6 ms·

The East Side needs another subway badly - this will be a great benefit to a great city. Thanks for this link! New York Magazine has an article that fills in s

The East Side needs another subway badly - this will be a great benefit to a great city. Thanks for this link! New York Magazine has an article that fills in some more of the historical and political context: http://nymag.com/print/?/nymetro/news/features/n_10109/ http://nymag.com/print/?/nymetro/news/features/n_10109/ Slightly related: As a transport geek, I'm a fan of subways everywhere. I recommend London's excellent Transport Museum in Covent Garden for a great historical perspective on how tunnels and public transportation gets built. http://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/ http://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/

melling 14y ago
NJ<->NYC needs another "subway" tunnel pretty badly too. Ferrying people in and out with buses has reached its limit.
- _delirium 14y ago
  There's a project currently in planning stages that is supposed to upgrade the 11-mile section of century-old infrastructure between Newark and NYC, improving both Amtrak and NJ Transit service. It'd add a new Hudson River tunnel, a faster modern routing through the Meadowlands, and expand Penn Station into the old James Farley Post Office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Project
  - melling 14y ago
    None of that will move people off of buses to a subway or train. The proposal of extending the 7 line to NJ, for example, would certainly help.
    - _delirium 14y ago
      If I understand correctly, the NJ Transit trans-Hudson services have been at maximum capacity for years, so they could carry more riders if they were able to add more trains at peak times, but without a new tunnel (and probably more platforms) it's just not possible to run more trains.
  - yummyfajitas 14y ago
    The gateway tunnel has been postponed indefinitely. But no worries, apparently the only reason the Gateway Tunnel was necessary was because the MTA previously refused to run things efficiently. http://transportationnation.org/2012/06/14/ny-mta-chief-says-railroads-need-to-work-together-to-overcome-maxed-out-hudson-river-crossings/ http://transportationnation.org/2012/06/14/ny-mta-chief-says... Also interesting: "The Regional Plan Association, which held the conference at which Lhota spoke, and other advocacy groups have expressed support for through-running—at least until Gateway Tunnel gets built." I.e., they want to be more efficient, but only as a stopgap measure until the tunnel is built. (Also check out Market Urbanism's blog post on the topic: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ycccmptVdFgJ:marketurbanism.com/2012/06/18/new-york-transit-officials-grudgingly-consider-using-existing-track-more-efficiency/+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ycccmpt... )
    - _delirium 14y ago
      Interesting. I suppose there are not high odds that these multiple systems will ever get integrated into one regional agency, the way the various NYC subways were eventually merged into the MTA and interconnected?
    - iwejfweoifjweif 14y ago
      As some comments say on that page, there are numerous technical details as to why it isn't nearly as simple as proposed. AFAIK you can't easily run LIRR trains to NJ because only a few engines support catenary operation, everything else requires a third rail to be built. So while this might get us a few percent increase in the number of trains for now, at the cost of a few hundred million to build out third rails in NJ (or catenaries in LIRR areas where NJ transit trains might be routed), it doesn't change the fundamental infrastructure issue given the growth of mass transit in the NYC metro area.
- ChrisLTD 14y ago
  Thanks to Gov. Chris Christie it's not gonna happen anytime soon: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
  - protomyth 14y ago
    If you don't have the money, then you cannot go forward with this type of thing. Maybe after some years of getting back to balance on their budget, NJ can start big things again.
    - melling 14y ago
      In the meantime, hundreds of thousands of people pay every day for the inefficient mass transportation system. There are good ways to spend money in bad times. See: Great Depression.
      - protomyth 14y ago
        And there are millions of children in NJ that need the government to not burden them with debt. NJ spends more than it takes in and needs to fix that first. Even if a family has another kid on the way, they still need to make sure they have budgeted properly before building an expansion on the house.
        natrius 14y ago
        A government with a rising tax base can spend more than its revenue in perpetuity. That doesn't mean it's always a good idea, but thinking about government spending the way a household manages its spending leads to incorrect conclusions. There are millions of children in New Jersey that need their parents to be employed. Counter-cyclical spending helps to accomplish that, and if done wisely, it also acts as an investment from which those children will reap the benefits. Discourse about government spending these days is sadly devoid of numbers that indicate the right choice one way or the other. We don't run our businesses this way.
philjohn 14y ago
I'll second the London Transport Museum suggestion - I was there with my children yesterday and had a great time. A ticket also lasts for one year, so you can revisit as many times as you wish, which makes it a great value day out.

melling 14y ago

NJ<->NYC needs another "subway" tunnel pretty badly too. Ferrying people in and out with buses has reached its limit.

_delirium 14y ago
There's a project currently in planning stages that is supposed to upgrade the 11-mile section of century-old infrastructure between Newark and NYC, improving both Amtrak and NJ Transit service. It'd add a new Hudson River tunnel, a faster modern routing through the Meadowlands, and expand Penn Station into the old James Farley Post Office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Project
- melling 14y ago
  None of that will move people off of buses to a subway or train. The proposal of extending the 7 line to NJ, for example, would certainly help.
  - _delirium 14y ago
    If I understand correctly, the NJ Transit trans-Hudson services have been at maximum capacity for years, so they could carry more riders if they were able to add more trains at peak times, but without a new tunnel (and probably more platforms) it's just not possible to run more trains.
- yummyfajitas 14y ago
  The gateway tunnel has been postponed indefinitely. But no worries, apparently the only reason the Gateway Tunnel was necessary was because the MTA previously refused to run things efficiently. http://transportationnation.org/2012/06/14/ny-mta-chief-says-railroads-need-to-work-together-to-overcome-maxed-out-hudson-river-crossings/ http://transportationnation.org/2012/06/14/ny-mta-chief-says... Also interesting: "The Regional Plan Association, which held the conference at which Lhota spoke, and other advocacy groups have expressed support for through-running—at least until Gateway Tunnel gets built." I.e., they want to be more efficient, but only as a stopgap measure until the tunnel is built. (Also check out Market Urbanism's blog post on the topic: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ycccmptVdFgJ:marketurbanism.com/2012/06/18/new-york-transit-officials-grudgingly-consider-using-existing-track-more-efficiency/+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ycccmpt... )
  - _delirium 14y ago
    Interesting. I suppose there are not high odds that these multiple systems will ever get integrated into one regional agency, the way the various NYC subways were eventually merged into the MTA and interconnected?
  - iwejfweoifjweif 14y ago
    As some comments say on that page, there are numerous technical details as to why it isn't nearly as simple as proposed. AFAIK you can't easily run LIRR trains to NJ because only a few engines support catenary operation, everything else requires a third rail to be built. So while this might get us a few percent increase in the number of trains for now, at the cost of a few hundred million to build out third rails in NJ (or catenaries in LIRR areas where NJ transit trains might be routed), it doesn't change the fundamental infrastructure issue given the growth of mass transit in the NYC metro area.
ChrisLTD 14y ago
Thanks to Gov. Chris Christie it's not gonna happen anytime soon: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
- protomyth 14y ago
  If you don't have the money, then you cannot go forward with this type of thing. Maybe after some years of getting back to balance on their budget, NJ can start big things again.
  - melling 14y ago
    In the meantime, hundreds of thousands of people pay every day for the inefficient mass transportation system. There are good ways to spend money in bad times. See: Great Depression.
    - protomyth 14y ago
      And there are millions of children in NJ that need the government to not burden them with debt. NJ spends more than it takes in and needs to fix that first. Even if a family has another kid on the way, they still need to make sure they have budgeted properly before building an expansion on the house.
      - natrius 14y ago
        A government with a rising tax base can spend more than its revenue in perpetuity. That doesn't mean it's always a good idea, but thinking about government spending the way a household manages its spending leads to incorrect conclusions. There are millions of children in New Jersey that need their parents to be employed. Counter-cyclical spending helps to accomplish that, and if done wisely, it also acts as an investment from which those children will reap the benefits. Discourse about government spending these days is sadly devoid of numbers that indicate the right choice one way or the other. We don't run our businesses this way.

philjohn 14y ago

I'll second the London Transport Museum suggestion - I was there with my children yesterday and had a great time. A ticket also lasts for one year, so you can revisit as many times as you wish, which makes it a great value day out.