Restructuring the S74/S78 in Tottenville
The S78 is officially the longest local route in the city, in terms of distance, at nearly 20 miles long. To put that into perspective, the X10 is around 24 miles long (the northbound and southbound distances are slightly different), and it's an express route.
The S78 is also a very unreliable route, in part due to its length. The long route leaves little chance of recovery in the event of a delay. If a bus is delayed due to traffic or some other reason, chances are that it's going to stay late unless you have Mario Andretti driving the bus or something. And depending on the time of day, that bus might become even later as crowds build up further up the line, increasing dwell times (the amount of time the bus spends at stops picking up and dropping off passengers). The issue might be alleviated a little if the next bus ends up catching up to its leader (meaning they split the loads), but you still end up with a long gap in service. The S78 runs every 15 minutes for most of the day, so 2 buses coming at once probably means that there's been a gap of 30 minutes or more. And you're probably going to feel that gap all the way until the end of the line. So if the end of the line is 10 miles away, well, that's a lot of people who are going to be delayed). Combine that with the low frequencies, and that compounds it further (if a bus runs every 5 minutes, 2 buses coming at once means there's been a 10 minute gap. If a bus runs every 15 minutes, 2 buses coming at once means a 30 minute gap).
The S74 faces a similar issue, except that the fact that it doesn't have to deal with the Hylan Blvd traffic makes it a little better. (However, the S74 is a little less frequent than the S78, so it still has its share of long gaps in service).
My solution is to make both routes a little bit more reliable by reducing the distance that both of them travel, like so. The S78 would get cut back to Tottenville, with the S74/S84 extended to Tottenville in its place. You may notice that this sounds similar to the pattern that operated prior to Spring 2011, which it is, except there's one major difference: The route the S74/S84 take in order to access Tottenville.
The S74/S84 take a really outdated routing down on the South Shore, that hasn't kept up with the development patterns down there. (Well, it has kept up a little bit, because it serves the Bricktown Mall, but that's about it). If you look at a map, you'll see that the S74 actually bypasses a denser neighborhood (Woodrow), in favor of serving a less-dense neighborhood (Charleston). And worse, it takes the long way around to bypass it, which increases costs and discourages ridership. Back when the Arthur Kill Correctional Facility was open, it was justifiable, but now that it's closed, there's no reason for it to take the long way around.
With my plan, you'll see that the S74 goes straight through Woodrow (or whatever you want to call that area over by Bloomingdale Road. It's too far north to be Pleasant Plains, and too far east to be Charleston, so the only other area I can think of would be Woodrow) en route to the Bricktown Mall, and then continues down to Tottenville.
This rectifies a couple of problems. For starters, it gives everybody east of Woodrow quicker access to the Bricktown Mall, as well as Tottenville (and vice versa: It gives Tottenville residents quicker access to pretty much everywhere along the S74 route). Secondly, it provides a full-time route in the area along Bloomingdale Road south of Woodrow. (The S55 runs weekdays only, and I have other plans for that as well)
Unfortunately, it means that the areas along the northern part of Bloomingdale Road, and the whole industrial/forested part of Arthur Kill Road (including Charleston) would lose service. For the people along Bloomingdale Road, one alternative is to have S74 buses run down Correll Avenue, running right through the heart of the residential portion of Rossville. The only problem with that is that you lose the direct connection with the S56, but I don't think there are that many Rossville residents making that transfer. (For what it's worth, the main reason somebody would be making that transfer would be to get to Tottenville High School, but I have a different proposal that would create a direct north-south route along Huguenot Avenue, which would solve that issue).
Otherwise, if buses continue running down Woodrow Road, residents of northwestern Rossville would still technically be within the MTA's guidelines of being within 0.5 miles of a bus route. It's just that it would be better if they made it by a wider margin, and the bus service was more conveniently located.
For riders along in Charleston, for starters there are really very few of them. A good portion of that route is literally just forest. The community should work together with the MTA, to see if there's a way to provide service only at times when it's needed. So for instance, if all of the businesses start a new shift at 3PM, there could be an S74 trip (say, one from each direction) that passes through a little before 3PM. Otherwise, they'll just have to make their way down to Veterans Road West to catch the bus.
For S78 riders, their service becomes slightly more reliable, because buses don't have to deal with that stretch of Arthur Kill Road north of Tottenville. From what I've seen, it doesn't get too much traffic, but as I've said, it's one more stretch of road for delays to compound on. By giving that section to the S74/S84 (making both routes shorter), that will help alleviate delays on both routes.
Friday, January 3, 2014
Expanding the Hours of the S96
Expanding the Hours of the S96
The S46 is the 4th-busiest route on Staten Island, and the third most cost-efficient (the only ones ranked higher are the S48/S98 and S53/S93). Similar to the S48, it has a lot of turnover (though I'd say slightly less than the S48), and definitely sees its share of crowds.
What I'm proposing is to expand the hours of the S96, which is the limited-stop counterpart to the S46. I would expand it to run from approximately 6AM - 6PM eastbound, and approximately 12 noon - 10PM westbound. (Unlike the S98, it wouldn't run Saturdays).
In order to keep costs down, I would reduce the frequencies of the S46 to every 15 minutes instead of every 12 minutes. I would also short-turn those buses at Grandview & Forest. With these savings, I would add S96 service running every 20 minutes, with midday buses serving both the Teleport & West Shore Plaza.
By doing so, this concentrates service where the demand is greater. South of Forest Avenue, service is reduced from 5 buses per hour to 3, while north of Forest, service is increased from 5 buses per hour to 7. Keep in mind that south of Forest, a significant number of patrons will see increased service overall, with the restructuring of the S66 I proposed. (Also keep in mind that I use the S46/S96 south of Forest Avenue very often, because that's my neighborhood, so I'm not reducing service willy-nilly). And of course, keep in mind that for passengers going to points east of Port Richmond Avenue, they would have a slightly quicker ride (assuming they're traveling to a limited stop, of course).
So here's an approximate schedule for the service: After the current last bus at 8:06AM, the next bus would be at 8:26AM from the West Shore Plaza, serving the Teleport, and then continuing to St. George. Buses would continue every 20 minutes until the last bus at 5:26PM. In the meantime, the 8:20AM S46 would be replaced with the 8:26AM S96, and 8:27AM S46 would start at Grandview & Forest instead of the Teleport. (Its start time would be at 8:35, which is the time it currently passes by Grandview & Forest). The S46 would then run every 15 minutes thereafter until 5:35PM, after which it would resume the current schedule (so the next bus would be the 5:37PM departure from the Teleport, and so on).
Westbound, buses would run their current schedule until 12:00 noon, and then the S96 would start service every 20 minutes, while the S46 would run every 15 minutes to Grandview & Forest. This pattern would continue until 4:00PM, when the current schedule would resume.
Keep in mind that this is exclusive of whatever trippers start running around school dismissal times (in other words, those trippers would be unaffected by the change in schedule). Also, I would convert the 7:00AM departure from St. George to an S96. (So the westbound span would be a 7:00AM trip, and then 12 noon to 10PM).
The S46 is the 4th-busiest route on Staten Island, and the third most cost-efficient (the only ones ranked higher are the S48/S98 and S53/S93). Similar to the S48, it has a lot of turnover (though I'd say slightly less than the S48), and definitely sees its share of crowds.
What I'm proposing is to expand the hours of the S96, which is the limited-stop counterpart to the S46. I would expand it to run from approximately 6AM - 6PM eastbound, and approximately 12 noon - 10PM westbound. (Unlike the S98, it wouldn't run Saturdays).
In order to keep costs down, I would reduce the frequencies of the S46 to every 15 minutes instead of every 12 minutes. I would also short-turn those buses at Grandview & Forest. With these savings, I would add S96 service running every 20 minutes, with midday buses serving both the Teleport & West Shore Plaza.
By doing so, this concentrates service where the demand is greater. South of Forest Avenue, service is reduced from 5 buses per hour to 3, while north of Forest, service is increased from 5 buses per hour to 7. Keep in mind that south of Forest, a significant number of patrons will see increased service overall, with the restructuring of the S66 I proposed. (Also keep in mind that I use the S46/S96 south of Forest Avenue very often, because that's my neighborhood, so I'm not reducing service willy-nilly). And of course, keep in mind that for passengers going to points east of Port Richmond Avenue, they would have a slightly quicker ride (assuming they're traveling to a limited stop, of course).
So here's an approximate schedule for the service: After the current last bus at 8:06AM, the next bus would be at 8:26AM from the West Shore Plaza, serving the Teleport, and then continuing to St. George. Buses would continue every 20 minutes until the last bus at 5:26PM. In the meantime, the 8:20AM S46 would be replaced with the 8:26AM S96, and 8:27AM S46 would start at Grandview & Forest instead of the Teleport. (Its start time would be at 8:35, which is the time it currently passes by Grandview & Forest). The S46 would then run every 15 minutes thereafter until 5:35PM, after which it would resume the current schedule (so the next bus would be the 5:37PM departure from the Teleport, and so on).
Westbound, buses would run their current schedule until 12:00 noon, and then the S96 would start service every 20 minutes, while the S46 would run every 15 minutes to Grandview & Forest. This pattern would continue until 4:00PM, when the current schedule would resume.
Keep in mind that this is exclusive of whatever trippers start running around school dismissal times (in other words, those trippers would be unaffected by the change in schedule). Also, I would convert the 7:00AM departure from St. George to an S96. (So the westbound span would be a 7:00AM trip, and then 12 noon to 10PM).
Sunday, December 29, 2013
Expanding The Hours of the S98
Expanding The Hours of the S98
The S48/98 is the most cost-efficient route on Staten Island, as well as the third-busiest. It makes sense if you think about it: Forest Avenue is a large commercial street, but the businesses are relatively transit-oriented (by Staten Island standards anyway), so a lot of people use transit to reach those businesses. While you do have a lot of people who travel all the way from Mariners' Harbor to the ferry, you also have a lot of turnover, which contributes to the cost-efficiency, because you're selling the same seat multiple times. Buses leave the ferry with a good-sized load (sometimes completely packed. Usually, it's moderately crowded from what I've seen), and then people start getting off as it makes its way through Silver Lake, but then more people get on coming from the S53. Then people start getting off further down, with a large crowd getting off at Richmond Avenue (many of them transferring to other buses there), but then at the same time, you have another large crowd getting on, going towards Mariners' Harbor and Arlington. And while all this is happening, you have all the people traveling to and from the stores along Forest as well.
As a result of all these people getting on and off at every stop, it can be a pretty slow route at times, and the longer the distance you're traveling, the more you feel the effects. During rush hour, the S48 has a limited-stop variant (the S98), which only stops at major stops east of Richmond Avenue (west of Richmond, it makes every stop). This helps greatly, but the problem is that it only runs for a few hours in the morning, and a few hours in the afternoon, and it only runs in the primary direction of rush hour. (Eastbound in the morning, westbound in the afternoon).
My proposal entails expanding the hours of the S98 to run as follows. Ferry-bound buses would run from roughly 6AM - 6PM weekdays, and 12PM - 5PM Saturdays. Arlington-bound buses would run from roughly 10AM - 10PM weekdays, and 1PM - 6PM Saturdays. Service would be expanded further under another one of my plans to extend it over the Goethals Bridge, but that's a separate plan.
I'd probably start off running it every 20 minutes, and reducing the S48's frequencies to every 15 minutes, instead of every 12, in order to make an effort to minimize the funds spent on adding the service. So looking at the current S48/S98 schedule, I would add an 8:15AM departure from Arlington, and then run it every 20 minutes thereafter until the last departure at 6:15PM. With the S48, I would have the next departure after the 8:08 bus be a bus at 8:23, and then every 15 minutes thereafter. The S48 would run this pattern until 6:08, after which the next departure would be at 6:30, before continuing the current schedule from that point on.
Going back from St. George, buses would run the current schedule until 10AM. Then at 10AM, I would have both an S48 and S98 depart going towards Arlington. The S48 would run every 15 minutes until 4:00PM, when it would resume its current schedule. The S98 would run every 20 minutes until 3PM, then every 15 minutes until 4PM, when it would resume its current schedule.
Saturdays, S98 buses would leave Arlington starting at 12:10PM, and then run every 20 minutes until the last departure at 5:10PM. The S48 would have its 11:55PM departure, and then a 12:05PM departure, and then run every 15 minutes until 5:05PM, after which the next bus would depart at 5:24PM, and then continue the regular schedule from there.
Going back from St. George, buses would run the current schedule until 1PM, at which time there would be both an S48 and S98 leaving towards Arlington. The S98 would run every 20 minutes until the last departure at 6PM, while the S48 would run every 15 minutes until 6PM, after which it would resume its current schedule.
I'll see if I can put together an actual schedule when I get the chance.
Now, generally, it is better when buses meeting the ferry run at a headway that works well with the ferry's headway. So if the ferry is running every 30 minutes, buses should be running every 10, 15, or 30 minutes, rather than every 20. However, Forest Avenue has a significant amount of people who aren't going towards the ferry, and so it isn't quite as necessary to have those even headways as it is for say, the S40. In addition, the S48 is already running every 15 minutes, so the S98 is more of a supplement, and the idea is that, with Forest Avenue being as busy as it is, hopefully, the additional buses will give people a better chance of connecting with the ferry they intended to.
The S48/98 is the most cost-efficient route on Staten Island, as well as the third-busiest. It makes sense if you think about it: Forest Avenue is a large commercial street, but the businesses are relatively transit-oriented (by Staten Island standards anyway), so a lot of people use transit to reach those businesses. While you do have a lot of people who travel all the way from Mariners' Harbor to the ferry, you also have a lot of turnover, which contributes to the cost-efficiency, because you're selling the same seat multiple times. Buses leave the ferry with a good-sized load (sometimes completely packed. Usually, it's moderately crowded from what I've seen), and then people start getting off as it makes its way through Silver Lake, but then more people get on coming from the S53. Then people start getting off further down, with a large crowd getting off at Richmond Avenue (many of them transferring to other buses there), but then at the same time, you have another large crowd getting on, going towards Mariners' Harbor and Arlington. And while all this is happening, you have all the people traveling to and from the stores along Forest as well.
As a result of all these people getting on and off at every stop, it can be a pretty slow route at times, and the longer the distance you're traveling, the more you feel the effects. During rush hour, the S48 has a limited-stop variant (the S98), which only stops at major stops east of Richmond Avenue (west of Richmond, it makes every stop). This helps greatly, but the problem is that it only runs for a few hours in the morning, and a few hours in the afternoon, and it only runs in the primary direction of rush hour. (Eastbound in the morning, westbound in the afternoon).
My proposal entails expanding the hours of the S98 to run as follows. Ferry-bound buses would run from roughly 6AM - 6PM weekdays, and 12PM - 5PM Saturdays. Arlington-bound buses would run from roughly 10AM - 10PM weekdays, and 1PM - 6PM Saturdays. Service would be expanded further under another one of my plans to extend it over the Goethals Bridge, but that's a separate plan.
I'd probably start off running it every 20 minutes, and reducing the S48's frequencies to every 15 minutes, instead of every 12, in order to make an effort to minimize the funds spent on adding the service. So looking at the current S48/S98 schedule, I would add an 8:15AM departure from Arlington, and then run it every 20 minutes thereafter until the last departure at 6:15PM. With the S48, I would have the next departure after the 8:08 bus be a bus at 8:23, and then every 15 minutes thereafter. The S48 would run this pattern until 6:08, after which the next departure would be at 6:30, before continuing the current schedule from that point on.
Going back from St. George, buses would run the current schedule until 10AM. Then at 10AM, I would have both an S48 and S98 depart going towards Arlington. The S48 would run every 15 minutes until 4:00PM, when it would resume its current schedule. The S98 would run every 20 minutes until 3PM, then every 15 minutes until 4PM, when it would resume its current schedule.
Saturdays, S98 buses would leave Arlington starting at 12:10PM, and then run every 20 minutes until the last departure at 5:10PM. The S48 would have its 11:55PM departure, and then a 12:05PM departure, and then run every 15 minutes until 5:05PM, after which the next bus would depart at 5:24PM, and then continue the regular schedule from there.
Going back from St. George, buses would run the current schedule until 1PM, at which time there would be both an S48 and S98 leaving towards Arlington. The S98 would run every 20 minutes until the last departure at 6PM, while the S48 would run every 15 minutes until 6PM, after which it would resume its current schedule.
I'll see if I can put together an actual schedule when I get the chance.
Now, generally, it is better when buses meeting the ferry run at a headway that works well with the ferry's headway. So if the ferry is running every 30 minutes, buses should be running every 10, 15, or 30 minutes, rather than every 20. However, Forest Avenue has a significant amount of people who aren't going towards the ferry, and so it isn't quite as necessary to have those even headways as it is for say, the S40. In addition, the S48 is already running every 15 minutes, so the S98 is more of a supplement, and the idea is that, with Forest Avenue being as busy as it is, hopefully, the additional buses will give people a better chance of connecting with the ferry they intended to.
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Restructuring Routes Near The SI Mall
Restructuring Routes Near The SI Mall
One of the major problems with service near the Staten Island Mall is that the needs of those who need to travel to the area by Marsh Avenue are ignored. This includes not only residents, but also students going to that educational complex along Marsh Avenue. (I forget exactly what it includes, but I know it includes at least one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school, and I know that elementary school is P.S.58, and there's McGowan High School and CSI High School). Riders looking to go up the Richmond Avenue corridor have to walk across the mall parking lot to get to the other side, which can be desolate early in the morning, and is a long walk at any time of the day. At certain times, the S44 & S59 have trippers running down to the school, but it would be nice if there was service available all day (and it could possibly save the MTA a little bit of money by allowing them to cut a few trippers, since the regular trips would be passing by the schools).
The other major problem is that riders aren't able to take advantage of all of the options available to them, due to the fact that different routes stop on opposite sides of the mall. For example, if somebody wanted to go to the Eltingville Transit Center (ETC), they could take the S55, S56, S59, S79, or S89. However, the S59/S79 stop at the "front" of the mall, and the S55/S56/S89 stop at the "back" of the mall. Since the S59/S79 run more frequently, most people opt to go to the front, meaning the S55/S56/S89 have wasted capacity and potential. Likewise, for those going up the Richmond Avenue corridor, the S44/S59 stop at the "front" of the mall, and the S89 stops at the "back". Again, since the S44/S59 are more frequent, most people opt to go to the front of the mall, leaving the S89 with wasted capacity and potential. (Northbound in the PM rush, I've seen packed S44s and S59s, with an empty S89 right behind them)
In order to solve these issues. I have a plan that would involve restructuring the S44/S59/S94, S55/S56, S79, and S89. Keep in mind that if the S79A were to be implemented, it would follow the same path as the S79. The portions in red are all the portions that would be discontinued (for that particular route). The portions in blue are the new routing that would be used instead. For the S44/S59/S94, there's an alternate new routing that I'll discuss below.
By doing so, the MTA would be using each route to its full potential as far as serving riders traveling from the mall, meaning buses would be more evenly loaded. So instead of packed S44s and S59s followed by near-empty S89s, you'd have moderately crowded buses on all three routes. And instead of packed S79s pulling into the ETC, followed by a near-empty S55 or S56, you'd have a more reasonably crowded S79, followed by an S55 or S56 with a decent-sized load (of course, once it leaves the ETC, the S55 or S56 would likely be close to empty as it is now, although my proposal to extend one or both to New Jersey should fix that. I'll get to that another time).
By the way, I just want to give a little background about S89 ridership. Northbound in the AM rush, it gets a decent amount of people, because it has all the commuters going to Bayonne to catch the HBLR, as well as schoolkids (the largest group being Port Richmond High School students). Southbound in the AM rush, the mall isn't open, and there aren't too many reverse commuters from Bayonne, but it gets a lot of students, and then adding that onto the people who use it as an alternative to the S59 to go towards the South Shore, nets it a decent amount of ridership. Southbound in the PM, it has the Bayonne commuters, plus people heading to the mall, plus people going home to the South Shore. However, northbound in the PM, buses are usually pretty empty because there's little to no students, and a handful of reverse-commuters. So unless it happens to come before a northbound S59 at the Eltingville SIR station or the ETC, that bus is going to have a handful of people going all the way up to Bayonne. There's been trips where I've been the only one on the bus, or maybe with 3-6 other people on board. The most crowded S89 I've been on that was traveling northbound in the PM rush had about 25 people, but the S89 in front had gone missing, and there was a long gap between it and the previous S59, with no S79s passing by in the interim, so it was a complete abnormality. (This was on the day before Thanksgiving last year, so all the buses were screwed up. My S84 got to the ETC 50 minutes late because of all the traffic, and I figured the S89 was supposed to come in a few minutes, so I passed up two S59s that came right behind each other, and ended up waiting another 20 minutes for the S89. In the meantime, no S79s were coming towards the mall, so I imagine Hylan Blvd traffic must've been a nightmare). But other than that, northbound S89 buses carry very few people at that time, and there's unused potential for those trips.
Additionally, riders would have more frequent service due to the fact that they would have all of their options on one street. With the S55/S56/S59/S79/S89 all at the same stop, riders going to the ETC would have a bus every 2-5 minutes during rush hours. Is it really necessary to have service that frequently? No, but if it can be done at little to no cost, why not? Along Richmond Avenue, the S89 would also add a little bit of frequency for those going up the corridor.
Keep in mind that 4 new stops behind the mall (serving Sears & Macys) would have to be constructed. And the reason I say "constructed" (because most of the time, adding a stop is as simple as drilling a hole, sticking a pole in it, and then pouring concrete in to stabilize it) is because they would have to expand the sidewalk a bit, and add a shelter (which would probably involve taking over a few parking spaces, which shouldn't be too much of an issue. Aside from the holiday season, the mall doesn't have a shortage of parking, and if that's such a big concern, they can add back spots on the other side of the mall, since there would no longer be buses stopping there)
Also, another issue is that the portion of Ring Road between the park-and-ride and TGIF (the restaurant) is only one lane in each direction. Well, you can either widen it in that portion, or just label it a transit mall (meaning, only allow buses in that portion). Here is where I would propose the transit mall. It's only in the portion where the street is one lane in each direction, so that people don't get stuck behind buses and get tempted to pass in the opposite lane, risking an accident. For the cars along that portion, they would have to make their way to Marsh Avenue. A barricade would be put up here (a simple guardrail or some Jersey barriers would do). It's at most, a minute of inconvenience for those drivers, and the bus riders get a huge benefit from this. And it would cost close to nothing, because it would just involve some signage, a single barricade for that one little street, and maybe some red paint on the ground if they want to demarcate it.
Now, to explain the exact restructuring, my plan for the S55/S56 is simple. Instead of having northbound buses turn left onto Marsh Avenue, they would make a left at the light before (which is Ring Road). They would go up Ring Road, serve those two stops by Sears & Macys, and then terminate where they normally do. Going back towards the South Shore, they would pull out of their terminal, make the next right, then make a left onto Ring Road, take that down to Platinum Avenue, make a right, and continue their normal route.
With the S79, it's the same idea: Turn left onto the eastern portion of Ring Road (right now, it turns left onto the western portion. The road makes a "ring" around the mall, hence the name "Ring Road"), serve the two stops by Sears & Macys, and then terminate where it normally does. The routing would be exactly the same as the routing the S55/S56 would take.
Now, with the S44/S59/S94, it gets a little more complicated, because you have a couple of options on what to do. Buses would definitely be turning down the eastern portion of Ring Road, instead of the western portion. The question becomes what to do once you pass Macy's. Buses can either make their way to Marsh Avenue, make a left onto Richmond Hill Road, and then a right on Richmond Avenue, or continue up Ring Road, pass by those apartment buildings near the mall, and then make a left onto Richmond Hill Road, and a right onto Richmond Avenue.
The advantage of running down Marsh Avenue is that you provide more service to the more residential portion of Richmond Hill Road. For instance, the people living in those townhouses off Lamped Loop would have easy access to the Richmond Avenue buses, compared to having them pass by the back of the complex without stopping because there's a fence separating Ring Road from the complex. People living on all those side streets off Richmond Hill Road would benefit as well. The only problem is that it would take a couple of minutes longer to reach the mall, and that extra distance might also make the S44/S94 a bit more unreliable for riders further up the route. (It's 4 more traffic lights to pass through, and 3 more stops to make). The S59 might also have the same issue, but north of the mall, it is supplemented by the S44/S94, whereas the reverse is only true west of Port Richmond).
So that's why my alternate plan is to have the S44/S59/S94 pass continue up Ring Road, and pass by those apartment buildings. (That's the green line in the S44/S59/S94 plan). It still serves the commercial part of Richmond Hill Road (west of approximately Ring Road) while providing a faster ride for those going to and from the mall. (The travel time would be more or less what it is today). That's another issue: If you want to get to or from say, Wendy's or one of those stores along Richmond Hill Road, you have to cross Richmond Avenue to access the southbound buses. It's not a regular street, where you're only crossing a few lanes. You're crossing nine lanes of traffic, plus the two parking lanes (which people sometimes use to make turns). The only business on the western side of Richmond Avenue is Fedex/Kinko's, whereas the eastern side has Radioshack, Marshall's, Wendy's, and many more businesses.
With the S89, we have those same two options: Have it go back to Marsh Avenue, which is slightly longer, or have it take the more direct route straight up Ring Road. The thing is that, being a limited, the only additional stop the S89 would make by serving Marsh Avenue would be the stop at Westport Street, so you're going out of the way to serve an additional stop worth of people. The more I think about it, the more I don't think it's worth it (especially since the nearest S89 stop would be 0.20 miles away), but it's just something to think about. (Keep in mind that the S89 can always take a slightly different route than the S44/S59/S94 if necessary. You could have the S89 serve Marsh Avenue, while the S44/S59/S94 take Ring Road straight down, or vice versa).
Part of the proposal entails constructing a little walkway right around here to allow residents living around Elmwood Park Drive to access the bus stops by Macy's. It would simply entail cutting out a little path (it doesn't even look like you'd have to remove any trees) and pouring some asphalt on it. Then you just remove a portion of that guardrail and you're done. (That would allow the riders to access the southbound stop. For the northbound stop, you can just extend the pathway a little further up)
Questions? Comments? As always, leave 'em below in the comments section.
One of the major problems with service near the Staten Island Mall is that the needs of those who need to travel to the area by Marsh Avenue are ignored. This includes not only residents, but also students going to that educational complex along Marsh Avenue. (I forget exactly what it includes, but I know it includes at least one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school, and I know that elementary school is P.S.58, and there's McGowan High School and CSI High School). Riders looking to go up the Richmond Avenue corridor have to walk across the mall parking lot to get to the other side, which can be desolate early in the morning, and is a long walk at any time of the day. At certain times, the S44 & S59 have trippers running down to the school, but it would be nice if there was service available all day (and it could possibly save the MTA a little bit of money by allowing them to cut a few trippers, since the regular trips would be passing by the schools).
The other major problem is that riders aren't able to take advantage of all of the options available to them, due to the fact that different routes stop on opposite sides of the mall. For example, if somebody wanted to go to the Eltingville Transit Center (ETC), they could take the S55, S56, S59, S79, or S89. However, the S59/S79 stop at the "front" of the mall, and the S55/S56/S89 stop at the "back" of the mall. Since the S59/S79 run more frequently, most people opt to go to the front, meaning the S55/S56/S89 have wasted capacity and potential. Likewise, for those going up the Richmond Avenue corridor, the S44/S59 stop at the "front" of the mall, and the S89 stops at the "back". Again, since the S44/S59 are more frequent, most people opt to go to the front of the mall, leaving the S89 with wasted capacity and potential. (Northbound in the PM rush, I've seen packed S44s and S59s, with an empty S89 right behind them)
In order to solve these issues. I have a plan that would involve restructuring the S44/S59/S94, S55/S56, S79, and S89. Keep in mind that if the S79A were to be implemented, it would follow the same path as the S79. The portions in red are all the portions that would be discontinued (for that particular route). The portions in blue are the new routing that would be used instead. For the S44/S59/S94, there's an alternate new routing that I'll discuss below.
By doing so, the MTA would be using each route to its full potential as far as serving riders traveling from the mall, meaning buses would be more evenly loaded. So instead of packed S44s and S59s followed by near-empty S89s, you'd have moderately crowded buses on all three routes. And instead of packed S79s pulling into the ETC, followed by a near-empty S55 or S56, you'd have a more reasonably crowded S79, followed by an S55 or S56 with a decent-sized load (of course, once it leaves the ETC, the S55 or S56 would likely be close to empty as it is now, although my proposal to extend one or both to New Jersey should fix that. I'll get to that another time).
By the way, I just want to give a little background about S89 ridership. Northbound in the AM rush, it gets a decent amount of people, because it has all the commuters going to Bayonne to catch the HBLR, as well as schoolkids (the largest group being Port Richmond High School students). Southbound in the AM rush, the mall isn't open, and there aren't too many reverse commuters from Bayonne, but it gets a lot of students, and then adding that onto the people who use it as an alternative to the S59 to go towards the South Shore, nets it a decent amount of ridership. Southbound in the PM, it has the Bayonne commuters, plus people heading to the mall, plus people going home to the South Shore. However, northbound in the PM, buses are usually pretty empty because there's little to no students, and a handful of reverse-commuters. So unless it happens to come before a northbound S59 at the Eltingville SIR station or the ETC, that bus is going to have a handful of people going all the way up to Bayonne. There's been trips where I've been the only one on the bus, or maybe with 3-6 other people on board. The most crowded S89 I've been on that was traveling northbound in the PM rush had about 25 people, but the S89 in front had gone missing, and there was a long gap between it and the previous S59, with no S79s passing by in the interim, so it was a complete abnormality. (This was on the day before Thanksgiving last year, so all the buses were screwed up. My S84 got to the ETC 50 minutes late because of all the traffic, and I figured the S89 was supposed to come in a few minutes, so I passed up two S59s that came right behind each other, and ended up waiting another 20 minutes for the S89. In the meantime, no S79s were coming towards the mall, so I imagine Hylan Blvd traffic must've been a nightmare). But other than that, northbound S89 buses carry very few people at that time, and there's unused potential for those trips.
Additionally, riders would have more frequent service due to the fact that they would have all of their options on one street. With the S55/S56/S59/S79/S89 all at the same stop, riders going to the ETC would have a bus every 2-5 minutes during rush hours. Is it really necessary to have service that frequently? No, but if it can be done at little to no cost, why not? Along Richmond Avenue, the S89 would also add a little bit of frequency for those going up the corridor.
Keep in mind that 4 new stops behind the mall (serving Sears & Macys) would have to be constructed. And the reason I say "constructed" (because most of the time, adding a stop is as simple as drilling a hole, sticking a pole in it, and then pouring concrete in to stabilize it) is because they would have to expand the sidewalk a bit, and add a shelter (which would probably involve taking over a few parking spaces, which shouldn't be too much of an issue. Aside from the holiday season, the mall doesn't have a shortage of parking, and if that's such a big concern, they can add back spots on the other side of the mall, since there would no longer be buses stopping there)
Also, another issue is that the portion of Ring Road between the park-and-ride and TGIF (the restaurant) is only one lane in each direction. Well, you can either widen it in that portion, or just label it a transit mall (meaning, only allow buses in that portion). Here is where I would propose the transit mall. It's only in the portion where the street is one lane in each direction, so that people don't get stuck behind buses and get tempted to pass in the opposite lane, risking an accident. For the cars along that portion, they would have to make their way to Marsh Avenue. A barricade would be put up here (a simple guardrail or some Jersey barriers would do). It's at most, a minute of inconvenience for those drivers, and the bus riders get a huge benefit from this. And it would cost close to nothing, because it would just involve some signage, a single barricade for that one little street, and maybe some red paint on the ground if they want to demarcate it.
Now, to explain the exact restructuring, my plan for the S55/S56 is simple. Instead of having northbound buses turn left onto Marsh Avenue, they would make a left at the light before (which is Ring Road). They would go up Ring Road, serve those two stops by Sears & Macys, and then terminate where they normally do. Going back towards the South Shore, they would pull out of their terminal, make the next right, then make a left onto Ring Road, take that down to Platinum Avenue, make a right, and continue their normal route.
With the S79, it's the same idea: Turn left onto the eastern portion of Ring Road (right now, it turns left onto the western portion. The road makes a "ring" around the mall, hence the name "Ring Road"), serve the two stops by Sears & Macys, and then terminate where it normally does. The routing would be exactly the same as the routing the S55/S56 would take.
Now, with the S44/S59/S94, it gets a little more complicated, because you have a couple of options on what to do. Buses would definitely be turning down the eastern portion of Ring Road, instead of the western portion. The question becomes what to do once you pass Macy's. Buses can either make their way to Marsh Avenue, make a left onto Richmond Hill Road, and then a right on Richmond Avenue, or continue up Ring Road, pass by those apartment buildings near the mall, and then make a left onto Richmond Hill Road, and a right onto Richmond Avenue.
The advantage of running down Marsh Avenue is that you provide more service to the more residential portion of Richmond Hill Road. For instance, the people living in those townhouses off Lamped Loop would have easy access to the Richmond Avenue buses, compared to having them pass by the back of the complex without stopping because there's a fence separating Ring Road from the complex. People living on all those side streets off Richmond Hill Road would benefit as well. The only problem is that it would take a couple of minutes longer to reach the mall, and that extra distance might also make the S44/S94 a bit more unreliable for riders further up the route. (It's 4 more traffic lights to pass through, and 3 more stops to make). The S59 might also have the same issue, but north of the mall, it is supplemented by the S44/S94, whereas the reverse is only true west of Port Richmond).
So that's why my alternate plan is to have the S44/S59/S94 pass continue up Ring Road, and pass by those apartment buildings. (That's the green line in the S44/S59/S94 plan). It still serves the commercial part of Richmond Hill Road (west of approximately Ring Road) while providing a faster ride for those going to and from the mall. (The travel time would be more or less what it is today). That's another issue: If you want to get to or from say, Wendy's or one of those stores along Richmond Hill Road, you have to cross Richmond Avenue to access the southbound buses. It's not a regular street, where you're only crossing a few lanes. You're crossing nine lanes of traffic, plus the two parking lanes (which people sometimes use to make turns). The only business on the western side of Richmond Avenue is Fedex/Kinko's, whereas the eastern side has Radioshack, Marshall's, Wendy's, and many more businesses.
With the S89, we have those same two options: Have it go back to Marsh Avenue, which is slightly longer, or have it take the more direct route straight up Ring Road. The thing is that, being a limited, the only additional stop the S89 would make by serving Marsh Avenue would be the stop at Westport Street, so you're going out of the way to serve an additional stop worth of people. The more I think about it, the more I don't think it's worth it (especially since the nearest S89 stop would be 0.20 miles away), but it's just something to think about. (Keep in mind that the S89 can always take a slightly different route than the S44/S59/S94 if necessary. You could have the S89 serve Marsh Avenue, while the S44/S59/S94 take Ring Road straight down, or vice versa).
Part of the proposal entails constructing a little walkway right around here to allow residents living around Elmwood Park Drive to access the bus stops by Macy's. It would simply entail cutting out a little path (it doesn't even look like you'd have to remove any trees) and pouring some asphalt on it. Then you just remove a portion of that guardrail and you're done. (That would allow the riders to access the southbound stop. For the northbound stop, you can just extend the pathway a little further up)
Questions? Comments? As always, leave 'em below in the comments section.
Adding Limited-Stop Service to the S53
Adding Limited-Stop Service to the S53
As of now, the MTA considers the S93 to be the S53's limited-stop version. Well, to me, that's nonsense, because the S93 has a completely different ridership base than the S53. The S93 doesn't go up to Port Richmond, and doesn't connect to routes like the S48/98 & S46/96, which provide a large portion of the S53's ridership (in other words, a good portion of the S53's ridership is riders transferring from the buses along Forest and Castleton Avenues)
So what I'm proposing is a limited-stop version of the S53 that actually goes up to Port Richmond. It would take on the route shown in this map. It would basically take the S53 route north of Victory Blvd, and the S93 route south of Victory Blvd. It would make local stops north of Victory, and limited stops south of Victory (and the limited stops would be the same ones the S93 currently makes). I would call it the S83 (limited-stop routes are numbered in the 80s & 90s, and S93 was already taken, so I'd call it the S83).
In order to make it more cost-efficient, I would slightly reduce service on the S53, and use it to add service to the S83. So there would be a little less local service, but more overall service in the corridor. So basically, at the times of day when the S53 currently runs every 6 minutes, I'd run the S53 every 8 minutes and S83 every 10 minutes. At the times of day when the S53 runs every 7-8 minutes, I'd run the S53 every 10 minutes and S83 every 12 minutes. At the times of day when the S53 runs every 10 minutes, I'd run the S53 every 12 minutes and the S83 every 15 minutes. At the times of day when the S53 runs at headways greater than 10 minutes, the S83 would not run. Keep in mind that this is going to be the initial headway, and I expect it to result in increased ridership and decreased headways (or in other words, more frequent service along both portions of the route)
I would also restructure the S53 so that, at the times of day when the S83 is running, the S53 would be sent up to the current S54 terminal at Broadway & Richmond Terrace (because keep in mind that I would combine the S42 & S54 as part of a separate proposal, though of course, these proposals don't necessarily have to be implemented simultaneously). I think the S53 would get more usage in that area than the S54 currently does, because it provides a quick connection to the S74/76 (mostly people going towards Park Hill, though people do take it going southbound), the S78/79, as well as the SIR. By contrast, the S54 sees weak usage outside of school hours (well, the route in general is like that, but I'm referring specifically to the portion along Broadway).
Keep in mind that (initially) this would result in slightly reduced frequencies to both Port Richmond (the areas west of Castleton & Broadway. I know technically it includes part of West Brighton, but I'll just refer to it as Port Richmond for simplicity's sake), as well as Grasmere and South Beach. However, keep in mind that there's a difference between what is scheduled and what actually comes. Right now, the fact that the S53 is making every single stop from Richmond Terrace & Park Avenue all the way down to Lily Pond Avenue & McClean Avenue causes serious delays at certain times of the day (and this applies every day). If a Brooklyn-bound bus gets hit with an unusually large load of passengers along Castleton Avenue, it'll likely end up delayed, which means that more passengers pile up further down the line, delaying the bus even further until another bus ends up catching up to it, because it has fewer passengers as a result of the first bus picking most of them up. Then, instead of say, a 10 minute frequency, you have a 20 minute gap, and then 2 buses come simultaneously. Or worse, you have a 20 minute gap, and then a packed bus comes by and passes the stop, and you still have to wait another 5-10 minutes for a bus that has room.
By separating the passengers into different ridership bases, you reduce the probability of such a delay occurring. Instead of every single person (those heading to Bay Ridge, those heading to Park Hill, those heading to Grasmere for the SIR, etc) piling onto the first bus they see, people will wait for the bus that heads to their specific destination. So that way, a delay on the S53 doesn't affect S83 riders, and vice versa. (Well, due to the fact that they basically share the same route between Castleton & Broadway and Targee Street, there might be a little bit of an impact, but either way, it is spread out). Will it eliminate bunching entirely? Unfortunately, no, but it will reduce it greatly.
Keep in mind that there is also the other major benefit is the quicker travel times for those heading from Port Richmond/West Brighton/Sunnyside to Brooklyn. Instead of looping around from Grasmere & South Beach, those riders will have a straight shot to/from Brooklyn along Narrows Road South/North.
A few riders may have to make an additional transfer. Riders traveling between Port Richmond and Grasmere/South Beach will have to make a transfer anywhere between Castleton & Broadway and Targee Street. Keep in mind that riders along Castleton Avenue can take either the S46/S96 or S83 (and that the S96 would see expanded hours under a different proposal of mine).
As always, questions and comments are welcome.
In order to make it more cost-efficient, I would slightly reduce service on the S53, and use it to add service to the S83. So there would be a little less local service, but more overall service in the corridor. So basically, at the times of day when the S53 currently runs every 6 minutes, I'd run the S53 every 8 minutes and S83 every 10 minutes. At the times of day when the S53 runs every 7-8 minutes, I'd run the S53 every 10 minutes and S83 every 12 minutes. At the times of day when the S53 runs every 10 minutes, I'd run the S53 every 12 minutes and the S83 every 15 minutes. At the times of day when the S53 runs at headways greater than 10 minutes, the S83 would not run. Keep in mind that this is going to be the initial headway, and I expect it to result in increased ridership and decreased headways (or in other words, more frequent service along both portions of the route)
I would also restructure the S53 so that, at the times of day when the S83 is running, the S53 would be sent up to the current S54 terminal at Broadway & Richmond Terrace (because keep in mind that I would combine the S42 & S54 as part of a separate proposal, though of course, these proposals don't necessarily have to be implemented simultaneously). I think the S53 would get more usage in that area than the S54 currently does, because it provides a quick connection to the S74/76 (mostly people going towards Park Hill, though people do take it going southbound), the S78/79, as well as the SIR. By contrast, the S54 sees weak usage outside of school hours (well, the route in general is like that, but I'm referring specifically to the portion along Broadway).
Keep in mind that (initially) this would result in slightly reduced frequencies to both Port Richmond (the areas west of Castleton & Broadway. I know technically it includes part of West Brighton, but I'll just refer to it as Port Richmond for simplicity's sake), as well as Grasmere and South Beach. However, keep in mind that there's a difference between what is scheduled and what actually comes. Right now, the fact that the S53 is making every single stop from Richmond Terrace & Park Avenue all the way down to Lily Pond Avenue & McClean Avenue causes serious delays at certain times of the day (and this applies every day). If a Brooklyn-bound bus gets hit with an unusually large load of passengers along Castleton Avenue, it'll likely end up delayed, which means that more passengers pile up further down the line, delaying the bus even further until another bus ends up catching up to it, because it has fewer passengers as a result of the first bus picking most of them up. Then, instead of say, a 10 minute frequency, you have a 20 minute gap, and then 2 buses come simultaneously. Or worse, you have a 20 minute gap, and then a packed bus comes by and passes the stop, and you still have to wait another 5-10 minutes for a bus that has room.
By separating the passengers into different ridership bases, you reduce the probability of such a delay occurring. Instead of every single person (those heading to Bay Ridge, those heading to Park Hill, those heading to Grasmere for the SIR, etc) piling onto the first bus they see, people will wait for the bus that heads to their specific destination. So that way, a delay on the S53 doesn't affect S83 riders, and vice versa. (Well, due to the fact that they basically share the same route between Castleton & Broadway and Targee Street, there might be a little bit of an impact, but either way, it is spread out). Will it eliminate bunching entirely? Unfortunately, no, but it will reduce it greatly.
Keep in mind that there is also the other major benefit is the quicker travel times for those heading from Port Richmond/West Brighton/Sunnyside to Brooklyn. Instead of looping around from Grasmere & South Beach, those riders will have a straight shot to/from Brooklyn along Narrows Road South/North.
A few riders may have to make an additional transfer. Riders traveling between Port Richmond and Grasmere/South Beach will have to make a transfer anywhere between Castleton & Broadway and Targee Street. Keep in mind that riders along Castleton Avenue can take either the S46/S96 or S83 (and that the S96 would see expanded hours under a different proposal of mine).
As always, questions and comments are welcome.
Sunday, December 22, 2013
Providing More Direct, Full-Time Service For Neighborhoods Along the S42 & S54 Routes
Providing More Direct, Full-Time Service For Neighborhoods Along the S42 & S54 Routes
As most of you know, the areas along the S42 & S54 routes were hit hard by the 2010 service reductions. The cuts to the S54 left entire swaths of Westerleigh, Castleton Corners, Meiers Corners, and Great Kills without any weekend service. Meanwhile, the cuts to the S42 left a section of New Brighton without any midday or weekend service.
The problem with the S54 is that ridership is very low, and the cost per passenger is high, but at the same time, for those few people that used it, it was their only transit option. The MTA likes to say "Our guidelines call for riders to be within a half mile of a bus route. It doesn't necessarily have to be a north-south or east-west route". Well, that's easy for them to say. While it may theoretically be possible to make the trip, it's still a heck of a lot easier when you don't have to go all the way out of the way to do it. For instance, say if you're going from the south end of the Todt Hill Houses (Manor & Westwood) over to Forest & Jewett. With the S54, you simply take the bus straight down Manor Road and get off at Forest.
Without the S54, you have to take the S48 to Broadway, take the S53 to Victory Blvd, take the S61/S62 to Manor Road, and then walk almost a half mile down to Westwood Avenue. Let's compare the trip times when the S54 is running to when it's not running. When the S54 isn't running, it doesn't even give you any transit options, because it actually takes longer to use transit than it does to just walk it. (It would be understandable if we were just talking about a 5-10 minute walk, but when Google Transit is telling us to walk over a mile and a quarter, because transit would take longer, that's a serious problem)
Just on a side note, this is an issue in my own neighborhood too (which is one of the issues I'm trying to remedy with the S57/S66 restructuring). For instance, let's look at a trip to Susan Wagner High School. Google Transit gives you the option to take the S44 or S59 going northbound, and then take the S54 or S57 going southbound. So in order to go south, first you have to go north. You could make the trip a little more direct by walking all the way down to Victory Blvd (which is nearly 3/4 of a mile away), but the time saved by the more direct trip is lost with the extra walking. (Note that even taking the S44 or S59, you're still walking almost a half mile, and as I've said before, depending on where exactly in the neighborhood you are, you might even be walking over a half mile)
Now let's forget about the how much more indirect and time-consuming trips are as a result. And let's also forget about the fact that they use a lower-standard for lower-density neighborhoods. (For most neighborhoods, you're supposed to be within a quarter mile of a bus route, but for lower-density neighborhoods, they raise the standard to a half mile). Even using the lowest standards, there are areas where the only available route is the S54.
For instance, the walking distance from Manor Road to Bradley Avenue is 0.60 miles. The cutoff for being within a half-mile of Victory Blvd is Westwood Avenue, so basically, everybody south of Westwood and east of about Fanning Street is left completely without service.
Over in Great Kills, we see that the eastern portion of the neighborhood is left without service on the weekends. They're too far from the SIR, too far from the S74, and definitely too far from the S59. Even in the western portion of the neighborhood, there's still portions further than a half mile from a transit route. And remember that we're using the most basic standard.
If you look at the ridership and cost-efficiency numbers for the Staten Island routes, you'll notice that the most cost-efficient routes go to one of two places: Either St. George, or Brooklyn. And it makes sense when you think about it: St. George is basically Downtown Staten Island. There's a lot of government offices and businesses, but parking is very difficult to find, so a lot of people use mass transit to get there. Then there's the ferry, which brings people to Manhattan. Mass transit is cheaper than paying for parking at the terminal (I think parking is $7 or $8, whereas taking the bus or SIR costs $2.50 and you get a free transfer to use in Manhattan). Not to mention that even for intra-island travel, St. George is a major hub, because you can get to almost any neighborhood on Staten Island with a transfer at St. George. You often see a lot of people making transfers at stops like Victory & Bay, or Bay Street & Borough Place.
For Brooklyn, it's a similar situation: The toll is $6, and parking is probably going to be difficult and/or expensive to find at your destination. (Whether it's Bay Ridge itself, or an area like Downtown Brooklyn)
So logically, if the routes that run to the ferry or Brooklyn are the most cost-efficient (and there's a logical reason why), then the best way to improve ridership on a route is to send it to one of those two destinations. And that's why I came up with the idea to extend the S54 to St. George. By doing so, it would give all of those areas along Manor Road direct access to St. George, while also taking some pressure off the S46 along Castleton Avenue. Most of the time, the S46 is crowded from all the people from points further west, and it could use a supplementary route. My original proposal would've just been to extend it straight down Richmond Terrace (which would also help out the S40 & S44 a little bit), until I later came up with the idea to combine it with the S42 (which I'll get to in a minute). But by doing so, it would improve ridership, and it would be efficient enough to run on the weekends.
Now, with the S42, the issue isn't really that the people are too far from the nearest transit route. The issue is that the area is up a steep hill coming from Jersey Street. (This is coming from York Avenue. There's a slight hill coming up from Jersey Street to York Avenue that you have to climb in addition to the one along Prospect). Coming up from the S44 at Lafayette & Henderson isn't too much better.
So now, how are the S42 & S54 related to each other? They have entirely different ridership bases (I'm sure there's plenty of people on the S54 that don't even know the S42 exists, and vice versa). Well, at first, I didn't see any connection either. I was half-joking around with a friend, and said "The S42 & S54 are kind of close to each other. They should just combine the two and maybe that will save them", in the meantime thinking "This will never work out. Those routes serve entirely different neighborhoods and have entirely different purposes".
Well, remember how I said that extending the S54 to St. George would result in a definite boost in its ridership and efficiency? While doing so, I figured I might as well see if I can benefit additional neighborhoods while doing so. So that's how I came up with the plan to combine the S42 & S54 like so.
The S54 would supplement the S46 along Castleton Avenue between Clove Road and Brighton Avenue, and would also provide direct access to Richmond University Medical Center and I.S.61. Then it would go up Brighton Avenue & Lafayette and serve the neighborhood currently served by the S42. You may also notice that the route goes down Franklin Avenue, which means that people in that area have an alternative to walking all the way down to Richmond Terrace to catch the S40 or S44 (it's not too far distance-wise, and the hill isn't quite as steep as the ones by the S42, but if you can make it easier for people, why not?)
You may have noticed that that stint along Broadway between Castleton Avenue & Richmond Terrace loses service. Well, they'd get it back with my plan to add limited-stop service to the S53 (more on that later). In addition, very few people actually use the S54 in that area, and most of them are/were walking over to Castleton Avenue or Richmond Terrace anyway, because those routes connect to more popular destinations. (The S40/90 & S46/96 go to the ferry, the S53 goes to Brooklyn, and those routes are much more frequent than the S54. In addition, they also offer connections to other major corridors such as the S74/76 on Richmond Road, and the S78/79 on Hylan Blvd). There's also more of a demand to go to areas like Park Hill, Port Richmond & Mariners' Harbor (served by the S53 & S46/96), compared to areas like Westerleigh & Castleton Corners along the S54. And for that matter, the S54 would be going to St. George as well, and the increased ridership will likely lead to improved frequencies at certain times of the day. So even riders going to areas like Westerleigh & Castleton Corners benefit, because now they have more frequent service, not to mention weekend service as I've said before. (And for the schoolkids from Wagner, you can still keep Richmond Terrace & Broadway around as a terminal for the trippers to and from school. Yes, "trippers" is an official term. It basically means "special trips" in MTA jargon)
You may have also noticed that Brighton Avenue between Lafayette Avenue & Jersey Street loses all service. Well, the good thing is that that portion of Brighton Avenue is fairly flat, so riders can still walk over to Jersey Street for the S52, or Lafayette Avenue for the (new and improved) S54 (the distance between the two is 0.30 miles, which means that if you live right in the middle, you're walking 0.15 miles, which is reasonable. Even adding in the block or two that you need to walk to Brighton Avenue, it's still under a quarter mile). In addition, I have a plan that I'm sort of iffy on, which would provide service to Brighton Avenue, in addition to College Avenue in Westerleigh. But that's for another post.
Now, you may have noticed that in my map, I have the S54 terminating at New Dorp instead of Eltingville. The reason for that is because the S57 gets a decent crowd at the New Dorp SIR station, whereas the S54 doesn't get a comparable crowd at the Great Kills SIR station. So by sending it to New Dorp instead of Great Kills, you improve ridership while decreasing milage.
You're probably wondering "What about Great Kills? Didn't he just show that they're more than a half-mile away from service on the weekend, and now he wants to remove service completely?" Well, I've got them covered as well, and similarly to S54 riders on the northern end, they're going to have improved access to destinations they actually want to get to. My plan entails creating a branch of the S79 (let's call it S79A) that serves Great Kills. I've drawn a map of it here.
Remember how I said that the most efficient routes go to St. George or Brooklyn? Well, Great Kills is now served by a route that goes to Brooklyn (which of course, would run 7 days a week). In addition, the S79A would provide a direct connection to the Staten Island Mall, Eltingville Transit Center, and shopping along Hylan Blvd, especially in the New Dorp area. As of now, the S54 doesn't really provide access to any area that would be of interest to most Great Kills residents. Yeah, it provides access to Seaview Hospital, and access to shopping in Castleton Corners and West Brighton, but most people in Great Kills aren't looking to go there. Most of them do their shopping along Hylan Blvd, and at the SI Mall, and I'm sure some would take advantage of the direct connection to Brooklyn. Not to mention that at the SI Mall, you not only have shopping, but you also have connections to other bus routes, which opens up easier access to other parts of Staten Island (even if there's relatively few people looking to go there)
And as an added bonus, local riders along Hylan Blvd get additional service. One of the major issues with the +Select Bus Service+ on the S79 was that the local stops along Hylan Blvd only have the S78 serving them. The S78 generally runs every 15 minutes for most of the day, which wouldn't be a huge issue, except for the fact that it can be unreliable at times. You have traffic on certain portions of Hylan Blvd (especially in the New Dorp area, but the whole stretch from New Dorp up to Arrochar can be a mess at times), and on top of that, if there's any problems in the Stapleton/Clifton/Rosebank area, you're basically screwed. So now, at least they'd have a little bit of a backup. (The S79A would run every 20-30 minutes most of the day, which isn't the greatest, but combine that with the S78's headways, and it becomes more reasonable).
Keep in mind that I plan on changing the routings of the routes around the Staten Island Mall (again, for another post), but for now, I have the S79A taking the current S79 route by the SI Mall.
As always, questions and comments are welcome.
As most of you know, the areas along the S42 & S54 routes were hit hard by the 2010 service reductions. The cuts to the S54 left entire swaths of Westerleigh, Castleton Corners, Meiers Corners, and Great Kills without any weekend service. Meanwhile, the cuts to the S42 left a section of New Brighton without any midday or weekend service.
The problem with the S54 is that ridership is very low, and the cost per passenger is high, but at the same time, for those few people that used it, it was their only transit option. The MTA likes to say "Our guidelines call for riders to be within a half mile of a bus route. It doesn't necessarily have to be a north-south or east-west route". Well, that's easy for them to say. While it may theoretically be possible to make the trip, it's still a heck of a lot easier when you don't have to go all the way out of the way to do it. For instance, say if you're going from the south end of the Todt Hill Houses (Manor & Westwood) over to Forest & Jewett. With the S54, you simply take the bus straight down Manor Road and get off at Forest.
Without the S54, you have to take the S48 to Broadway, take the S53 to Victory Blvd, take the S61/S62 to Manor Road, and then walk almost a half mile down to Westwood Avenue. Let's compare the trip times when the S54 is running to when it's not running. When the S54 isn't running, it doesn't even give you any transit options, because it actually takes longer to use transit than it does to just walk it. (It would be understandable if we were just talking about a 5-10 minute walk, but when Google Transit is telling us to walk over a mile and a quarter, because transit would take longer, that's a serious problem)
Just on a side note, this is an issue in my own neighborhood too (which is one of the issues I'm trying to remedy with the S57/S66 restructuring). For instance, let's look at a trip to Susan Wagner High School. Google Transit gives you the option to take the S44 or S59 going northbound, and then take the S54 or S57 going southbound. So in order to go south, first you have to go north. You could make the trip a little more direct by walking all the way down to Victory Blvd (which is nearly 3/4 of a mile away), but the time saved by the more direct trip is lost with the extra walking. (Note that even taking the S44 or S59, you're still walking almost a half mile, and as I've said before, depending on where exactly in the neighborhood you are, you might even be walking over a half mile)
Now let's forget about the how much more indirect and time-consuming trips are as a result. And let's also forget about the fact that they use a lower-standard for lower-density neighborhoods. (For most neighborhoods, you're supposed to be within a quarter mile of a bus route, but for lower-density neighborhoods, they raise the standard to a half mile). Even using the lowest standards, there are areas where the only available route is the S54.
For instance, the walking distance from Manor Road to Bradley Avenue is 0.60 miles. The cutoff for being within a half-mile of Victory Blvd is Westwood Avenue, so basically, everybody south of Westwood and east of about Fanning Street is left completely without service.
Over in Great Kills, we see that the eastern portion of the neighborhood is left without service on the weekends. They're too far from the SIR, too far from the S74, and definitely too far from the S59. Even in the western portion of the neighborhood, there's still portions further than a half mile from a transit route. And remember that we're using the most basic standard.
If you look at the ridership and cost-efficiency numbers for the Staten Island routes, you'll notice that the most cost-efficient routes go to one of two places: Either St. George, or Brooklyn. And it makes sense when you think about it: St. George is basically Downtown Staten Island. There's a lot of government offices and businesses, but parking is very difficult to find, so a lot of people use mass transit to get there. Then there's the ferry, which brings people to Manhattan. Mass transit is cheaper than paying for parking at the terminal (I think parking is $7 or $8, whereas taking the bus or SIR costs $2.50 and you get a free transfer to use in Manhattan). Not to mention that even for intra-island travel, St. George is a major hub, because you can get to almost any neighborhood on Staten Island with a transfer at St. George. You often see a lot of people making transfers at stops like Victory & Bay, or Bay Street & Borough Place.
For Brooklyn, it's a similar situation: The toll is $6, and parking is probably going to be difficult and/or expensive to find at your destination. (Whether it's Bay Ridge itself, or an area like Downtown Brooklyn)
So logically, if the routes that run to the ferry or Brooklyn are the most cost-efficient (and there's a logical reason why), then the best way to improve ridership on a route is to send it to one of those two destinations. And that's why I came up with the idea to extend the S54 to St. George. By doing so, it would give all of those areas along Manor Road direct access to St. George, while also taking some pressure off the S46 along Castleton Avenue. Most of the time, the S46 is crowded from all the people from points further west, and it could use a supplementary route. My original proposal would've just been to extend it straight down Richmond Terrace (which would also help out the S40 & S44 a little bit), until I later came up with the idea to combine it with the S42 (which I'll get to in a minute). But by doing so, it would improve ridership, and it would be efficient enough to run on the weekends.
Now, with the S42, the issue isn't really that the people are too far from the nearest transit route. The issue is that the area is up a steep hill coming from Jersey Street. (This is coming from York Avenue. There's a slight hill coming up from Jersey Street to York Avenue that you have to climb in addition to the one along Prospect). Coming up from the S44 at Lafayette & Henderson isn't too much better.
So now, how are the S42 & S54 related to each other? They have entirely different ridership bases (I'm sure there's plenty of people on the S54 that don't even know the S42 exists, and vice versa). Well, at first, I didn't see any connection either. I was half-joking around with a friend, and said "The S42 & S54 are kind of close to each other. They should just combine the two and maybe that will save them", in the meantime thinking "This will never work out. Those routes serve entirely different neighborhoods and have entirely different purposes".
Well, remember how I said that extending the S54 to St. George would result in a definite boost in its ridership and efficiency? While doing so, I figured I might as well see if I can benefit additional neighborhoods while doing so. So that's how I came up with the plan to combine the S42 & S54 like so.
The S54 would supplement the S46 along Castleton Avenue between Clove Road and Brighton Avenue, and would also provide direct access to Richmond University Medical Center and I.S.61. Then it would go up Brighton Avenue & Lafayette and serve the neighborhood currently served by the S42. You may also notice that the route goes down Franklin Avenue, which means that people in that area have an alternative to walking all the way down to Richmond Terrace to catch the S40 or S44 (it's not too far distance-wise, and the hill isn't quite as steep as the ones by the S42, but if you can make it easier for people, why not?)
You may have noticed that that stint along Broadway between Castleton Avenue & Richmond Terrace loses service. Well, they'd get it back with my plan to add limited-stop service to the S53 (more on that later). In addition, very few people actually use the S54 in that area, and most of them are/were walking over to Castleton Avenue or Richmond Terrace anyway, because those routes connect to more popular destinations. (The S40/90 & S46/96 go to the ferry, the S53 goes to Brooklyn, and those routes are much more frequent than the S54. In addition, they also offer connections to other major corridors such as the S74/76 on Richmond Road, and the S78/79 on Hylan Blvd). There's also more of a demand to go to areas like Park Hill, Port Richmond & Mariners' Harbor (served by the S53 & S46/96), compared to areas like Westerleigh & Castleton Corners along the S54. And for that matter, the S54 would be going to St. George as well, and the increased ridership will likely lead to improved frequencies at certain times of the day. So even riders going to areas like Westerleigh & Castleton Corners benefit, because now they have more frequent service, not to mention weekend service as I've said before. (And for the schoolkids from Wagner, you can still keep Richmond Terrace & Broadway around as a terminal for the trippers to and from school. Yes, "trippers" is an official term. It basically means "special trips" in MTA jargon)
You may have also noticed that Brighton Avenue between Lafayette Avenue & Jersey Street loses all service. Well, the good thing is that that portion of Brighton Avenue is fairly flat, so riders can still walk over to Jersey Street for the S52, or Lafayette Avenue for the (new and improved) S54 (the distance between the two is 0.30 miles, which means that if you live right in the middle, you're walking 0.15 miles, which is reasonable. Even adding in the block or two that you need to walk to Brighton Avenue, it's still under a quarter mile). In addition, I have a plan that I'm sort of iffy on, which would provide service to Brighton Avenue, in addition to College Avenue in Westerleigh. But that's for another post.
Now, you may have noticed that in my map, I have the S54 terminating at New Dorp instead of Eltingville. The reason for that is because the S57 gets a decent crowd at the New Dorp SIR station, whereas the S54 doesn't get a comparable crowd at the Great Kills SIR station. So by sending it to New Dorp instead of Great Kills, you improve ridership while decreasing milage.
You're probably wondering "What about Great Kills? Didn't he just show that they're more than a half-mile away from service on the weekend, and now he wants to remove service completely?" Well, I've got them covered as well, and similarly to S54 riders on the northern end, they're going to have improved access to destinations they actually want to get to. My plan entails creating a branch of the S79 (let's call it S79A) that serves Great Kills. I've drawn a map of it here.
Remember how I said that the most efficient routes go to St. George or Brooklyn? Well, Great Kills is now served by a route that goes to Brooklyn (which of course, would run 7 days a week). In addition, the S79A would provide a direct connection to the Staten Island Mall, Eltingville Transit Center, and shopping along Hylan Blvd, especially in the New Dorp area. As of now, the S54 doesn't really provide access to any area that would be of interest to most Great Kills residents. Yeah, it provides access to Seaview Hospital, and access to shopping in Castleton Corners and West Brighton, but most people in Great Kills aren't looking to go there. Most of them do their shopping along Hylan Blvd, and at the SI Mall, and I'm sure some would take advantage of the direct connection to Brooklyn. Not to mention that at the SI Mall, you not only have shopping, but you also have connections to other bus routes, which opens up easier access to other parts of Staten Island (even if there's relatively few people looking to go there)
And as an added bonus, local riders along Hylan Blvd get additional service. One of the major issues with the +Select Bus Service+ on the S79 was that the local stops along Hylan Blvd only have the S78 serving them. The S78 generally runs every 15 minutes for most of the day, which wouldn't be a huge issue, except for the fact that it can be unreliable at times. You have traffic on certain portions of Hylan Blvd (especially in the New Dorp area, but the whole stretch from New Dorp up to Arrochar can be a mess at times), and on top of that, if there's any problems in the Stapleton/Clifton/Rosebank area, you're basically screwed. So now, at least they'd have a little bit of a backup. (The S79A would run every 20-30 minutes most of the day, which isn't the greatest, but combine that with the S78's headways, and it becomes more reasonable).
Keep in mind that I plan on changing the routings of the routes around the Staten Island Mall (again, for another post), but for now, I have the S79A taking the current S79 route by the SI Mall.
As always, questions and comments are welcome.
Saturday, December 21, 2013
Extending S62 short-turns from CSI to Richmond Avenue
As most of you probably know, the S62 (and its limited-stop counterpart, the S92) run the full length of Victory Blvd, from St. George to Travis. However, not all buses go as far as Travis. A good portion only go as far as the College of Staten Island.
What I want is for the CSI short-turns to continue down to Richmond Avenue. This would provide more frequent service for those looking to connect to the bus routes along Richmond Avenue, as well as take some pressure off of the S62s going to and from Travis. (Because currently, those are the only S62s that make that connection).
The S62 was transferred to the Yukon bus depot a couple of years ago, which is where the S44/94 and S61/91 terminate, just south of the SI Mall. So in the afternoon rush hour, you have a lot of buses that end at CSI, and then continue down Victory Blvd to Richmond Avenue, make a left on Richmond, and continue down to the depot. Now, along Richmond Avenue, the service is generally frequent heading towards the mall, so while it would be nice if the buses operated in service all the way down to the mall, it's not really necessary. However, what is necessary is for those buses to at least continue to make all stops until Richmond Avenue. Buses could drop passengers off at the southbound stop at Richmond & Victory (in front of Dunkin' Donuts), and then go out of service and make their way to the depot.
There are some S62s that terminate at CSI, and then start another trip towards St. George. I propose to simply extend those buses to Richmond Avenue. Buses would make a left from Victory onto Richmond, drop off their passengers, then make a right onto Clifton Street and take their break. (Conveniently, it's right by Dunkin' Donuts, so drivers can actually get a coffee on their break. Both the drivers and the passengers benefit from this!) And there's also other stores like McDonald's across the street, and a bunch of stores at the Coral Lane Shopping Center.
Now, obviously, the main purpose of any extension should always to benefit the passengers. But you have to admit that it's nice when it benefits the drivers as well.
So anyway, when the driver is finished with his break, he (or she) would go down Clifton Street, make a right on Jones, and then another right on Victory, making the first stop at the current eastbound S62/S92/X11 stop at Victory & Richmond (because Richmond Avenue is so wide, there's actually one stop by Dunkin' Donuts, and one on the other side of Richmond by the HSBC bank).
An alternative is to have the buses continue to Arlene Street, make a right, then make a right on Merrill and end by Moore Catholic High School (there's currently one trip per day that starts there, school days only). Then buses can start up, go down Merrill, make a right on Richmond, a left on Victory, and then continue their normal route. This would have the buses using wider streets, compared to Clifton & Jones, which are narrower. However, it would probably cost a little bit more money, and the amount of ridership generated from the additional distance traveled would be fairly low, so it would probably be better just having them end right at Victory & Richmond. (Keep in mind that this alternative would benefit me personally, by cutting a quarter mile off my walk down to Victory, so I'm being not at all callous when I say this).
The one disadvantage of this extension is that Victory Blvd between Richmond Avenue & CSI can get backed up in the eastbound direction, which delays the buses for people further down the line. However, during rush hour, there's the S93, which starts at CSI, so if the S62 is backed up, they have the S93 (which they can take into Brooklyn, or transfer to the S61 if they're heading east of Clove Road). For ferry-bound riders, there's a special shuttle from CSI to St. George, which runs nonstop, so most of those ferry-bound CSI students are taking that shuttle anyway.
Keep in mind that the S93 also serves all of the areas between CSI & Clove Road (and is set to get midday service next year), and then east of Jewett, you have the S61 & S66 to get to the ferry. So between all of those alternatives, you have some leeway to handle any possible delays on the S62.
On the weekends (Saturdays in particular, since there's no short-turns on Sundays), traffic along that portion of Victory is generally pretty light, and in addition, there aren't too many CSI kids (I used to take College Now classes at CSI on Saturdays). So the extension wouldn't have too much of an impact on reliability. In addition, if they tinkered with the schedule a little bit, it wouldn't require additional buses or drivers, and would cost very little.
However, while this is going on, there should be an increase in the number of runs going out to Travis. For starters, I believe that all runs leaving St. George from about 3:00PM to 4:30PM should be running to Travis. A lot of times, these buses run late because they have to deal with the loads from the ferry, plus everybody who wants to go to Travis. I've seen buses get to Richmond Avenue 15-20 minutes late because of delays due to crowding (well, traffic can get bad too in the area between Slosson & Jewett, but that's only part of the reason for the delay). At least by having more buses running to Travis, the crowds are spread out more evenly.
Then, apparently somebody thinks it's a good idea to have the buses coming from Travis arrive at St. George at 10:02AM, 10:32AM, and 11:02AM. The schedule should either be redone so that the Travis buses arrive 10-15 minutes before the ferry, or more buses need to come from Travis at that time. There's also a long gap between the 7:55AM S92 (which arrives at 8:37, catching the 8:45 ferry), and the 8:20AM S62 (which misses the 9:00AM ferry by about 5 minutes) Either the 8:23 S62 from CSI should start from Travis, or the 8:20 S62 should start a few minutes earlier, and run as an S92 to allow riders to catch the ferry. Actually, that might be a good idea for the 9:20, 9:50, and 10:20 buses (leave a few minutes earlier and run as an S92).
What I want is for the CSI short-turns to continue down to Richmond Avenue. This would provide more frequent service for those looking to connect to the bus routes along Richmond Avenue, as well as take some pressure off of the S62s going to and from Travis. (Because currently, those are the only S62s that make that connection).
The S62 was transferred to the Yukon bus depot a couple of years ago, which is where the S44/94 and S61/91 terminate, just south of the SI Mall. So in the afternoon rush hour, you have a lot of buses that end at CSI, and then continue down Victory Blvd to Richmond Avenue, make a left on Richmond, and continue down to the depot. Now, along Richmond Avenue, the service is generally frequent heading towards the mall, so while it would be nice if the buses operated in service all the way down to the mall, it's not really necessary. However, what is necessary is for those buses to at least continue to make all stops until Richmond Avenue. Buses could drop passengers off at the southbound stop at Richmond & Victory (in front of Dunkin' Donuts), and then go out of service and make their way to the depot.
There are some S62s that terminate at CSI, and then start another trip towards St. George. I propose to simply extend those buses to Richmond Avenue. Buses would make a left from Victory onto Richmond, drop off their passengers, then make a right onto Clifton Street and take their break. (Conveniently, it's right by Dunkin' Donuts, so drivers can actually get a coffee on their break. Both the drivers and the passengers benefit from this!) And there's also other stores like McDonald's across the street, and a bunch of stores at the Coral Lane Shopping Center.
Now, obviously, the main purpose of any extension should always to benefit the passengers. But you have to admit that it's nice when it benefits the drivers as well.
So anyway, when the driver is finished with his break, he (or she) would go down Clifton Street, make a right on Jones, and then another right on Victory, making the first stop at the current eastbound S62/S92/X11 stop at Victory & Richmond (because Richmond Avenue is so wide, there's actually one stop by Dunkin' Donuts, and one on the other side of Richmond by the HSBC bank).
An alternative is to have the buses continue to Arlene Street, make a right, then make a right on Merrill and end by Moore Catholic High School (there's currently one trip per day that starts there, school days only). Then buses can start up, go down Merrill, make a right on Richmond, a left on Victory, and then continue their normal route. This would have the buses using wider streets, compared to Clifton & Jones, which are narrower. However, it would probably cost a little bit more money, and the amount of ridership generated from the additional distance traveled would be fairly low, so it would probably be better just having them end right at Victory & Richmond. (Keep in mind that this alternative would benefit me personally, by cutting a quarter mile off my walk down to Victory, so I'm being not at all callous when I say this).
The one disadvantage of this extension is that Victory Blvd between Richmond Avenue & CSI can get backed up in the eastbound direction, which delays the buses for people further down the line. However, during rush hour, there's the S93, which starts at CSI, so if the S62 is backed up, they have the S93 (which they can take into Brooklyn, or transfer to the S61 if they're heading east of Clove Road). For ferry-bound riders, there's a special shuttle from CSI to St. George, which runs nonstop, so most of those ferry-bound CSI students are taking that shuttle anyway.
Keep in mind that the S93 also serves all of the areas between CSI & Clove Road (and is set to get midday service next year), and then east of Jewett, you have the S61 & S66 to get to the ferry. So between all of those alternatives, you have some leeway to handle any possible delays on the S62.
On the weekends (Saturdays in particular, since there's no short-turns on Sundays), traffic along that portion of Victory is generally pretty light, and in addition, there aren't too many CSI kids (I used to take College Now classes at CSI on Saturdays). So the extension wouldn't have too much of an impact on reliability. In addition, if they tinkered with the schedule a little bit, it wouldn't require additional buses or drivers, and would cost very little.
However, while this is going on, there should be an increase in the number of runs going out to Travis. For starters, I believe that all runs leaving St. George from about 3:00PM to 4:30PM should be running to Travis. A lot of times, these buses run late because they have to deal with the loads from the ferry, plus everybody who wants to go to Travis. I've seen buses get to Richmond Avenue 15-20 minutes late because of delays due to crowding (well, traffic can get bad too in the area between Slosson & Jewett, but that's only part of the reason for the delay). At least by having more buses running to Travis, the crowds are spread out more evenly.
Then, apparently somebody thinks it's a good idea to have the buses coming from Travis arrive at St. George at 10:02AM, 10:32AM, and 11:02AM. The schedule should either be redone so that the Travis buses arrive 10-15 minutes before the ferry, or more buses need to come from Travis at that time. There's also a long gap between the 7:55AM S92 (which arrives at 8:37, catching the 8:45 ferry), and the 8:20AM S62 (which misses the 9:00AM ferry by about 5 minutes) Either the 8:23 S62 from CSI should start from Travis, or the 8:20 S62 should start a few minutes earlier, and run as an S92 to allow riders to catch the ferry. Actually, that might be a good idea for the 9:20, 9:50, and 10:20 buses (leave a few minutes earlier and run as an S92).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)