|
|
| SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop (310336) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (310337) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Feb 10 12:17:42 2016, in response to SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 11:22:40 2016. SI Bus Study workshop 02/09/2016 official MTA handout - SI Bus Study workshop 02/09/2016 non-MTA proposal-1 - SI Bus Study workshop 02/09/2016 non-MTA proposal-2 - Staten Island Transportation Project, 02/09/2016 non-MTA proposal-3 - |
|
|
| (310338) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 13:34:36 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Union Tpke on Wed Feb 10 12:17:42 2016. Thanks! |
|
|
| (310339) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Wed Feb 10 13:57:19 2016, in response to SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 11:22:40 2016. The first non-MTA proposal has some great ideas for reconfiguring service in a relatively budget-neutral way. I liked the way he reconfigured the S42, S54, S57, and S66. But then he started to lose me with the extension to Newark Airport on the S98 (I'm sorry. . .I don't see any way to do that in a budget-neutral way) and then everything else seemed to just be added expenditures.The second non-MTA proposal seemed to be all just service increases, so I didn't read into it too much. |
|
|
| (310340) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Feb 10 15:42:12 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by New Flyer #857 on Wed Feb 10 13:57:19 2016. The S42/54 and S57/66 proposals were from this site. Here's the debate that convinced him to adopt those proposals: http://www.subchat.com/buschat/readflat.asp?Id=306746&p=1For the S98 extension to Newark, it might not be cost-neutral, but at the same time, it does provide an important SI-NJ connection. S52 extension to Richmond Road is reasonable, to provide a connection from the hospital to the SIR and S74/76/78/79. However, I still think the detour through McClean Avenue should be eliminated, and replaced by having the S77 run through McClean Avenue. That one stop along Steuben Street at Fingerboard Road will either have to remain with express bus-only service, or worse-case scenario, add an S79 stop there. S55 via Englewood to Bricktown is actually shorter than the current route. The extension to NJ would add additional costs, but again, would provide an important SI-NJ connection. S78 to Huguenot & Arthur Kill provides network coverage to a dense neighborhood with lots of townhouses. S59 to Bricktown should only be running to Tottenville, with the S74 Englewood branch extended westward to restore the old connection from Tottenville to the rest of Arthur Kill Road. X17J split makes sense, for the same reason the X17A/19 split makes sense. X22 midday service makes sense, because it is MUCH quicker (literally, over an hour quicker) to reach Midtown. Bus operators on the X17 have told me that there's been many times when they literally picked up nobody on the entire length of the extension. Who on the South Shore is going to spend an hour getting to the Eltingville Transit Center when they could drive there in 20 minutes? The MTA planner even agreed it was a bad idea (and it wasn't his). I think there should also be an X22 Downtown variant, and middays, both variants should be combined. (The X19 is the only South Shore express route that runs Downtown during rush hours). He wants to swap the S76/86 with the S57 in the Oakwood area. No opinion. 24/7 service on the S59, I could see if the S78 had overnight service eliminated, and replaced with the S59/79. (Tompkins Avenue riders would have to walk to the S51) |
|
|
| (310342) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 16:44:11 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Feb 10 15:42:12 2016. I didn't get anyone's names but figured at least 1 or 2 were on this board. |
|
|
| (310343) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by caine515 on Wed Feb 10 16:48:11 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Union Tpke on Wed Feb 10 12:17:42 2016. Proposal 2 won't work. Since most routes are combined putting a 30 foot bus on a 40 foot route is ridiculous |
|
|
| (310344) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by hound on Wed Feb 10 17:17:17 2016, in response to SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 11:22:40 2016. What ridiculous ideas. MTA buses to Perth Amboy? Newark? You've got to be kidding. Only bus foamers would come up with these ideas. |
|
|
| (310345) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Feb 10 18:04:22 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 16:44:11 2016. The people who wrote those first two proposals were sitting at the express bus table on the left-hand side, and are on these boards. I forget where the person with the Facebook group was sitting, but he's not from these boards. I know there was another person from these boards who was at the local table on the right-hand side.I'm going to be honest, I specifically avoided those tables once I saw them. Make of that what you will. |
|
|
| (310346) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 20:07:41 2016, in response to SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 11:22:40 2016. Why should NYCT send buses to NJ when virtually every bus route loses money? Why don't they ask NJT to operate these services? Because they lose money too. Sending a NYCT bus route to Metuchen is just nuts. |
|
|
| (310353) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Feb 10 21:33:26 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 20:07:41 2016. The agency loses money as is. It's a public service. You think the NYPD, FDNY, DSNY, NYCDOE, etc turn a profit? They're there to serve the public.The question is, would it lose an unreasonable amount of money relative to the number of passengers served, and the benefits it provides. If the only people riding it are joyriding busfanners, that's one thing. If it shaves two hours off the commutes of a non-negligible number of legitimate commuters, it's a different story. |
|
|
| (310357) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 23:30:42 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Feb 10 21:33:26 2016. NYCT is not an interstate agency. Yes they dip into Nassau Co, yes they dip into New Jersey. But to go deep into New Jersey to a place like Metuchen is the job of the interstate operators. |
|
|
| (310359) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Thu Feb 11 00:29:38 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 23:30:42 2016. Alright, fair enough. The bus could end at either the Woodbridge NJT station or Perth Amboy NJT station, then. |
|
|
| (310360) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by JAzumah on Thu Feb 11 00:31:49 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 20:07:41 2016. You could zero out losses on the Staten Island express bus system tomorrow. Fill 90% of seats and the losses go away, even at $200/hour. |
|
|
| (310361) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Thu Feb 11 02:37:53 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by JAzumah on Thu Feb 11 00:31:49 2016. Getting rid of the high peak-base ratio would help too. The MTA isn't running the X1 every 5-6 minutes during rush hour (on top of the other Hylan express routes) for the fun of it. |
|
|
| (310362) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Fri Feb 12 08:02:11 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Feb 10 23:30:42 2016. In my email to the Bus Study group I suggested express services from the Hylan and Richmond corridors to the new employment centers of Jersey City and Hoboken where more and more Staten Islanders work every year.At the workshop I brought that subject up with the MTA rep at the workshop. He said as you state that the MTA's jurisdiction is to operate withing New York. But he also said that numerous people including our elected officials had brought that up and that it was possible for the MTA to one day operate such services as they do now with the S89. |
|
|
| (310366) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Feb 12 10:41:25 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Dan on Fri Feb 12 08:02:11 2016. The numbers just don't justify the effort.There are 160362 workers on SI. Of these 3746 work in Hudson County, which includes both Jersey City and Hoboken. That's 2.3% of all SI workers. The number along a Hylan or Richmond bus route corridor to Jersey City (Journal Sq?) and Hoboken would be smaller. I could get a precise estimate but it's really not worth the effort because there are bigger fish to fry. The number of SI workers working on SI is 48961; close behind are those working in Manhattan - 47935. Further behind are those working in Brooklyn - 22499. The rest are only 4 figures with the greatest being 7483 (Queens). |
|
|
| (310371) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Fri Feb 12 15:08:05 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Feb 12 10:41:25 2016. Aside from that, there already is a bus route that connects SI to Hudson County (actually Bayonne is Hudson County as well). It serves around 400 riders a day. (The remaining 600 or so use it for intra-SI travel). So it's not like it's a trip that's extraordinarily difficult to make by mass transit (as opposed to say, Middlesex County-SI)Plus, an express bus would likely operate less frequently and with a shorter span than the S89. Additionally, NYCT would shoulder more of the costs (as opposed to bringing riders to Bayonne and having them transfer to the HBLR and pay again). And of course, it would also cut into the S89's market (and the S89 is more useful because it allows intra-SI trips, which are currently a slight majority of trips on the route) |
|
|
| (310373) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Fri Feb 12 17:25:14 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 13:34:36 2016. your welcomesee here HTML for SubChatters |
|
|
| (310383) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Fri Feb 12 20:39:10 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Thu Feb 11 00:29:38 2016. I can deal with that. |
|
|
| (310397) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 09:02:14 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Union Tpke on Fri Feb 12 17:25:14 2016. I'm just lazy! |
|
|
| (310398) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 09:21:35 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 09:02:14 2016. SubChat/BusChat html guide (pdf download) |
|
|
| (310399) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by SI 93 on Sat Feb 13 10:33:04 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 09:21:35 2016. Let's hope that a Newark Liberty International Airport to Staten Island bus is considered as the final recommendations for this study.I do like the S98 route being extended but operating the S98 a full 7 day a week service. |
|
|
| (310404) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 13 10:43:37 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by SI 93 on Sat Feb 13 10:33:04 2016. Actually I think Newark Penn would be a more popular destination than EWR for a SI bus. From there, they can connect to many area rail and bus lines. |
|
|
| (310406) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 10:54:41 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 13 10:43:37 2016. I don't think there is enough SI ridership to either EWR or Newark Penn Station to justify a new bus route. Staten Islanders going to EWR either call car service or have someone drive them out to the airport. |
|
|
| (310407) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Feb 13 10:58:30 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 10:54:41 2016. Or they head to JFK in a gypsy cab. |
|
|
| (310408) | |
How to do Cross-Outs Here? Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Feb 13 11:16:41 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 09:21:35 2016. Does anybody know how to do cross-outs here with the html? |
|
|
| (310411) | |
Re: How to do Cross-Outs Here? Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Feb 13 11:49:33 2016, in response to How to do Cross-Outs Here? Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Feb 13 11:16:41 2016. Does anybody know how to do cross-outs here with the html?<strike>no</strike> |
|
|
| (310413) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Sat Feb 13 11:53:33 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 10:54:41 2016. Well, what else are they supposed to do if there's no easy transit alternative? Aside from that, people work at EWR as well. (And people have a need to travel to parts of Union, Essex & Middlesex Counties that could be easily accessible by a route over the Goethals Bridge) |
|
|
| (310414) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 12:08:27 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Sat Feb 13 11:53:33 2016. I live on SI and know how Staten Islanders behave. A family trip to EWR usually entails a lot of luggage, etc. I just can't see a family of 4 starting their trip to Florida, California or Europe by waiting for a bus at the curb. Business travelers can expense the car service trip to the airport, so no need for bus. |
|
|
| (310415) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Sat Feb 13 12:39:47 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 12:08:27 2016. Don't pull that "I'm an SI resident" crap on me. I live a stone's throw from the Goethals Bridge and there have been times when I wanted to visit friends or hang out at cultural events in Newark and Elizabeth that would've been a very simple transit ride if there were a route over the Goethals Bridge. Instead, it involved having to make arrangements to be picked up and dropped off, because there's no feasible way to get there by transit.Likewise, even if you're insisting that travelers wouldn't take the bus to get to the airport, there's still all the airport workers who live on Staten Island. The route is needed for basic connectivity purposes. Maybe not to the airport per se, but to some point on the other side where people can connect to another mode that can get them to where they need to go. People work, shop, and go to school in those parts of NJ, and I'm sure there's a few reverse-commuters (the same way with the S89) that could benefit from traveling to Staten Island. You want to talk about express bus service to Hudson County, when we've already set up a local bus, but yet nothing over the Goethals Bridge? Please. |
|
|
| (310416) | |
Re: How to do Cross-Outs Here? Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Feb 13 12:41:28 2016, in response to Re: How to do Cross-Outs Here? Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Feb 13 11:49:33 2016. I |
|
|
| (310418) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Gotham Bus Co. on Sat Feb 13 13:09:38 2016, in response to SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Dan on Wed Feb 10 11:22:40 2016. Here's a better idea...Maybe they should forget about "workshops" and "alternatives" and instead just disclose what they've already decided to do. |
|
|
| (310422) | |
Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Sat Feb 13 13:49:04 2016, in response to Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop, posted by Gotham Bus Co. on Sat Feb 13 13:09:38 2016. At the 2/9/16 workshop the MTA stated that there would be an 'interim progress report' sometime this Spring, which if we are lucky they will post to the SI Bus Study website. |
|
|
| (310428) | |
Re: How to do Cross-Outs Here? Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Sat Feb 13 18:51:32 2016, in response to How to do Cross-Outs Here? Re: SI Bus Study 02/09/2016 workshop Links, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Feb 13 11:16:41 2016. Ah, Ok. |
|
|