|
|
| Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? (239377) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (239377) | |
Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by JAzumah on Tue Jul 19 16:17:55 2011 Projects done just to use Federal dollars always propose stupid ideasI need to propose something reckless. How about a new vehicular tunnel from NJ to Manhattan with completely private financing at 57 Street? |
|
|
| (239378) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Tue Jul 19 16:57:37 2011, in response to Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by JAzumah on Tue Jul 19 16:17:55 2011. The extension's not dead? |
|
|
| (239379) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by Forest Glen on Tue Jul 19 16:59:09 2011, in response to Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by JAzumah on Tue Jul 19 16:17:55 2011. I'd rather they not build something at all than to build something just for the sake of building something. Christie's fat @ss KO'ed the ARC. Hopefully a Democratic governor will revive the project. Christie is a one term governor. |
|
|
| (239382) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jul 19 17:05:19 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by Kriston Lewis on Tue Jul 19 16:57:37 2011. Nope, not yet. |
|
|
| (239390) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by JAzumah on Tue Jul 19 18:03:32 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by Forest Glen on Tue Jul 19 16:59:09 2011. The project was getting out of control. When your state has a $30B budget, $2B is a lot of money. |
|
|
| (239391) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by hank eisenstein on Tue Jul 19 19:03:05 2011, in response to Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by JAzumah on Tue Jul 19 16:17:55 2011. A better idea-A privately-funded tunnel from NJ to Long Island, with no exits (except emergency vehicle access) in Manhattan at all. |
|
|
| (239392) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by hank eisenstein on Tue Jul 19 19:04:14 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by Forest Glen on Tue Jul 19 16:59:09 2011. The ARC, as being built, was a bad project from the first turn of dirt. It should ALWAYS have connected, or provided for a track connection, to the existing Penn Station. |
|
|
| (239420) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by RailBus63 on Wed Jul 20 00:11:05 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by JAzumah on Tue Jul 19 18:03:32 2011. Exactly. Take a look at the sad state of affairs in Massachusetts, where the Big Dig's billions in cost overruns continues to reverberate to this day. The MBTA and the state's highways are literally falling apart but the state has no money to even begin to address the maintenance backlog. I fear New York has already begun to go down the same road with megaprojects like the Second Avenue line, ESA, the Fulton Street hub, etc. |
|
|
| (239424) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jul 20 00:16:48 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by RailBus63 on Wed Jul 20 00:11:05 2011. Huh????What huge cost overruns on "the Second Avenue line, ESA, the Fulton Street hub" are New York State now swimming neck deep in? |
|
|
| (239427) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by hank eisenstein on Wed Jul 20 00:49:49 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by RailBus63 on Wed Jul 20 00:11:05 2011. New York's budget is screwed over by its overly generous medicaid reimbursements, among other things.Those other things being creative financing, using funds that are supposed to be 'lockboxed' for one purpose, and using them for another; a state budget that counts non-existant revenue (they set the state budget before all tax revenue is received); significant corruption. |
|
|
| (239430) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Wed Jul 20 01:55:52 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by Forest Glen on Tue Jul 19 16:59:09 2011. Hmm, you always struck me as a conservative. |
|
|
| (239436) | |
MassDOT and MBTA funding (Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?) |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Jul 20 07:22:25 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by RailBus63 on Wed Jul 20 00:11:05 2011. Take a look at the sad state of affairs in Massachusetts, where the Big Dig's billions in cost overruns continues to reverberate to this day. The MBTA and the state's highways are literally falling apart but the state has no money to even begin to address the maintenance backlog.I don't think it's fair to blame the Big Dig for the MBTA's funding woes anymore. The state's highways are not falling apart; there's widening and reconstruction work going on all over the state, and 174 bridges will have been reconstructed by the end of the year under the four year old, $3 billion Accelerated Bridge Program. There's obviously a funding imbalance between the Highway Division and MBTA. |
|
|
| (239442) | |
Re: MassDOT and MBTA funding (Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin station on Wed Jul 20 08:33:12 2011, in response to MassDOT and MBTA funding (Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Jul 20 07:22:25 2011. Thanks for providing the truth. |
|
|
| (239443) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by JAzumah on Wed Jul 20 08:43:07 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by RailBus63 on Wed Jul 20 00:11:05 2011. As a baby, my family rode subway trains that had to run through smoke conditions created by track fires. The people screaming about Christie have forgotten or have no direct knowledge of what the subways used to be like. The subways got that way because they stopped maintaining them. The subways went from being a cash cow to a cash drain because of government policies.$250,000 is a lot of money and I don't want it spent on projects that should not see the light of day. The idea of rerouting passengers onto rail service is the type of efficiency seeking that drives passengers off the transit system, much as excessive truncation of bus routes to light rail stations does the same thing. It will damage NJT Bus in the medium term because the profitability of its NYC bus network stems from direct service into NYC. Those profits are reinvested into the rest of the NJ bus network that needs subsidies. The truncation of some of these services into Secaucus will kill off at least 30% of the bus service in NJ. I cannot support that. |
|
|
| (239444) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Jul 20 10:03:23 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by JAzumah on Wed Jul 20 08:43:07 2011. But how would those people get into Manhattan if they truncated the bus routes to Secaucus? I doubt that they would drive: They would most likely just transfer, considering that rail service into NYC would become more frequent.Plus, if NJT can cut back some buses to Secaucus, it can run them more frequently within NJ, which would result in trip times improving overall. The thing is that, because the zone fare pass allows travel on the rail and bus, they might lose revenue that way. |
|
|
| (239451) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by The Flxible Neofan on Wed Jul 20 11:59:06 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by Forest Glen on Tue Jul 19 16:59:09 2011. Well, Amtrak created that "Gateway Plan" that makes a heck of a lot more sense than what the ARC was in the end. They should just support that project than revive ARC.The 7 extension would be a waste IMO. |
|
|
| (239454) | |
Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan? |
|
|
Posted by Pablo M 201 on Wed Jul 20 12:57:11 2011, in response to Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?, posted by The Flxible Neofan on Wed Jul 20 11:59:06 2011. IAWTP. |
|
|
| (239475) | |
Re: MassDOT and MBTA funding (Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?) |
|
|
Posted by RailBus63 on Wed Jul 20 16:06:20 2011, in response to MassDOT and MBTA funding (Re: Bus Transfer in Secaucus Part of No. 7 Extension Plan?), posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Jul 20 07:22:25 2011. The accelerated bridge repair program is a step in the right direction, but there will still be almost 350 bridges in the state rated as ‘structurally deficient’ when the program is completed (and more will undoubtedly be added to the list as they age). The condition of the pavement on the Mass Turnpike is getting worse every year as turnpike revenues were diverted (I’ve been traveling this road multiple times every year since 1996 and it has never been as bad as it is right now). The MBTA has a $3 billion unfunded backlog just to return the system to a state of good repair and has no money to replace its fleet of 42-year-old Red Line cars, 30-year-old Orange Line cars or 17-year-old RTS buses.The Big Dig’s cost overruns resulted in the project’s cost ballooning from $2.8 billion in 1982 to $14 billion in 2000. The commonwealth’s inspector general estimated the project’s true cost at $18 billion in 2001 and a 2008 Boston Globe report estimated that it could ultimately reach $22 billion. Given that the Federal government capped its contribution at $9 billion, that resulted in an unplanned liability to the commonwealth of $5 billion to $13 billion. I think one can reach a credible conclusion that both the commonwealth’s highways and the MBTA system would be in better shape had the Central Artery cost overrun been avoided and those billions the state is on the hook for been available for other projects. |
|
|