SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   New York City - Transit News (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=154524)

NYC4Life Nov 21, 2010 8:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K (Post 5059394)
When would Staten Island get a decent connection....

Perhaps, by extending the 1 line to a new tunnel beyond the South Ferry station in Lower Manhattan to St. George on Staten Island. That will allow for connections with the Staten Island Railway, the Staten Island terminus of the ferry and Richmond County ballpark.

Busy Bee Nov 21, 2010 3:37 PM

No way. No how.

k1052 Nov 21, 2010 8:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYC4Life (Post 5063932)
Perhaps, by extending the 1 line to a new tunnel beyond the South Ferry station in Lower Manhattan to St. George on Staten Island. That will allow for connections with the Staten Island Railway, the Staten Island terminus of the ferry and Richmond County ballpark.

I can only imagine the many many billions that would cost. Probably better to wait for the Bayonne Bridge replacement and include rail in the design and go into Manhattan through the PATH tunnels.

NYC4Life Nov 23, 2010 3:10 PM

WABC-TV New York / Associated Press

Christie says he'd consider helping fund subway link
Updated at 08:42 AM today

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?se...ork&id=7805339

Quote:

TRENTON -- Gov. Chris Christie, who halted construction last month on a new commuter rail tunnel between New Jersey and New York City, said Monday that he would consider contributing to a cheaper alternative: extending New York's No. 7 subway line under the Hudson River to New Jersey.

Speaking on Millennium Radio's "Ask the Governor" program Monday night, Christie said extending the No. 7 line from Manhattan through Hoboken and onto Secaucus is "a much better idea" than the tunnel that was the nation's most expensive public works project.

Christie scrapped that project because of potential cost overruns, forfeiting $3 billion in federal funds that had been approved. New Jersey could be on the hook to repay the federal government $350 million already spent.

Christie said he hadn't yet spoken with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg about the proposal. Policymakers in Bloomberg's office have been discussing whether it would be possible to extend the line.
"This is an example of what can happen when you decide to take a strong, principled stand on something," Christie said. "If something is necessary, people find other ideas that are more equitable."

Christie said the proposed subway extension has three points in its favor: It would be cheaper than the scrapped tunnel, it would connect to Penn Station and Grand Central Station and would have funding from New York City and state.

He then chided Sen. Frank Lautenberg for not speaking up on behalf of the new idea. Lautenberg helped secure federal funding for the rail tunnel.

The $8.7 billion project to construct a second rail tunnel between New Jersey and New York was 15 years in the making when Christie killed it Oct. 27. Former Gov. Jon Corzine broke ground on the project amid his re-election campaign against Christie.

Christie later accused the former governor of rushing the start of the project for political gain; Corzine said he was creating jobs.

New Jersey was expected to shoulder $2.7 billion of the costs, plus overruns. The federal government and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey had each committed $3 billion to the project.

Before the most recent idea goes anywhere, it would need support from Christie, Bloomberg, who's an independent, and New York Gov.-elect Andrew M. Cuomo, a Democrat. U.S. Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., offered his support in obtaining federal funds to make the idea work.



(Copyright ©2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

NYC4Life Nov 23, 2010 3:13 PM

WABC-TV New York

New York City considering bike-sharing plan
Updated at 06:18 AM today

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?se...ork&id=7805168

Quote:

NEW YORK (WABC) -- Critics say there are too many bicycles wheeling around New York City. But now, there are plans for a bike-sharing program that could put thousands more on the streets.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to push ahead with the plans Tuesday, launching an effort that could make thousands of bicycles available for public use.

The city is reportedly set to request proposals from companies interested in running kiosks to rent the bikes. If those kiosks become a reality, New York would join a string of American cities now trying out similar measures.

A bike-sharing program in Washington, D.C. started in September. A day pass costs just $5, with annual membership going for $75.
But in New York City, there are concerns that too many bikes are already roaming the streets. The NYPD is in the middle of a crackdown on cyclists, issuing large amounts of summonses to delivery people, pedicab drivers and regular commuters.

"People are extremely frustrated, they're nervous," New York City Councilman Daniel Garodnick said. "It's a dangerous situation, and that's why it's important that police have stepped it up and done some strong enforcement out here."

If implemented, the bike-sharing plan would take effect next year.



(Copyright ©2010 WABC-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)

k1052 Nov 23, 2010 4:10 PM

It will be 20+ years before a 7 train extension to Secaucus could come to fruition. The MTA should focus on Metro-North, LIRR, and improvements to the subways. Leave NJ to suffer the consequences of their own bad choices.

M II A II R II K Nov 23, 2010 4:13 PM

Regardless of extra cost the tunnel should be commuter rail to traverse long distances, not a short range rapid transit line to go through it, unless it was thrown in, in addition to a commuter rail line.

Dac150 Nov 23, 2010 4:27 PM

Am I the only one who isn't digging those new taxi proposals?

Busy Bee Nov 23, 2010 8:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 5066544)
It will be 20+ years before a 7 train extension to Secaucus could come to fruition. The MTA should focus on Metro-North, LIRR, and improvements to the subways. Leave NJ to suffer the consequences of their own bad choices.

I'm not sure the region, like the country, has the luxury to make transport policy based on absurd, meaningless jurisdictional lines and worse yet, fueled by revenge and contempt for literal neighbors and shared benefactors. Such protocol will just accelerate our non-competitiveness to ______________(fill in the blank with any number of developed and emerging centers of business and commerce - the list is long).

k1052 Nov 23, 2010 8:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 5066937)
I'm not sure the region, like the country, has the luxury to make transport policy based on absurd, meaningless jurisdictional lines and worse yet, fueled by revenge and contempt for literal neighbors and shared benefactors. Such protocol will just accelerate our non-competitiveness to ______________(fill in the blank with any number of developed and emerging centers of business and commerce - the list is long).

That's already been done and NJ did it. The possbility of any new service is dead for two decades until Amtrak decides to build new tunnels and NJT piggy backs along.

I just see no reason for the MTA to expend their limited resources in this area at present when they have a number of other worthy projects that have been on the sidelines for much longer.

Crawford Nov 23, 2010 9:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 5066544)
It will be 20+ years before a 7 train extension to Secaucus could come to fruition. The MTA should focus on Metro-North, LIRR, and improvements to the subways. Leave NJ to suffer the consequences of their own bad choices.

It wouldn't even take a decade to build.

Even the ARC project, which is much more ambitious, wouldn't take a decade.

Much of the 7 train extension would be on the surface, paralleling the Amtrak-NJ Transit line.

k1052 Nov 23, 2010 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 5067065)
It wouldn't even take a decade to build.

Even the ARC project, which is much more ambitious, wouldn't take a decade.

Much of the 7 train extension would be on the surface, paralleling the Amtrak-NJ Transit line.

Engineering, multiple EIS, alternatives analysis, public hearings, funding agreements, etc...

If all that was in hand at this moment you'd be right, actual construction would only take a few years. But it isn't.

Crawford Nov 24, 2010 1:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 5067177)
Engineering, multiple EIS, alternatives analysis, public hearings, funding agreements, etc...

If all that was in hand at this moment you'd be right, actual construction would only take a few years. But it isn't.

Again, no, it doesn't take anywhere close to that long.

The ARC doesn't take 10 years.

Even the current 7 train extension is taking about 7-8 years from start to finish.

k1052 Nov 24, 2010 3:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 5067383)
Again, no, it doesn't take anywhere close to that long.

The ARC doesn't take 10 years.

Even the current 7 train extension is taking about 7-8 years from start to finish.

NJT's own construction timetable was 9 years.

The project itself was first put forth around 1995 and wouldn't have be done until 2018 at the earliest.

Nexis4Jersey Nov 24, 2010 3:47 AM

Yes , but this plan is short sighted since NJT can't expand its network west and south. I wish Politicians would shut there mouths and think , projects that sound good aren't always good in Real life. :hell:

Busy Bee Nov 24, 2010 4:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 5067533)
The project itself was first put forth around 1995 and wouldn't have be done until 2018 at the earliest.


Early talk ≠ Aggressive planning and preparation

k1052 Nov 24, 2010 4:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 5067585)
Early talk ≠ Aggressive planning and preparation

We would be at the "early talk" stage of any possible 7 line extension.

Phil_North Nov 25, 2010 5:40 AM

7 line extension
 
According to nycsubway.org, this is not the first time an extension the NYC subway to NJ has been proposed.

http://www.nycsubway.org/articles/erj-1926-njplan.html

Here is an excerpt:

Quote:

Principal features of a comprehensive plan for passenger transportation between communities in the nine northern counties of New Jersey and the city of New York are outlined in a report submitted on Jan. 15 to the Legislature of the state by the North Jersey Transit Commission. A preliminary report presented about a year ago was abstracted in Electric Railway Journal for Feb. 7, 1925, page 222. The ultimate object of the program recommended is the creation of a new electric railway system comprising 82.6 miles of route, and the electrification of 399 route-miles of railroad now operated by steam. As the first step it is proposed to construct an interstate loop line 17.3 miles in length connecting with all of the north Jersey commuters' railroads and passing under the Hudson River into New York City by two tunnels, one uptown and one downtown. A new low-level subway through Manhattan would complete the loop. Construction costs of this preliminary project are estimated at $154,000,000, with $40,000,000 additional for equipment. The cost of power facilities is not included in this estimate.

In developing the plan three separate problems were considered. The first was to furnish rapid transit facilities for the area within 20 miles of New York City and to connect this area with Manhattan by facilities providing service comparable to that of present subways. The second problem was to provide eventually for a commuter or suburban transit service for the area within 40 miles of New York City. The third was to utilize the existing rapid transit facilities, the Hudson & Manhattan, the Interborough and the Brooklyn-Manhattan systems to serve North Jersey more effectively than at present.

As the result of the study of these problems the commission has recommended a program consisting of six principal parts. Listed in the order of their importance, they are as follows: (1) Construction of a new North Jersey rapid transit system. (2) Hudson & Manhattan Railroad extensions in New Jersey. (3) Interborough extensions of its Manhattan lines to New Jersey. (4) Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit system extensions from Manhattan to New Jersey. (5) Extension of north Jersey rapid transit system, listed as part one of this program, to serve a larger area. (6) Electrification of existing steam railroads.

Busy Bee Nov 25, 2010 5:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150 (Post 5066572)
Am I the only one who isn't digging those new taxi proposals?

I think the consensus is that, with the exception of the Turkish entry which doesn't have a chance of winning, the proposals are very underwhelming. Taxi of the future? Yeah, sure. The only standing American company, Ford, is proposing a slightly modified panel van in the Transit Connect which just recently started sales in the US. The argument is that the NY metro taxi vehicle market and the entire US market isn't large enough to warrant a specialized and purpose built vehicle and the expense factory tooling to manufacture them. I say that's bunk. How and why did Checker do it then and last sooo many years? How to NA transit bus manufacturers who build 500-2000 buses a year do it? What should have occurred here is domestic innovation coming out of the woodwork, including industrial designers and then partnering with major manufacturers. Instead, one US company, who apparently barely made an effort is the likely winner. And the competition was called Taxi of the Future? How hard is it really to change up your body styling and incorporate A/V features like the Turkish bid? It appears they barely got off the couch for this one. A shocking lack of imagination. Pathetic.

NYC4Life Nov 26, 2010 6:16 PM

10:03 AM
Report: TLC Considers Dress Code For Cabbies
By: NY1 News

http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stori...de-for-cabbies

Quote:

While riders may not pay much attention to how their cabbie is dressed, the city reportedly wants taxi drivers to take better stock of their own appearance.

The New York Times says the Taxi and Limousine Commission is planning a new dress code for cabbies that would require them to "present a professional appearance.''

The current dress code bans tube shirts, tank tops and bathing trunks -- with fines for violators.

But the revised code doesn't mention specific types of clothing.

TLC chairman David Yassky tells the Times that while enforcement may prove difficult, the new code is more of an attempt to establish standards.

The code changes are expected to be approved next month.



Copyright © 2010 NY1 News. All rights reserved.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.