run it every 30 minutes, but no extra buses if each portion is served every hour. I understand their reasoning for their current routing though, it forces all the current Mall - Stony Brook- PJ Village - PJ to ride the one bus remaining.
The southern part of this route is miles better than the current S57/S59 combined which makes a million deviation on its way to Sayville


S17 - That ending on Montauk highway just doesn't sit right with me. I would extend the southern terminus to either Islip, to serve some commercial areas along Islip Ave, or to Great River LIRR, so people on connectquot will have slightly less of a walk and have more options. Though extending this line anywhere else will probably force them to add more buses if they wanted to preserve the pulse/30 min headway. Not that I believe Carleton Ave should have a 30-minute service. I feel like they have it to try to replace the southern portion of the S42 along Islip Ave which they assume passengers will walk to Carleton


S62 - Seems like there is no more direct Happague to Smith Haven Mall service. Passengers will now have to transfer at either Brentwood/or Central Islip, which isn't the worse with the pulse system. I am assuming the S11 and the S6/17 will be offset by 15 minutes, so passengers will have a bus every 15 minutes connecting Happague and the KO branch (although they will make the same train/bus because S11 takes a loner route to Brentwood)
I am not keen on cutting the entire portion PJ east to Wading River/Riverhead. Ridership is low in this area, but I feel like something should cover this huge portion of the county, maybe something like a Flexi bus, it has a set route between PJ and Riverhead, but can deviate 3/4 of a mile, since most people don't live exactly along 25A


S58/S6- I wonder how good that transfer will be at Vet Mem/Old Willet, this way passengers don't need to ride into Brentwood to continue on Jericho Tpk
Nothing in the Dix Hills area... that doesn't sit right with me as well. It is not exactly an urbanized area or even suburban but I feel a Flexi route connecting with every train at Wyandanch serving Deer Park Ave/WWM area would work. That being said WWM is left with two routes. 


10B/C- Seems like they utilized resources on both routes to attempt to run this as one microtransit route. Most likely they cut a bus from it so from 3 to 2 buses. I would run it as a Flexi, which is similar to the current 10C but deviates 3/4 miles off route. The current route between Bridgehampton and Montauk is on NY 27. The benefit of having a Flexi route is that you have somewhat of a schedule and more flexible drop off points in Bridgehampton and Montauk

Overall, they went way too far into the frequency territory for SCT. In the ideal world, passengers can just walk to the nearest route, but Suffolk County overall is not easily walkable, and the streets are usually not in a grid-like network. I believe Suffolk County as a whole will be served much better by consistent 60 minute routes with timed transfers and more routes than 30 minutes services with fewer routes, since more people will have access to service.

That being said however the positives about this frequent network is that potentially there will be more LIRR - Bus ridership for SCT (and that SCT will have a bus system better than most of NICE's network)

On 2/24/2022 at 8:36 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

S6 - I guess since the route doesn't stop at Ronkonkoma, serving Central Islip LIRR would be the next best thing if they're gonna send it via MacArthur Airport. Generally speaking it's a good route. My only point of concern is that the route between Sun Vet Mall and Patchogue is definitely a time saving measure, but how much would it impact existing ridership by not running down Broadway Avenue and Montauk Highway?

I think they are more so trying to avoid duplication along Montauk highway with the S2

On 2/24/2022 at 8:36 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

S47 (Elimination) - I can't really comment on this route, as I've never seen in actual service. Anyone know how ridership was? Sounds a bit distract IMO, but perhaps ridership wasn't the best.

From all the time I fan it I never see more than a dozen passengers on board and that is including the ones serving the Captree fishing dock. LIRR actually has a package with SCT but its nowhere near as popular as the n88 package with NICE. Don't think transit dependent city residents come out this far or go to Robert Moses specifically.

But for SCT 2-4 per bus is not exactly bad ridership so in context I don't know

On 2/24/2022 at 8:36 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

S57/S59 (Elimination) - Part of the S57 and S59 routes are going to be taken over by the S51 (and MacArthur by the S6), but I don't agree with having nothing from Ronkonkoma to Sayville. There should be north-south coverage in that area. I would have it operate between Ronkonkoma LIRR and Sayville via McArthur Airport (although certainly to Montauk Highway, I would consider operating it to the Fire Island Ferry Terminal). 

Such a route would be a mix of the two segments. I would have it operate via Ocean Avenue, NYS 454, MacArthur Airport, Johnson Avenue, Sunrise Highway, Smithtown Avenue, Terry Road, Tariff Street, Railroad Avenue (if only to Montauk Highway), Middle Road, and Foster Avenue (if extended to the Fire Island Ferry). If the route operated to the ferry terminal, I would have it coordinated with the ferry arrivals/departures. This route would operate from 6 AM to 9 PM on Weekdays, and from 7 AM to 8 PM on Saturdays. 

SCT currently attempt to coordinate S61 to the Ferry departures (could be a coincidence), but because of traffic, its becomes a very nail biting connection. Last time I attempt this, what was supposed to be a 10 minute connection ended up being a 2 minute connection 

I think the theory is all passengers from Ronkonkoma will take a bus to Patchogue for the S2 to backtrack to Sayville. This way there are no duplications along Montauk Hwy

That being said, SCT as it currently stands, do operate somewhat of a pulse operation at Patchogue with all the bus leaving at the top of the hour and arriving 10-15 min before. Though if the buses are late, they will not wait 

 

I wonder how will they coordinate the pulses? Will they have boots on ground, some sort of a signal system like in Syracuse, radio system, or are they just going to pad the schedules so that the buses are never late.

 

Also in the plan "The Draft New Network does include a larger budget for more service, but most of that additional budget is used to ensure that buses run more reliably on-time. Today’s Existing Network has very poor reliability: the average route is on-time only about 40% of the time. This poor reliability is due to schedules that have not been updated in many years, and therefore are not accounting for changes in traffic patterns. Improving reliability to a more reasonable level requires an investment of at least 15% in additional fixed route service to account for slower speeds. An additional 5% investment in fixed route service is included in the Draft New Network to provide more consistent service on the evenings and weekends. Fixed route services comprise roughly 45% of the County’s total Transit budget, so this would mean a 9-10% increase in the overall Transit budget."

Does this mean they have the 15% secured to improve OTP or not? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/25/2022 at 1:03 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

 

For the S2, I assume you mean west of GSB Shopping Center. I'd personally leave it as proposed, especially considering that west of Copiague, you're a short walk from the S4 (I wouldn't be strongly opposed to it, though)

I actually mean west of Babylon LIRR altogether (one routing following Oak Street, the other via Montauk Highway). Once you get into Lindenhurst, there really is no close transportation option. So one branch follows the existing S20 Oak Street segment between Sunrise Mall and Babylon, and the other follows the Montauk Highway segment (with the Montauk Highway being the main branch of the two). 

On 2/25/2022 at 1:03 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

For the S5, I agree that it should be split up into hourly routes (the whole segment from SCCC to Central Islip pretty duplicates the S4 and S7). I'd have the S3 run straight up Deer Park Avenue and end at Huntington Square Mall. (If you think about it, you're pretty much set with the connections. You have the S7 to SCCC & Brentwood, the S6 to Hauppauge, Central Islip, and Walt Whitman Mall, and the H10 to Huntington/Huntington Station. The H40 is also an option to Walt Whitman Mall if you get off at Elwood Road). 

I'd have the S5 run up Udall Road and end at Deer Park LIRR station (or Heartland Industrial Park if there's enough time in the schedule). For service directly from Tanger Outlets to Babylon, I'd have a short-turn S3 (taking Grand Blvd-Deer Park Avenue). And yes, for the S12, I'd have it run down Commack Road-Bay Shore Road to expand the coverage provided there (just like your idea)

Doing some rough calculations, you'd need 6 buses to run half-hourly service on the proposed S5. My plan would require 2 buses for the full S3, 1 bus for the S5, and 1 bus for the S3 short-turn. So you'd have two buses left over for something else (probably restoring the S62 from Riverhead to Port Jefferson)

As far as the S5 via Udall Road, how much ridership do you expect to get from Deer Park LIRR? Reason I chose Tanger Outlets was because it's more likely to be a ridership generator (people going to jobs or going to the stores). Also, I personally believe that if you plan on attracting LIRR riders, you'd be much better off from Babylon than Deer Park, due to the amount of train service provided there. 

Also, with the S4 and S12 both available as transfers at Deer Park Avenue (and both serving Tanger Outlets), I don't know if it's needed to have such a service from Deer Park Avenue. I'm not necessarily opposed, but if you had the S5 directly to Tanger Outlets from Babylon, you would have frequent service on more of Deer Park Avenue.

As for the S3, I personally lean more towards on preserving coverage (as long as the transfers aren't too inconvenient), and I would want to preserve some service in Dix Hills for Five Towns College and the Sagamore Child Center. I'm not so sure on how many people transfer off of S23 & S29s to other routes at WWM (outside of the S54), so if that number is particularly low, I guess I can be onboard with that plan.

The S3 from my initial suggestions would instead be the weekday route, while the S29 (I'll just dub it 'S9' just to fit in with the proposal) from Babylon LIRR would run daily. However, I would suggest perhaps consider serving Commack Plaza and Kings Park (terminating at the Kings Park LIRR station). The replaces the S56 on Indian Head Road but would also provide direct service to Huntington Square Mall and more of Jericho Turnpike (in addition to the rest of the route all the way to Babylon). IDK if Kings Park would be pushing it for a 50-54 minute run from Babylon LIRR, but I think it's worth considering if cycle time allotted for such a route is 2 hours. 

On 2/25/2022 at 1:03 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Islip Avenue is served more so by the S11 on Broadway than by the S17 on Carleton Avenue. (That's also part of the reason why Broadway has service every 30 minutes). I'd have the S17 end at the Islip LIRR station (via Union Blvd. Riders can walk to Montauk Highway if they need the S2 transfer, especially since those aren't timed). The bulk of the ridership on that part of the present-day 3C is around Boulevard Avenue, which is within walking distance of the Lowell Avenue part of the S17.

For the Bay Shore - Brentwood routes, the fact that both of them meander a bit makes it a bit easier to schedule timed transfers to the S12. If the S7 ran straight down Brentwood Road, you'd still have to schedule the S12 to leave when the S11 branch arrived (especially for the Broadway branch). Plus there's the issue of the Broadway branch covering for Islip Avenue (though in your case, you'd give it its own separate route)

I just realized the S11/S17 interline is probably to connect riders on both routes to both the Dennison Building & NYS Building (the different parts of the county office complex are unfortunately not walkable to each other despite their proximity). That, and an easy connection for any S17 riders seeking the industrial part of Hauppauge on the western end)

I don't know how successful will you get with people taking S17s from Islip LIRR, but I personally wouldn't take it completely off Montauk Highway. If you're adamant about it serving Islip LIRR, I would have the S17 take Union Boulevard, go into Islip LIRR, then operate down Nassau Avenue to Montauk Highway. I personally would run the S17 until at the very least Saxon Avenue, so that it hits most commercial areas. 

I've thought about it a little more, and I've rethought of how I would do the network in that area, and it's a modification from my proposal. Here are the modifications to my original suggestions:

(Weekdays Daytime: 5:00 AM - 6:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S19: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Connetquot Ave, Ave, Lowell Ave, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge
  • S13 buses interline with S19 buses at Hauppauge

(Weekday Evening: 6:00 PM - 10:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Brentwood LIRR, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S19: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Central Islip, via Montauk Highway, Connetquot Ave, Ave, Lowell Ave, Suffolk Avenue - every 60 minutes (until 9 PM)
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge

(Saturdays: 6:00 AM - 10:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Brentwood LIRR, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S19: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Central Islip, via Montauk Highway, Connetquot Ave, Ave, Suffolk Avenue - every 60 minutes (from 7 AM until 7 PM)
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes (starts at 7 AM)
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge

(Sundays: 7:00 AM - 8:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Brentwood LIRR, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes (starts at 8 AM)
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes 
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge

TLDR: The S19 now becomes an Islip-Hauppauge Route, with the S18 operating to Smithtown. The S17 AND S19 would interline with the S11 and S13, respectively, during daytime hours. Some minor time span changes as well. 

On 2/25/2022 at 1:03 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I think the reasoning for the S52 getting frequent service over the S55 is the fact that the S52 connects to the Ronkonkoma Branch (whereas the S55 only connects to the infrequent Greenport Branch). So for someone in Coram looking to get to Manhattan, they'll most likely head to the Ronkonkoma Branch (even though the S55 connects to three LIRR branches, none of them is as frequent as the Ronkonkoma Branch). It's a shame they didn't go through with building the Mid-Suffolk Yard out in Yaphank. Would've helped the folks in Medford (and connecting bus passengers) a great deal. 

I think the other (small) thing in favor of the S52 is that riders can use it to travel between SCCC & Coram Plaza, so if you just miss the S55, the S53 to the S52 (or S58) will likely get you to Coram Plaza before the next S55 would've, and vice versa for S53 riders seeking SCCC). Unfortunately, it doesn't do anything for riders in Medford or other parts of the NY-112 corridor.

For the S58, I actually didn't realize it was bypassing SCCC...good catch! In any case, I don't think it's too bad. The S52 & S53 connect to the S58 for anyone who needs the S58 specifically (likely for points east of Coram, since the S52 makes most of the same connections for those heading westbound). The other thing to consider is the timing at the transfer points. The S58 has to make (timed) connections at Riverhead, Smith Haven, and Brentwood, and the diversion to SCCC might throw that off. 

My first instinct for the S58 running to Brentwood was that they wanted to have a bus connecting Riverhead to every LIRR branch, to make up for the minimal LIRR service out there (S66 for Montauk and S58 for Port Jefferson & Ronkonkoma). But you're right that they probably also wanted a bus from Hauppauge to the Port Jefferson Branch.  

You'd get more local riders than potential LIRR to SCT riders by having the S55 be the frequent route over the S52 honestly. There's a lot more potential with boosting S55 service over S52 service. As for the S58, I would keep it going to SCCC especially because the coverage area it provides, and to maintain accessibility to that campus. If it gets reroued away from Brentwood and gets straightened out to Huntington Square Mall, you'd be able to afford that deviation too. 

On 2/25/2022 at 1:03 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I think the lack of north-south service in the Sayville-Ronkonkoma corridor is to further prop up ridership on the frequent routes, and further emphasize the timed transfer hubs. (In other words, a timed transfer between two 30 minute routes should generally be quicker than a one-seat ride on a meandering hourly route)

In most, if not every case, it will not be faster. If you are going from Ronkonkoma and are going to Sayville, let say you have to wait for the S51 to Patchogue, then the S2 out to Sayville, The travel time would be approximately double than what it would take with an S57/59 combo. And it would be useless for almost all other intermediate points. If that's the case why they didn't have a north-south link there, then I can't agree with it. Besides the fact that not much of anyone would resort to doing such a trip, it also indicates a sense as if they don't believe in their own proposal, to have to resort to such measure.

On 2/25/2022 at 1:03 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

For the S77, I would extend it to South Country Road, which would make it accessible to Bellport proper. I think they were being overly cautious with the runtime (the present-day S68 does Patchogue-Bellport in 20 minutes. The S77 would take a longer route, but along higher-speed streets, so it should be possible to make a round-trip within an hour, with a few minutes of layover time on each end)

For the 10C microtransit route, I think the idea is that you'd be able to get the ride at a time more suitable for you, rather than having to wait at a fixed time. (So if the bus is normally scheduled to pass 10 minutes before you get off work at 5pm, you could schedule a trip to pick you up between 5pm & 5:30pm for example).

For the S77, I don't have an issue with that either.

As far as service in the Hamptons and Montauk, I just think there should be fixed route service out there, especially between Montauk and East Hampton. I don't agree with just leaving them with microtransit. Using the most recent data, the 10C appears to have low ridership, but because it's frequency is every 3 hours for the most part, it's has more riders per bus than people think. It's average ridership, 9.4 riders per bus, is better than routes that are being looked into for frequent service and span expansions, such as the 2B and 6A at 6.7 and 3.3 riders per bus respectively.

I think a Flexi-type operation would provide a middle ground and the best of both worlds, with an established fixed route segment for people traveling between the two points (without having to call for a vehicle), and on-demand service being provided to several other stops if wanted. When it comes to that, I think it would be best to hear from 10C users in particular on what times work best for them to get where they need to go, and then try to provide the best possible schedule from that. 

Also I took a look at the 10B schedule, and I made a mistake looking at the runtime from Bridgehampton to East Hampton. It would be a stretch if my proposed 10D would be made with one bus, but I did see it is possible to milk the existing 10C headway and schedule to provide service out to Bridgehampton without adding service. If three buses are used as in the my previous proposal, it would instead be the following:

  • 10B: East Hampton - Springs Loop (Timed with S92) - every 60 minutes
  • 10C: East Hampton to Montauk (Every other bus timed with S92) - every 90 minutes
  • 10D: East Hampton to Bridgehampton (Every other bus timed with S92) - every 90 minutes

The 10C and 10D would be interlined. So this bus would essentially start at East Hampton and do the 10C to Montauk Village and the Dock, then return to East Hampton, and then operate as a 10D to Bridgehampton, and return back to East Hampton. There would be a cycle of 180 minutes, with at least 10 minutes of guaranteed break at East Hampton LIRR. Due to the flex nature of the route, the travel time around Montauk is padded to account for potential deviation to serve the on-demand stops. Operators would have up to 7 minutes additional break at the Dock, and 6 minutes at Montauk Village (coming from the Dock), potentially getting 23 minutes of break spread across various points of the route should they not have to deviate. The headway may be two hours during a part of the day to account for a driver lunch break. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

S5 - If they are having a timed connection with the S4 why do they have it continue to Central Islip? So pax connecting at the CI pulse can have a direct service to Babylon? Seems pretty wasteful to me having two buses traveling between CI and Brentwood at the same time every 30 minutes, and SCT offers 2 free transfers anyways

Agreed 100%

19 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

S17 - That ending on Montauk highway just doesn't sit right with me. I would extend the southern terminus to either Islip, to serve some commercial areas along Islip Ave, or to Great River LIRR, so people on connectquot will have slightly less of a walk and have more options. Though extending this line anywhere else will probably force them to add more buses if they wanted to preserve the pulse/30 min headway. Not that I believe Carleton Ave should have a 30-minute service. I feel like they have it to try to replace the southern portion of the S42 along Islip Ave which they assume passengers will walk to Carleton

The bulk of Islip Avenue riders would be taking the S11 on Broadway, not the S17 on Carleton Avenue. North of the Southern State Parkway, the street grid gets disconnected between Islip Avenue and Carleton Avenue (until you reach the areas closer to Suffolk Avenue, at which point the S4/5 would become an option as well). 

If you take a look at the ridership map on 49/86 of the "SCT Choices" report, the vast majority of 3C riders seem to be covered by the S17. You see a huge dot at the courts, you'll see some medium-size dots along the southern part of Carleton Avenue (which currently only has service every 2 hours) and around Boulevard Avenue, and then tiny dots along Connequot Avenue (which indicates minimal ridership...less than 1 person per day). 

But in any case, I do agree that it should be extended to Islip. 

19 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

S62 - Seems like there is no more direct Happague to Smith Haven Mall service. Passengers will now have to transfer at either Brentwood/or Central Islip, which isn't the worse with the pulse system. I am assuming the S11 and the S6/17 will be offset by 15 minutes, so passengers will have a bus every 15 minutes connecting Happague and the KO branch (although they will make the same train/bus because S11 takes a loner route to Brentwood)
I am not keen on cutting the entire portion PJ east to Wading River/Riverhead. Ridership is low in this area, but I feel like something should cover this huge portion of the county, maybe something like a Flexi bus, it has a set route between PJ and Riverhead, but can deviate 3/4 of a mile, since most people don't live exactly along 25A

The S58 still runs Hauppauge - Smith Haven, albeit only the North Complex. I suspect the timing will be somewhat offset (so that way it can meet the same 4 in both Brentwood and Central Islip). 

The thing with a deviated flex route is that you'd have to account for that in the amount of buses you assign to the route. For a fixed-route S62 from Port Jefferson - Riverhead, you need at least two buses, likely three (maybe you could have some B/Os cycle on/off the 62 to take their lunch break in Port Jefferson). For a deviated flex route, you'd pretty much be guaranteed to need 3 buses.

19 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

I wonder how will they coordinate the pulses? Will they have boots on ground, some sort of a signal system like in Syracuse, radio system, or are they just going to pad the schedules so that the buses are never late.

If I had to guess, probably a combination of radios like in the old days, with some schedule padding. (Ideally, they'd try to put most of that padding in at the main transfer points, to avoid buses running early at other parts of the route)

19 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

Also in the plan "The Draft New Network does include a larger budget for more service, but most of that additional budget is used to ensure that buses run more reliably on-time. Today’s Existing Network has very poor reliability: the average route is on-time only about 40% of the time. This poor reliability is due to schedules that have not been updated in many years, and therefore are not accounting for changes in traffic patterns. Improving reliability to a more reasonable level requires an investment of at least 15% in additional fixed route service to account for slower speeds. An additional 5% investment in fixed route service is included in the Draft New Network to provide more consistent service on the evenings and weekends. Fixed route services comprise roughly 45% of the County’s total Transit budget, so this would mean a 9-10% increase in the overall Transit budget."

Does this mean they have the 15% secured to improve OTP or not? 

Yes. Since fixed route service is only about 45% of the total transit budget (with the rest presumably being paratransit), a 15% increase in funding for runtime issues, plus 5% for extra evening/weekend service ends up being about a 9-10% increase when you consider that paratransit won't be increased at all.

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I actually mean west of Babylon LIRR altogether (one routing following Oak Street, the other via Montauk Highway). Once you get into Lindenhurst, there really is no close transportation option. So one branch follows the existing S20 Oak Street segment between Sunrise Mall and Babylon, and the other follows the Montauk Highway segment (with the Montauk Highway being the main branch of the two). 

I'm not terribly opposed to it, but I still think the 10 and the Babylon Branch can still be considered to cover that area.

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

As far as the S5 via Udall Road, how much ridership do you expect to get from Deer Park LIRR? Reason I chose Tanger Outlets was because it's more likely to be a ridership generator (people going to jobs or going to the stores). Also, I personally believe that if you plan on attracting LIRR riders, you'd be much better off from Babylon than Deer Park, due to the amount of train service provided there. 

I chose Deer Park because I already had another Babylon-Tanger Outlets route via Deer Park Avenue.

As for LIRR riders, it'll be getting the riders at Babylon anyway. But it could still make an attempt at connecting riders to both stations (Especially considering Mineola and Hicksville, are very hard to reach from the handful of Montauk Branch trains that stop there). 

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Also, with the S4 and S12 both available as transfers at Deer Park Avenue (and both serving Tanger Outlets), I don't know if it's needed to have such a service from Deer Park Avenue. I'm not necessarily opposed, but if you had the S5 directly to Tanger Outlets from Babylon, you would have frequent service on more of Deer Park Avenue.

Where do you propose the Deer Park Avenue short-turn service terminate? Kenmore Street (Deer Park Town Line)?

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

As for the S3, I personally lean more towards on preserving coverage (as long as the transfers aren't too inconvenient), and I would want to preserve some service in Dix Hills for Five Towns College and the Sagamore Child Center. I'm not so sure on how many people transfer off of S23 & S29s to other routes at WWM (outside of the S54), so if that number is particularly low, I guess I can be onboard with that plan.

Ideally, HART would take this opportunity to restructure their own routes (with the 7 running every 30 minutes along Larkfield Road, you could shift the H10 to Elwood Road, run the H30 from Walt Whitman to Northport (via Centerport), have a shuttle run in a loop between Greenlawn & Huntington, and then that frees up a bus that could operate between WWM & Five Towns College. But of course, wishful thinking....

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The S3 from my initial suggestions would instead be the weekday route, while the S29 (I'll just dub it 'S9' just to fit in with the proposal) from Babylon LIRR would run daily. However, I would suggest perhaps consider serving Commack Plaza and Kings Park (terminating at the Kings Park LIRR station). The replaces the S56 on Indian Head Road but would also provide direct service to Huntington Square Mall and more of Jericho Turnpike (in addition to the rest of the route all the way to Babylon). IDK if Kings Park would be pushing it for a 50-54 minute run from Babylon LIRR, but I think it's worth considering if cycle time allotted for such a route is 2 hours. 

I agree. I think it's worth considering. 

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I've thought about it a little more, and I've rethought of how I would do the network in that area, and it's a modification from my proposal. Here are the modifications to my original suggestions:

(Weekdays Daytime: 5:00 AM - 6:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S19: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Connetquot Ave, Ave, Lowell Ave, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge
  • S13 buses interline with S19 buses at Hauppauge

(Weekday Evening: 6:00 PM - 10:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Brentwood LIRR, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S19: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Central Islip, via Montauk Highway, Connetquot Ave, Ave, Lowell Ave, Suffolk Avenue - every 60 minutes (until 9 PM)
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge

(Saturdays: 6:00 AM - 10:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Brentwood LIRR, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S19: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Central Islip, via Montauk Highway, Connetquot Ave, Ave, Suffolk Avenue - every 60 minutes (from 7 AM until 7 PM)
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes (starts at 7 AM)
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge

(Sundays: 7:00 AM - 8:00 PM)

  • S11: Bay Shore to Hauppauge, via Broadway & Commack Road - every 60 minutes
  • S13: Bay Shore to Brentwood LIRR, via 5th Avenue - every 60 minutes (starts at 8 AM)
  • S17: Islip (Saxon Avenue & Montauk Highway) to Hauppauge, via Montauk Highway, Carleton Ave, Wheeler Road, NYS 454 - every 60 minutes
  • S18: Bay Shore to Smithtown LIRR, via Montauk Highway, Islip Ave (NYS 111), Wheeler Road (NYS 111), NYS Office Building, NYS 25A -every 60 minutes 
  • S11 buses interline with S17 buses at Hauppauge

TLDR: The S19 now becomes an Islip-Hauppauge Route, with the S18 operating to Smithtown. The S17 AND S19 would interline with the S11 and S13, respectively, during daytime hours. Some minor time span changes as well. 

As mentioned above, I think the ridership patterns shown on page 49/86 of the network concepts report really advocate in favor of taking service away from Commack Road (3B portion) and Connequot Avenue, and putting 30 minute headways on Broadway and Carleton Avenue respectively. (The Lowell/Connequot route covers the busiest portions of the 3C). 

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

You'd get more local riders than potential LIRR to SCT riders by having the S55 be the frequent route over the S52 honestly. There's a lot more potential with boosting S55 service over S52 service. As for the S58, I would keep it going to SCCC especially because the coverage area it provides, and to maintain accessibility to that campus. If it gets rerouted away from Brentwood and gets straightened out to Huntington Square Mall, you'd be able to afford that deviation too. 

I get your point on the S52 vs. S55 debate.

As for the S58, I actually believe sending it to Brentwood is the correct move. You have the connection to the Ronkonkoma Branch, and all the other routes, and you send it to a (relatively) dense, transit-dependent area. 

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

In most, if not every case, it will not be faster. If you are going from Ronkonkoma and are going to Sayville, let say you have to wait for the S51 to Patchogue, then the S2 out to Sayville, The travel time would be approximately double than what it would take with an S57/59 combo. And it would be useless for almost all other intermediate points. If that's the case why they didn't have a north-south link there, then I can't agree with it. Besides the fact that not much of anyone would resort to doing such a trip, it also indicates a sense as if they don't believe in their own proposal, to have to resort to such measure.

The other thing is, how many people are making a north-south trip directly within that corridor vs. trying to reach another ultimate destination. If you want the Ronkonkoma Branch from the airport, the S6 will take you to Central Islip. If you want a point on the South Shore, the S6 the other way will get you to Patchogue. 

In any case, I meant to say faster when you account for waiting time. (If the connections line up perfectly, the S2 - S51 combo would be similar to the travel time on the present-day S57/59 from Sayville to Patchogue. Obviously, there would be some sort of cushion built in, so the time difference is the amount of the cushion). But of course, the S57/59 do have some sort of attempt to coordinate the schedule to provide more frequent service. 

16 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

As far as service in the Hamptons and Montauk, I just think there should be fixed route service out there, especially between Montauk and East Hampton. I don't agree with just leaving them with microtransit. Using the most recent data, the 10C appears to have low ridership, but because it's frequency is every 3 hours for the most part, it's has more riders per bus than people think. It's average ridership, 9.4 riders per bus, is better than routes that are being looked into for frequent service and span expansions, such as the 2B and 6A at 6.7 and 3.3 riders per bus respectively.

I don't think microtransit is necessarily inferior to fixed-route service, but in any case, one of the things I do hope is that they can coordinate with the SFCC shuttles and leverage those into their schedules and/or microtransit setup.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2022 at 1:22 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I'm not terribly opposed to it, but I still think the 10 and the Babylon Branch can still be considered to cover that area.

I chose Deer Park because I already had another Babylon-Tanger Outlets route via Deer Park Avenue.

As for LIRR riders, it'll be getting the riders at Babylon anyway. But it could still make an attempt at connecting riders to both stations (Especially considering Mineola and Hicksville, are very hard to reach from the handful of Montauk Branch trains that stop there). 

Where do you propose the Deer Park Avenue short-turn service terminate? Kenmore Street (Deer Park Town Line)?

The Babylon Branch may be more suited for long-distance travel, but for more local trips, it doesn't help much because those stops aren't that closely spaced apart. I suppose you could make a bit of a case for the S10 given how it it's routed in the Babylon area (and it going to Amityville), but I still feel like there's quite a coverage gap there.

Regarding the Deer Park routing, it would be great if it can pull ridership from the LIRR station, but I just personally don't see it being greater than demand to Tanger Outlets. As far as the Deer Park Avenue short-turn, yeah either there or Straight Path. 

On 3/4/2022 at 1:22 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Ideally, HART would take this opportunity to restructure their own routes (with the 7 running every 30 minutes along Larkfield Road, you could shift the H10 to Elwood Road, run the H30 from Walt Whitman to Northport (via Centerport), have a shuttle run in a loop between Greenlawn & Huntington, and then that frees up a bus that could operate between WWM & Five Towns College. But of course, wishful thinking....

 

I was actually thinking about something this, right after I posted my reply. I did some calculations myself, and it turns out that there's actually quite a lot of inefficiency, where they can be operate 30 minute service on several routes (and segments) if they routed it correctly. If this SCT plan version would be implemented, there would be a lot of it. The H40 for example, would be almost useless to specifically wait for, since a lot of trips on that route could be done with the S6 & S7 (which are both slated to be frequent service routes). While the current H10 and the S41 do duplicate along Larkfield Road, I don't actually think it would be the best to shift to Elwood because it misses commercial East Northport and reduces the catchment area for riders going to Greenlawn and Huntington, and makes it harder for those west of Larkfield Road. 

HART buses 8 buses on weekdays, and 4 buses on Saturdays (and their routes operate every 45-50 minutes on Weekdays, 90-100 minutes on Saturdays). Well I actually came up with a plan to redistribute the buses around, and it turns out you can increase access, connectivity, and frequency by using the same resources. IDK if this would be more suited for here or the SCT proposals thread, but here's a HART map of the proposed service and frequency levels. Existing areas on routes like the H10 and H30 would greatly benefit from the increased service, and you would be able to have a HART replacement for the S23 in that area. Routes would be more frequent on Saturdays than they currently are, and besides the H40 elimination, the only areas that would see a service cut on weekdays is Northport (since my proposed H25 route would operate every 60 minutes), and the H20 route (which would also operate every 60 minutes). However, although the service may be less frequent on some routes, they are also easier to time with other SCT routes, because they would all have a base headway which can be timed with (there's no guarantee with the existing system, since the HART and SCT routes have different headways). 

On 3/4/2022 at 1:22 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

 As mentioned above, I think the ridership patterns shown on page 49/86 of the network concepts report really advocate in favor of taking service away from Commack Road (3B portion) and Connequot Avenue, and putting 30 minute headways on Broadway and Carleton Avenue respectively. (The Lowell/Connequot route covers the busiest portions of the 3C). 

I would still try to provide as much coverage, because between Eastview Drive and Manhattan Boulevard, you cannot walk to Carleton from Connetquot, and there's still some activity south of Eastview. Perhaps maybe have the Connectquot branch take Manhattan Boulevard to Carleton Avenue as a compromise (instead of going all the way to Montauk Highway), but wouldn't leave that area with zero service. I get the point made, but I can't agree with leaving that area with nothing. Even if service is provided during the hours the frequent service runs on the trunk of the route, that would be preferable compared with nothing for people who need the bus in that area.

As far as Commack Road goes, if that's the case, I still wouldn't route the services (S7 and S11) like they did in that proposal. There's quite a bit of activity going, even in the areas where there's no proposed bus service with regards to 5th Avenue and Brentwood Road. I thought about for a while, and I would have the S7 like I mentioned before, but operating via South Shore mall, which I didn't even notice it didn't serve. I would maintain a connection there, so I would have it take Sunrise Highway and Brooke Ave towards Bay Shore LIRR. Perhaps I would shift the Broadway route to take Brentwood Road south of Spur Drive North and either Union Boulevard or Main Street to/from Bay Shore LIRR, with a deviation to South Shore Mall as well.

On 3/4/2022 at 1:22 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I get your point on the S52 vs. S55 debate.

As for the S58, I actually believe sending it to Brentwood is the correct move. You have the connection to the Ronkonkoma Branch, and all the other routes, and you send it to a (relatively) dense, transit-dependent area. 

The way I see, if anyone wants Brentwood, the S4 is there at Smith Haven which also connects to many other areas (and the transfer is timed). Doing that with the S58 to me is unnecessary for that reason, and it really screws up connectivity for anyone going eastward/northward.

On 3/4/2022 at 1:22 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

The other thing is, how many people are making a north-south trip directly within that corridor vs. trying to reach another ultimate destination. If you want the Ronkonkoma Branch from the airport, the S6 will take you to Central Islip. If you want a point on the South Shore, the S6 the other way will get you to Patchogue. 

In any case, I meant to say faster when you account for waiting time. (If the connections line up perfectly, the S2 - S51 combo would be similar to the travel time on the present-day S57/59 from Sayville to Patchogue. Obviously, there would be some sort of cushion built in, so the time difference is the amount of the cushion). But of course, the S57/59 do have some sort of attempt to coordinate the schedule to provide more frequent service. 

 

The routes do okay generally for east-west travel in that area (I still have some gripes regarding the S6 in that area), but the proposal hurts north-south ridership. It's not just about those getting off Ronkonkoma Branch trains, it's about those who may be transfer from either the S51 or S52, who live or work near those routes, who then may want the S57 to get to their final destination (wherever that is around the streamlined combo route). It also includes existing riders on the S57 & S59 routes where there would be zero service, and the alternative would be a walk to one of the frequent routes and backtrack. Since the S58 would have a timed transfer to the S51, you can also include riders on that route looking for service to points between Ronkonkoma and Sayville along the S57/S59). The S51 would somewhat cover segments the S59, but doesn't cover the S57 south of Ronkonkoma. It may not be a lot of ridership compared to other routes, but I wouldn't scrap the service entirely like that. You'd only need one bus for such a service anyways.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like I'm going to have to go against the consensus here a bit with some of these... My takes are as follows:

S1: If anyone thinks S1's are crowded now, wait until you start seeing how many people'll take buses at Sunrise.... I mean, I get it, but quite frankly, I don't think this extension is really necessary, per se.... Something else that I don't think S1's should be doing anymore (that isn't proposed, but I'll still mention it for discussion's sake) is running in/out of the college (Farmingdale).... Waste of time for very little benefit....

S2: IDC what it's nomenclated.... I didn't back then & I will continue to abhor this idea (regardless if it runs to Sunrise or LIRR Amityville past LIRR Babylon)... The absence of the n19 in Suffolk County & this band-aid solution that's currently in place that's got the S20 turned into a loop route (to cover that part of Montauk Hwy. west of Babylon, etc) AFAIC doesn't make an S40 extension west of Babylon any more justified... That is what I think some people that always sided/still side with the general idea are on..... Generally speaking, those taking S40's from Babylon tend to not ride it past Bay Shore.... I'm not convinced that anyone utilizing these things (S2's) west of Babylon will be doing too much riding past Bay Shore.... There's no real need to turn the S40 into the western version of the S66 (which is what I think more of aim was with this proposal, compared to providing better service on Montauk Hwy. west of Babylon)....

FWIW, If not for leaving the S40 alone, I would have a route run between Sunrise & Bay Shore (South Shore Mall, to be specific) if I were to have any part of the current S40 swing out past LIRR Babylon... The mileage that this proposed S2 will eat up (and then some) IMO is better spent running buses b/w Bay Shore & (either) North Bellport or Mastic-Shirley.... While I agree with making Babylon less of a major xfer point b/w buses in general (as it pales in comparison to the xferring b/w buses going on at Patchogue RR, for example), I would still have a Sunrise - Bay Shore route serve Babylon RR for the connection to the Montauk line... But this whole Amityville - Patchogue bit is a huge NO for me....

S4: Finally they address the (direct) gap in service between Wyandanch & Central Islip; it'll eradicate the amt. of people commuting on the LIRR for that stretch.... Too much piecemealing, with the S33, S27, and the S45 (or 3d).... The S1 will still trump it, but the S1 & this S4 will be the "M15 vs Bx12" (so to speak) of Suffolk County.... Here's another comparison for you - Being that they're running it to Smith Haven, this S4 will be the 21st century version of the S62 (damn, how the mighty have fallen with that route... it's more or less straggler level now... I still wouldn't eliminate it outright though)...

S5: This is an interesting concept... I would still branch the route in Deer Park though - one branch would do the current proposed routing (serving residential Commack rd.) & the other branch would continue along Deer Park Av. to Long Island av, to Commack rd... Also, I can agree with detaching one route serving both the Psych. center & SCCC Brentwood the way the S41 does, by having this S5 serving the Psych. center & having that S7 (which is basically the S41) serve {inside} SCCC Brentwood.... There's a stop outside the college along College rd. up there anyway, so hell, the S5 would still serve the college (just won't run inside it).... The tradeoff with turning this route towards LIRR Brentwood & LIRR Central Islip is that it'd create a big ass gap in service b/w Melville & Commack... Dix Hills patrons simply do not patronize S23's & S29's; I totally get why they cut service north of Deer Park... Patronage on both those routes even from Whitman Mall have waned over time, on top of it...

As far as the portion of the S5 east of the Psych Ctr., I don't think it necessarily has to run to Central Islip.... After passing by SCCC Brentwood, I'd have it covering Oser dr instead (of that S11), then coming down Willets Path & turning on Motor Pkwy to get to Washington av, where it would take to eventually terminate at Brent City {LIRR Brentwood}.... The Wicks portion of the proposed S5, I'd have that S7 doing.... You don't need separate routes serving Wicks & serving Crooked Hill towards Suffolk av, south of SCCC Brentwood... So I would do away with the Crooked Hill part of the proposed S5/current S41 b/w Suffolk av & SCCC Brentwood...

S6: I have mixed feelings about this route for several reasons... One, I don't think it should be the route serving ISP, because you've opted to to away with the coverage routes b/w Sayville & Smith Haven... I'd have it run inside Gateway Plaza up there in Patchogue, instead of panning along the LIE service rd (where SB/EB riders won't be able to access that mall)... Also, while Sun Vet is a dead mall, the S54 has garnered a decent amt. of patronage to/from that Target on the other side of rt. 27... The routing in that immediate area I'd have go as follows:

  • towards Whitman: west on Sunrise Hwy. service rd > south on Broadway av > run inside the target (bus stop would be just short of that right turn inside the target) > east on Sunrise Hwy. service rd > north on Broadway av > en route to proposed route via Church st
  • towards Patchogue: south on Broadway av > east on Sunrise Hwy. service rd (bus stop would be right after that left turn onto the service rd.) > en route to proposed route

Having the route come off Vets. Hwy. directly serving Central Islip is what the demand for the S54 has been for the longest... The portion of the S54 b/w that jank ass xfer point (Wheeler/Motor Pkwy) & the other side of the tracks (as in, via Islandia), large in part, is an unofficial nonstop portion... They need to do away with that part of the S54, so yeah, the proposed S6 via Suffolk av & Wheeler rd. to the county offices makes way more sense... Having something like that S52 coming from LIRR Ronkonkoma serving that same part of Islandia towards Central Islip, in turn, equally makes more sense than what the current network offers.... As for the part of the S54 west of the county offices, I hate to say it, but past a certain point, the thing's in trouble.... While I think it should still run to Whitman, I would not be at all surprised if some time in the future that they'd have every other S6's short turning at Commack Plaza or Huntington Sq. Mall....

Food for thought: Would be worth it at this point to swap the S6 & the S7 past Huntington Sq. Mall? To be perfectly honest, I'm leaning towards a yes... Something like 60/40 (percent) on the yes side....

S7: Looks to be [an S41 north of Brentwood (with the exception of serving the Psych center)] and [a routing south of Brentwood that aims to have residential & commercial portions being served towards Bay Shore (instead of serving any one specific corridor)]... I have to be honest - while it looks like shit on paper (south of the Main line, I'm referring to), I can see people eventually appreciating a route like this.... Interesting that it would be the only route serving South Shore Mall though; I have to agree that you don't need all them dam routes serving that mall like the current network does.... Other comments I have regarding this route, see my comments under the S5.... Going back to the SS Mall bit though, you really... don't.... need to have a route (let alone multiple routes) serving both SS Mall & Gardiner Manor mall... There's cumulative wasted mileage on the 2a & the 2b serving both of those malls, I have to admit....

S10: I CTFU'd at this :lol:.... They're really trying to kill 3 birds with one stone (S1a, S20 [John st. segment], S25) with this.... The crazy part is, I think it has an outside shot of working, in terms of cumulative patronage.... It would be a whole troll move if they were to have this running to Sunrise :lol::lol::lol:

S11: I don't so much mind the portion of the route south of the main line (for the same reason I don't too much mind the S7 routing south of the main line), but I would have the northern portion of the route run b/w Brentwood & Smith Haven via the county offices, rt. 111, and rt. 25.... Even though they extracted the S58 away from SCCC Selden, I still wouldn't have that running to Brentwood... So the long & the short of it is that I'd have this S11 & the S58 ending at Smith Haven...

S12:  I like the route in general, but I still think the whole, terminating it at SUNY Farmingdale is for the birds... I'd run it to Republic Plaza instead.... I think this is what hampers 2b patronage past Wyandanch & Wheatley Heights.... Something else I'd have it do (if it's going to run up Howell's rd. in Baywood), is have it loop up to serve LIRR Deer Park before serving Grand Blvd (regardless if it serves LIRR Wyandanch)....

S17: I'm pretty certain they have this ending at Montauk Hwy due to the road changes/rules inside the courthouse.... Buses don't terminate in front of 400 Carleton anymore (they have 45 degree parking in place for government vehicles now, which makes sense)... They end down in the Federal Plaza section of the complex now (which is a poor terminal for a bus route)..... If the complex is defiant with not wanting buses to terminate inside the property anymore, I'd either push this S17 towards Islip RR or towards the Dept. of Health services bldg. in Great River - but I would not dead it right there at Carleton/Montauk Hwy..... On the northern end, I'd try to spawn more ridership on this thing by running it up to Siena Hospital via Smithtown RR.... If I have to draw up a map for it to better explain it, I will... There is a demand for Siena Hospital; the problem is that a go-nowhere route like the S56 serves it....

S51/53/55: Have to admit, it's pretty clever what they're doing with these 3 routes, but I see the play here.... This whole bit regarding having every S53 & S55 continue as S51's, is to avert the terminal situation with the current S61 up there by the ferry dock.... In any event, I take issue with having this S51 be the 30 min. route over the S55 (as if the S51 would be that superior to the S55).... If anything, I would have the totality of the S55 be the 30 min. route & only the portion of the S51 b/w Ronkonkoma & Pt. Jeff RR stations operate every 30 mins.... I would not have a defacto express b/w Ronkonkoma & Patchogue RR stations operating every 30 mins, so I'd have every other S51 pan south of Ronkonkoma.... The S53 can remain as an hourly route....

S52: I proposed something similar to this on here... Instead of running to Gordon Hgts. & Central Islip on their respective ends, I had it ending at Coram Plz on the eastern end & ending at Ronkonkoma RR via the S57's stint around Lake Ronkonkoma on the western end... To be honest, I would worry about overall patronage on this route for 30 min headways... With as many BPH there would be along Suffolk av, I'm not too sure where else to send this route, to where anything better than hourly service would be worth it.... The good thing is, it'll be relatively quick between the 2 points, but I would be concerned with it's overall usage....

S58: Interesting to have it serve Peconic Bay Medical Ctr, to shave about 5 mins. or so off the S92... Anyway, if push came to shove, I would side with it serving Brentwood over the current diverting of it to serve SCCC Selden... That doesn't mean that I think it should run to Brentwood, because I don't... If the idea is to directly connect that general area of the county to the County Offices in Riverhead, then I wouldn't have it taking Willets Path to rt. 25... Refer to my S11 commentary for further comments regarding this rendition of an S58....

S66/S77: Can't agree with this setup.... I mean, I can understand hourly service past Mastic towards Riverhead, but still - If I were to have a 30 min. routing b/w Patchogue & Mastic-Shirley via the S66, I would incorporate portions of the S68 into such a route (meaning, serving more of North Bellport)... I would not leave Bellport Village with nothing, nor would I have some limp d*ck route that happens to serve the hospital out there, eventually coming to stop dead in the middle of much of nothing inparticular (Montauk Hwy/Station rd)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2022 at 7:12 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I was actually thinking about something this, right after I posted my reply. I did some calculations myself, and it turns out that there's actually quite a lot of inefficiency, where they can be operate 30 minute service on several routes (and segments) if they routed it correctly. If this SCT plan version would be implemented, there would be a lot of it. The H40 for example, would be almost useless to specifically wait for, since a lot of trips on that route could be done with the S6 & S7 (which are both slated to be frequent service routes). While the current H10 and the S41 do duplicate along Larkfield Road, I don't actually think it would be the best to shift to Elwood because it misses commercial East Northport and reduces the catchment area for riders going to Greenlawn and Huntington, and makes it harder for those west of Larkfield Road. 

HART buses 8 buses on weekdays, and 4 buses on Saturdays (and their routes operate every 45-50 minutes on Weekdays, 90-100 minutes on Saturdays). Well I actually came up with a plan to redistribute the buses around, and it turns out you can increase access, connectivity, and frequency by using the same resources. IDK if this would be more suited for here or the SCT proposals thread, but here's a HART map of the proposed service and frequency levels. Existing areas on routes like the H10 and H30 would greatly benefit from the increased service, and you would be able to have a HART replacement for the S23 in that area. Routes would be more frequent on Saturdays than they currently are, and besides the H40 elimination, the only areas that would see a service cut on weekdays is Northport (since my proposed H25 route would operate every 60 minutes), and the H20 route (which would also operate every 60 minutes). However, although the service may be less frequent on some routes, they are also easier to time with other SCT routes, because they would all have a base headway which can be timed with (there's no guarantee with the existing system, since the HART and SCT routes have different headways). 

I don't think it should be too hard to implement a timed transfer between the S7 and H25 for those going to Huntington Village. For those heading to areas closer to the railroad tracks, a timed transfer can be implemented at Huntington Square Mall. Unless somehow along Larkfield Road, they can coordinate the two so that the H10 connects to the S6, and is evenly spaced with the S7. (I suppose we could try to get an idea of what the timings would be like between the different hubs, and figure a rough idea of the schedules for the Draft SCT network).

Will the H10 & H25 be interlined on Saturdays under your plan? (Is that why the H25 is extended to Cold Spring Harbor on Saturdays)?

On 3/6/2022 at 7:12 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I would still try to provide as much coverage, because between Eastview Drive and Manhattan Boulevard, you cannot walk to Carleton from Connetquot, and there's still some activity south of Eastview. Perhaps maybe have the Connectquot branch take Manhattan Boulevard to Carleton Avenue as a compromise (instead of going all the way to Montauk Highway), but wouldn't leave that area with zero service. I get the point made, but I can't agree with leaving that area with nothing. Even if service is provided during the hours the frequent service runs on the trunk of the route, that would be preferable compared with nothing for people who need the bus in that area.

You mean create a branch of the 17 that operates to Great River instead of Islip? I think that would work. 

On 3/6/2022 at 7:12 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

As far as Commack Road goes, if that's the case, I still wouldn't route the services (S7 and S11) like they did in that proposal. There's quite a bit of activity going, even in the areas where there's no proposed bus service with regards to 5th Avenue and Brentwood Road. I thought about for a while, and I would have the S7 like I mentioned before, but operating via South Shore mall, which I didn't even notice it didn't serve. I would maintain a connection there, so I would have it take Sunrise Highway and Brooke Ave towards Bay Shore LIRR. Perhaps I would shift the Broadway route to take Brentwood Road south of Spur Drive North and either Union Boulevard or Main Street to/from Bay Shore LIRR, with a deviation to South Shore Mall as well.

For those portions of 5th Avenue & Brentwood Road, the street itself doesn't have a bus route, but there is still bus service nearby. From Candlewood Road to Pine Air Drive along 5th Avenue is about 0.6 miles, which means that worse-case, you'd be 0.3 miles from the nearest bus route. Going down Brentwood Road from Candlewood Road to Spur Drive North is about 0.7 miles (so the worse-case scenario for someone right in the middle would be a 0.35 mile walk). And depending on where exactly you are, you might walk directly to Spur Drive North or Candlewood Road itself to catch the bus (or 5th Avenue instead of Brentwood Road).

It's unclear from the map on page 19 as to whether the S7 would actually divert into the South Shore Mall (It calls it out as a major stop, but it doesn't show any actual deviation). But in any case, I definitely wouldn't divert the S11 to the South Shore Mall. I'd leave it running right down Brentwood Road as planned. It's only 3 blocks from the mall to Brentwood Road, and if somebody doesn't want to walk that, there's the timed transfer to the S7. No need to replicate the current situation where you have the 2A, 2B, S42, and S45 all running between Mechanicsville Road and Shore Shore Mall.

On 3/6/2022 at 7:12 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The way I see, if anyone wants Brentwood, the S4 is there at Smith Haven which also connects to many other areas (and the transfer is timed). Doing that with the S58 to me is unnecessary for that reason, and it really screws up connectivity for anyone going eastward/northward.

True, but at the same time, the connection to the S6 is still available in Hauppauge. But I suppose someone coming from HART territory would benefit from a connection to the S58 to points east.

On 3/6/2022 at 7:12 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The routes do okay generally for east-west travel in that area (I still have some gripes regarding the S6 in that area), but the proposal hurts north-south ridership. It's not just about those getting off Ronkonkoma Branch trains, it's about those who may be transfer from either the S51 or S52, who live or work near those routes, who then may want the S57 to get to their final destination (wherever that is around the streamlined combo route). It also includes existing riders on the S57 & S59 routes where there would be zero service, and the alternative would be a walk to one of the frequent routes and backtrack. Since the S58 would have a timed transfer to the S51, you can also include riders on that route looking for service to points between Ronkonkoma and Sayville along the S57/S59). The S51 would somewhat cover segments the S59, but doesn't cover the S57 south of Ronkonkoma. It may not be a lot of ridership compared to other routes, but I wouldn't scrap the service entirely like that. You'd only need one bus for such a service anyways.

The thing is that both the S51 & S52 offer a timed connection to the S6 (and the S51 connects to both the S2 and S6). In any case, can you post a map of the route again? What would it take, Lakeland Avenue to Smithtown Avenue?

On 3/6/2022 at 6:18 PM, B35 via Church said:

Looks like I'm going to have to go against the consensus here a bit with some of these... My takes are as follows:

S1: If anyone thinks S1's are crowded now, wait until you start seeing how many people'll take buses at Sunrise.... I mean, I get it, but quite frankly, I don't think this extension is really necessary, per se.... Something else that I don't think S1's should be doing anymore (that isn't proposed, but I'll still mention it for discussion's sake) is running in/out of the college (Farmingdale).... Waste of time for very little benefit....

The S1 actually isn't getting extended (I know it looks like it's sort of looping around the Amityville LIRR station and then heading off to the mall). There is a chart on page 23 that shows the terminii of all the routes. The S1 & S4 will start at Amityville LIRR, while the S2 & S10 will start at Sunrise Mall. 

On 3/6/2022 at 6:18 PM, B35 via Church said:

S10: I CTFU'd at this :lol:.... They're really trying to kill 3 birds with one stone (S1a, S20 [John st. segment], S25) with this.... The crazy part is, I think it has an outside shot of working, in terms of cumulative patronage.... It would be a whole troll move if they were to have this running to Sunrise :lol::lol::lol:

Looks like they're trolling us then ;) I actually didn't realize it was running to Sunrise until I double-checked that chart. Talk about an expanded S20.....

On 3/6/2022 at 6:18 PM, B35 via Church said:

S12:  I like the route in general, but I still think the whole, terminating it at SUNY Farmingdale is for the birds... I'd run it to Republic Plaza instead.... I think this is what hampers 2b patronage past Wyandanch & Wheatley Heights.... Something else I'd have it do (if it's going to run up Howell's rd. in Baywood), is have it loop up to serve LIRR Deer Park before serving Grand Blvd (regardless if it serves LIRR Wyandanch)....

What are your thoughts on branching it, and having half the trips take Commack Road - Bay Shore Road?

Also, are most of the people in that part of Baywood looking for S27 service, or 2A/2B service (considering those as one route...in other words, north-south service vs. east-west service)? What would you say is the split? 60/40 in favor of east-west service?

On 3/6/2022 at 6:18 PM, B35 via Church said:

S17: I'm pretty certain they have this ending at Montauk Hwy due to the road changes/rules inside the courthouse.... Buses don't terminate in front of 400 Carleton anymore (they have 45 degree parking in place for government vehicles now, which makes sense)... They end down in the Federal Plaza section of the complex now (which is a poor terminal for a bus route)..... If the complex is defiant with not wanting buses to terminate inside the property anymore, I'd either push this S17 towards Islip RR or towards the Dept. of Health services bldg. in Great River - but I would not dead it right there at Carleton/Montauk Hwy..... On the northern end, I'd try to spawn more ridership on this thing by running it up to Siena Hospital via Smithtown RR.... If I have to draw up a map for it to better explain it, I will... There is a demand for Siena Hospital; the problem is that a go-nowhere route like the S56 serves it....

I think it had more to do with maintaining a direct connection from Central Islip to that part/region of Montauk Highway (considering the S42 was eliminated, and the S45 was split up among multiple routes). Not to mention the 3C itself (eventually) makes its way down towards the Montauk Branch (even though ridership is minimal).

On 3/6/2022 at 6:18 PM, B35 via Church said:

S66/S77: Can't agree with this setup.... I mean, I can understand hourly service past Mastic towards Riverhead, but still - If I were to have a 30 min. routing b/w Patchogue & Mastic-Shirley via the S66, I would incorporate portions of the S68 into such a route (meaning, serving more of North Bellport)... I would not leave Bellport Village with nothing, nor would I have some limp d*ck route that happens to serve the hospital out there, eventually coming to stop dead in the middle of much of nothing inparticular (Montauk Hwy/Station rd)...

What are your thoughts on extending the S77 out to Riverhead? (In other words, continue down to Bellport Village, and then take over the present-day S66). It wouldn't be perfectly offset with the S66 via Montauk Highway (since the route is a little bit longer), but you'd get 2 buses per hour all the way out to Riverhead instead of just to Mastic. 

To take it a step further, they could interline it with the S62 running as far as Port Jefferson (So for one pulse you'd have the S58, S66, and S92, and for the other one, you'd have the S62, S77, and an S92 depending on whether or not it's rush hour). 

On a side note, I didn't realize Sills Road & Woodside Avenue are pretty much highways through that part of North Bellport. I'm not even sure if they'll put a bus stop at Woodside Avenue & Sills Road. For all that, they might as well just get on Sunrise Highway for a couple of exits and take that to Station Road, if their goal is to provide a stop proximate to the Bellport Outlets.

But long-story short, I think the best way to cover that 7B/S68 territory is to either run it as a demand-response shuttle route, or incorporate a section of it into a branch of the S66. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@checkmatechamp13 I'm in the process of mapping out my suggestions (plus some additions), so you'll get to see how they look.

As far as the H25 bit, I forgot to eliminate that part, but that was part of my original proposal. Yes, I would have had the H10 and H25 interline in Cold Spring Harbor, but the cycle time would definitely not have been 2 hours or less (which would have meant running both routes hourly instead of just the H10). So I just kept the H10 by itself (but extended it on Saturdays to South Commack, hoping to provide 30 minute service between East Northport and South Commack on the S7/H10 route. I'm still trying to see how to get the interlining situation down on Saturdays for sure though. I'm keeping the H30 and H31 interlining together with one bus, which works out. Issue is the H20 and H25s runtimes are rather tight, and the terminals a far enough apart where it becomes an issue of providing adequate break for the operator. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@checkmatechamp13 Here's a map with my suggestions for route modifications in the draft plan. This should be much easier to visualize, but I'll break it down by region. For more specifics, you can check the map.

SW Suffolk Routes

  • S2 split up to operate via Oak Street and Montauk Highway, otherwise no changes to service levels 
  • S10 split into two routes as follows (each using 1 of 2 buses allocated for this route):
    • S10 - Amityville to East Farmingdale (Airport Plaza), with some route modifications
    • S8 - Babylon to East Farmingdale
  • S5 reduced to hourly and operating via Udall Road between Babylon and Tanger Outlets in Deer Park
  • New S9 bus route between Babylon and Kings Park, which uses resources from the draft plan S5 route to operate instead

Bay Shore & Islip Routes

  • S7 route would serve both SCCC and Pilgrim Psychiatric Center and would operate straight down Brentwood Road with a deviation to South Shore Mall
  • S11 route would become hourly, would now operate via South Shore Mall and shortcut down Brooks Avenue
  • S12 route is extended to Airport Plaza in East Farmingdale
  • New S13 route would operate hourly between Hauppauge and Bay Shore, via 5th Avenue and South Shore Mall (evening service operates from Bay Shore to Brentwood Only)
  • S17 route would have branches during the daytime hours on weekdays, with one route via Connetquot Ave & Lowell Avenue, and another via CI Courts and Carleton Avenue, and extended to Islip
  • New S18 route would operate hourly between Hauppauge and Smithtown LIRR, via Islip Avenue (NYS 111), Central Islip LIRR, Hauppauge Road (NYS 111)

Patchogue Routes

  • The S51 will be split up into three routes as follows:
    • S51: Patchogue to Ronkonkoma, serving a portion of discontinued S59 route, hourly service only
    • S60: Ronkonkoma to Port Jefferson 
    • S57: Ronkonkoma to Sayville, via Ocean Avenue and Johnson Avenue, hourly from 6 AM to 8 PM (Monday - Saturday Only). 
    • Timed transfers between these three routes will occur in Ronkonkoma
  • S53 route would serve parts of North Patchogue, as well as Ocean Avenue in Patchogue to replace lack of service with 7A discontinuation, and more of Terryville Road in Port Jeff
  • S55 route would operate frequent service during the daytime on weekdays, with branching either via NYS 112 or Old Town Road between Coram and Port Jefferson
    • This increase is partially possible through merging the S68 route with the S77 and using resources from the weekday S77 route (see below)
  • S66 route will be modified in order to better serve the Bellport area, as follows:
    • S66 - Patchogue to Riverhead, via South Country Road & Mastic Beach, every 60 minutes
    • S68 - Patchogue to Mastic Beach (Weekdays) or Shirley (Weekends), every 60 minutes
    • Frequent service area shortened to Mastic/Mastic Beach due to longer runtime through Bellport
    • The weekend S68 service is provided using weekend S77 resources

Ronkonkoma Area Routes

  • S52 route will be modified to operate between Smith Haven Mall and Gordon Heights hourly, requiring 2 buses instead of 5-6 buses during daytime (and 3 buses all other times)
    • Provides more frequent service on the S58 between Gordon Heights and Smith Haven Mall
    • Timed transfers to S53 and new S71 route (see below)
  • NEW - S71 route operating from Central Islip to Shirley, via Ronkonkoma, SCCC Selden, Horseblock Road, LIE (not for the speed lol), Walmart in Yaphank, and William Floyd Parkway
    • Hourly service, uses 3 buses from the draft plan S52 service
    • Timed transfer with S52 and S53 at SCCC Selden
  • New S57 route between Ronkonkoma and Sayville (not part of the initial draft plan)

Riverhead and Eastern Routes

  • S58 route will be retained to originate at Huntington Square Mall instead of Brentwood, and will operate to Riverhead
    • Buses will not operate via SCCC Selden as proposed
    • Buses will operate via Calverton to partially replace 8A bus
    • Buses will operate via Roanoke Ave instead of Northville Turnpike in Riverhead
  • Existing S62 is retained as an hourly route between Port Jefferson station and Riverhead
    • Deviation into Sound Beach streamlined and will be done by all trips
    • Will operate via Peconic Bay to partially replace 8A route
  • 10C Route will operate every 2 hours instead of every 3 hours, with a relatively simple schedule rewrite, and will now have on-demand stops
    • Service will operate on two different routes in Montauk, depending on the day and time of year:
      • Montauk Loop (to/from Dock) - Daily, except from Friday through Sunday and Holidays between Memorial Day and Labor Day
      • Montauk Lightouse (via Montauk Highway) - Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays, and Holidays between Memorial Day and Labor Day
    • Transfer in Montauk Village for the free Hampton Hopper bus when bus goes to Lighthouse
    • Timed transfer with the 10B to/from Bridgehampton and S92 to Riverhead and North Fork at East Hampton LIRR
    • Padded runtime in Montauk is provided to account for on-demand stops
  • 10B Route will operate a streamlined loop through East Hampton and Springs, and will terminate at Montauk Highway and Ocean Road in Bridgehampton
    • For service to Bridgehampton, riders can walk or if necessary, wait for the S92, where there will be a timed transfer
    • For Pantigo Place, transfer to the 10C
    • Route will remain a Monday - Saturday service
    • Bus operates every 2 hours
  • NEW - S90 Route operates between Hampton Bays and Shirley, every 3 hours
    • Uses the one bus that was saved from existing 10B route
    • Operates Monday - Saturday
    • Timed with S92 in Hampton Bays, and S66 or S68 and S71 in Shirley 
    • Summer Service extended to Smith Point Park via William Floyd Parkway, making stops only at Northern Boulevard, Roberts Road, and Neighborhood Drive
Edited by BM5 via Woodhaven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I just found out that Sunrise Mall will soon see its sunset (if you think I've been living under a rock, well, I don't blame you). With that bit of knowledge, I can't help but question that S2 proposal's viability (west of Babylon).

At this point, I'd rather see the N19 back, at least partially so that route doesn't completely wither on the vine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lex said:

So I just found out that Sunrise Mall will soon see its sunset (if you think I've been living under a rock, well, I don't blame you). With that bit of knowledge, I can't help but question that S2 proposal's viability (west of Babylon).

At this point, I'd rather see the N19 back, at least partially so that route doesn't completely wither on the vine

Hopefully they can just shift the transfer point to Amityville (NICE extends its routes a few blocks to Amityville LIRR, and SCT cuts the S2 and S10 back to Amityville LIRR)

If N71 ridership is super-low along County Line Road, perhaps they could run it down NY-110 and supplement the S1 (Since it's seeing a reduction in rush hour service)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lex said:

So I just found out that Sunrise Mall will soon see its sunset (if you think I've been living under a rock, well, I don't blame you). With that bit of knowledge, I can't help but question that S2 proposal's viability (west of Babylon).

At this point, I'd rather see the N19 back, at least partially so that route doesn't completely wither on the vine.

I don't think the S40 should be swinging out there, regardless of that mall's eventual demise or not... Way I see it, it's a cover up to the fact that the S20's patronage has quite noticeably waned over time (exacerbated by SCT's current rendition of the route, on top of it).... As was brought up in an earlier comment of mine, I'd rather see a route running between Sunrise & Bay Shore (via the affected corridor; Montauk Hwy) before this proposed S2, or even a reversion of the n19....

2 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

Hopefully they can just shift the transfer point to Amityville (NICE extends its routes a few blocks to Amityville LIRR, and SCT cuts the S2 and S10 back to Amityville LIRR)

If N71 ridership is super-low along County Line Road, perhaps they could run it down NY-110 and supplement the S1 (Since it's seeing a reduction in rush hour service)

You mean Carmans road.... But hell, the n71 dies the second it turns off Conklin nowadays...

The n54/55 is more patronized over the n71 from Sunrise for getting back to the more western part of the county.... I would personally do away with the n71 & revert the n72 to Babylon at this point...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2022 at 12:38 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

The S1 actually isn't getting extended (I know it looks like it's sort of looping around the Amityville LIRR station and then heading off to the mall). There is a chart on page 23 that shows the termini of all the routes. The S1 & S4 will start at Amityville LIRR, while the S2 & S10 will start at Sunrise Mall.

On 3/8/2022 at 12:38 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Looks like they're trolling us then ;) I actually didn't realize it was running to Sunrise until I double-checked that chart. Talk about an expanded S20.....

It would've eased confusions if they simply featured individual route profiles for all the routes (like in the PDF's for the MTA's Bronx & Queens redesigns & the Newark area redesigns)... The maps/map snippets shouldn't be (looking like it's) portraying one thing, while text descriptions of the routes are conveying something else.... This was one of the reasons why I kept putting off my analysis of this draft plan (back when you started this thread)....

Anyway, I can agree with wanting to doing away with a route running b/w Sunrise & LIRR Babylon the way the S20 does via East John & via Oak... Everytime I'm at Sunrise, I say to myself, it's quite sad how far this route (S20) done fell off.... However, to try to replace it with that S10 is wild & I'm still CTFU at it.... Pretty sure the idea is that they'll garner more cumulative riders b/w LIRR Babylon & Sunrise on it, over that spur of the S20...

On 3/8/2022 at 12:38 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

What are your thoughts on branching it, and having half the trips take Commack Road - Bay Shore Road?

Also, are most of the people in that part of Baywood looking for S27 service, or 2A/2B service (considering those as one route...in other words, north-south service vs. east-west service)? What would you say is the split? 60/40 in favor of east-west service?

I wouldn't have too much of a problem branching it, but I would have that branch go [Bay Shore rd > Deer Park av > Nicolls rd] instead of [Bay Shore rd > Commack rd >  Grand, etc.]... I wouldn't put anymore buses on Commack rd. in the S5's service area - matter of fact, as I mentioned in my initial post in this thread, I would branch that route (S5) in Deer Park....

In that part of the county (S27 vs 2a/2b), I would say that the split used to be 60/40 in favor of north-south service... However, I'd say now that it's 80/20 in favor of north-south service (might even be worse :()... That's not to say that there's necessarily more people taking S27's because they stopped taking 2a/2b's, but instead that the 2a/2b has lost so much more riders than the S27 did in the area (and in general), to where it's that much more noticeable to see people taking S27's over 2a/2b's....

On 3/8/2022 at 12:38 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I think it had more to do with maintaining a direct connection from Central Islip to that part/region of Montauk Highway (considering the S42 was eliminated, and the S45 was split up among multiple routes). Not to mention the 3C itself (eventually) makes its way down towards the Montauk Branch (even though ridership is minimal).

I don't think the S42's elimination (and definitely not anything done with the S45) had anything to do with specifically having that S17 end at Montauk Hwy.... I'd say it has less to do with coverage (and/or a connection to the S2), over specifically not having a route end at the courthouses/complex - especially being that that coverage to Montauk Hwy. for the connection to the same S2 (albeit in Sayville) b/w Ronkonkoma & Sayville was neglected... You mention the Montauk branch, but Carleton/Montauk Hwy (S17 terminal) is almost equidistant to LIRR Islip & LIRR Great River....

The 3c's stretch b/w Bay Shore & Islip Terrace/East Islip doesn't perform any better b/w the S57/S59 b/w Ronkonkoma & Sayville... Matter fact, I'd say it's worse...

From the east (of Carleton), I can guarantee folks will do the S6 > S17 xfer scenario over the S2 > S17 xfer scenario if they need the courthouse (or anywhere along Carleton b/w the Main Line & the courthouse)... They're not going to get people waiting for buses at Carleton/Montauk Hwy... This is what plagues the 3c now (regardless of branch) & I don't see that phenomenon changing - especially given that S6 would directly serve Suffolk av in Central Islip... Forget it... Lol....

From the west, there's a much better chance they'll get more people doing the S2 > S17 xfer scenario to get to the aforementioned parts of Central Islip, due to the thing running from Sunrise (which is a sort of gateway into Suffolk county for those that don't wanna pay LIRR prices, or otherwise embark on the LIRR for whatever their reasons)...

On 3/8/2022 at 12:38 AM, checkmatechamp13 said:

What are your thoughts on extending the S77 out to Riverhead? (In other words, continue down to Bellport Village, and then take over the present-day S66). It wouldn't be perfectly offset with the S66 via Montauk Highway (since the route is a little bit longer), but you'd get 2 buses per hour all the way out to Riverhead instead of just to Mastic. 

To take it a step further, they could interline it with the S62 running as far as Port Jefferson (So for one pulse you'd have the S58, S66, and S92, and for the other one, you'd have the S62, S77, and an S92 depending on whether or not it's rush hour). 

On a side note, I didn't realize Sills Road & Woodside Avenue are pretty much highways through that part of North Bellport. I'm not even sure if they'll put a bus stop at Woodside Avenue & Sills Road. For all that, they might as well just get on Sunrise Highway for a couple of exits and take that to Station Road, if their goal is to provide a stop proximate to the Bellport Outlets.

But long-story short, I think the best way to cover that 7B/S68 territory is to either run it as a demand-response shuttle route, or incorporate a section of it into a branch of the S66. 

That's what I was going to originally suggest S77's do; run to Riverhead via N. Bellport & Bellport Village.... But I'm not necessarily opposed to having every other S66 run to Riverhead (to have 30 min. service b/w Patchogue & Mastic) either... The issue (which we all seem to concur with) is that all service on the proposed S66 pans along Montauk Hwy, instead of alternating S66 service in that part of the county the way the current S66 does.... Crazy enough, but I do think there's value in having an S66 service run b/w Patchogue & Riverhead via N. Bellport (which you more or less allude to in that very last point you make there)....

So outside of leaving the current S66 as is, I'm a bit conflicted as to what should exactly do what out there, since they decided to throw that S77 into the mix....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@B35 via Church To clarify, you'd have the S5 running down Washington Avenue, and the S11 running up Caleb's Path, correct? (With the S5 running to the industrial parts of Hauppauge in the west, while the S11 runs straight to the County Offices)

In terms of present-day routes, would you keep some form of the S27 around? (Specifically, the Udall Road portion, since most people are seeking north-south service). Would you do something like Babylon - Tanger Outlets, or something else? (Or just leave them with the S12 and the Commack Road branch of the S5 and have them make their way from there?)

I just found a few new documents. They have a more detailed route table (A bit inaccurate, since they put the description for the S1, S2, and S4 into the box for some other routes). For the S17, they mention it will serve commercial areas along Carleton Avenue, which hopefully means it will have a stop proximate to Central Islip Town Center (the map doesn't show an actual deviation, but at least a stop on the street would help, even if the bus momentarily blocks traffic in the right lane). 

Then they have an interactive route map that shows a more detailed version of each route (with turnaround scenarios and deviations). Apparently for the Brentwood transfer point, the eastbound S4, S5, and S58 will stop on the north side of the LIRR station, while the S7 & S11 will stop at the current stops at the south side of the tracks. (Not sure what the westbound S4 & S5 will do, since the directions in the table only show the routing in one direction. Not sure if they will also do the loop, or if they will just make stops along Suffolk Avenue). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/16/2022 at 6:31 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church To clarify, you'd have the S5 running down Washington Avenue, and the S11 running up Caleb's Path, correct? (With the S5 running to the industrial parts of Hauppauge in the west, while the S11 runs straight to the County Offices)

In terms of present-day routes, would you keep some form of the S27 around? (Specifically, the Udall Road portion, since most people are seeking north-south service). Would you do something like Babylon - Tanger Outlets, or something else? (Or just leave them with the S12 and the Commack Road branch of the S5 and have them make their way from there?)

Correct on the S5, but I would have the S11 running along 111 between Suffolk av & Rabro dr (meaning, via Joshua's path instead of Caleb's path) before serving the county offices....

If you're asking that S27 question as it relates to the current network, well the portion of the route I would retain (for the most part) would be the Babylon - LIRR Deer Park portion... The eastern portion of the S27 I'd have other routes take bits & pieces of it over (like the S33 taking over the S27's portion b/w Deer Park Tanger & LIRR Brentwood, and the S45 taking over the S27's portion b/w LIRR Brentwood & Motor Pkwy)... Anyway, I say "for the most part" b/c I wouldn't have it use as much of Udall rd. that it currently does... North of the main line, I would run it up to rt. 25 (Huntington Sq. Mall, to be exact) → So, something like this... This would loom far more useful b/w the main line (and points south of the main line) & rt. 25 than the S29, since that turns west on rt. 25 towards Whitman Mall, via Dix Hills...

On 3/16/2022 at 6:31 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

I just found a few new documents. They have a more detailed route table (A bit inaccurate, since they put the description for the S1, S2, and S4 into the box for some other routes). For the S17, they mention it will serve commercial areas along Carleton Avenue, which hopefully means it will have a stop proximate to Central Islip Town Center (the map doesn't show an actual deviation, but at least a stop on the street would help, even if the bus momentarily blocks traffic in the right lane). 

Then they have an interactive route map that shows a more detailed version of each route (with turnaround scenarios and deviations). Apparently for the Brentwood transfer point, the eastbound S4, S5, and S58 will stop on the north side of the LIRR station, while the S7 & S11 will stop at the current stops at the south side of the tracks. (Not sure what the westbound S4 & S5 will do, since the directions in the table only show the routing in one direction. Not sure if they will also do the loop, or if they will just make stops along Suffolk Avenue). 

Not too long after it (CI Town Center) first opened, the 3c actually used to run inside there... None of the trips that served McGann Village served CI Town Center & not every trip that didn't serve McGann Village served CI Town Center... I still can't figure out when they kicked buses out of CI Town Center though (but I can understand why they did it)... What I will say is (speaking of deviations), I have to concur with 3c's no longer having buses run inside the area that encompasses NYIT - even before NYIT sold off the majority of the property....

Looking at that map, I see that they have that S5 running inside Wyandanch Village... I get that they're proposing that to not have it crossing the RR tracks (to have it still directly serve LIRR Wyandanch), but I don't see that part of the proposal falling through in actuality... Likely to have buses simply continuing on Straight Path to Winter (both directions), with a stop along Straight Path, just outside of Wyandanch Village...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you mean the S12 running through Wyandanch Village (the Bay Shore - SUNY Farmingdale route). Which reminds me, I wonder how they will set up the transfer point at the Brentwood LIRR station. I assume the S7 & S11 will use the current stops south of the tracks, and apparently the S58 and eastbound S4/S5 will serve the north side of the station. The big question is, will the westbound S4/5 do the detour to the station, and how will they ensure that people aren't rushing across the railroad tracks as the gates are going down to make their connections. (My guess is they'll have the B/Os radio each other)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.