|
|
| Re: Hudson River rail tunnel project has new name, but same concerns over funding (1162204) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Hudson River rail tunnel project has new name, but same concerns over funding |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Jun 16 23:09:18 2012, in response to Re: Hudson River rail tunnel project has new name, but same concerns over funding, posted by Joe V on Sat Jun 16 17:58:59 2012. 1) No one is FORCING a subway transfer int the MeadowlandsExcept that you are. Because you are not providing additional capacity into PSNY the additional trains must be terminated at Secaucus, a role it was never designed for. The passengers unfortunate enough to get stuck on those trains must transfer to reach Manhattan regardless of whether they want NYP or GCT. 2) You fail to recognize transfers in Manhattan as just as obnoxious Which is why we should work on improving the transfers within Manhattan, not making another ill-conceived transfer in the Meadowlands. 3) You fail to realize the subways at Penn Station cannot handle a doubling of NJ commuters Yes, which is why it's better to combine the LIRR and NJT into a commuter tunnel which distributes their load across the city and enables cross platform transfers between major destinations. 4) You fail to realize that 36 #7 train per hour has far more capacity then 13 NJT trains per hour. Pretty sure they only contemplated half of the #7 trains running over from Manhattan due to the excessive empty VMTs those trains would rack up deadheading to and from the Secaucus transfer. NJT operating at the same throughput would carry a greater number of passengers, and that's not overly ambitious in commuter rail operations. 5) You fail to understand that many commuters cannot take NJT trains because of municipal parking issues and limitations And NJ has a statewide effort to implement transit oriented developments. Once Chrisco is no longer obstructing those projects we'll stand a chance at redevelopment. 6) You fail to understand that there in not one dime in Gatway for parking decks So follow the East Brunswick station model and integrate the parking deck into the new TOD. 7) You fail to understand that NJ is a Home-Rule/NIMBY state and most communities do not want to become the next MetroPark or Hamilton - just ask Ridgewood, Westfield, and Annandale. But they do want to attract 'Transit Villages' and the property tax revenue with fewer children that they bring. 8) You fail to understand that the Route 9 buses run in the black and Cruiser buses can achieve break even with just 40 passengers Sure, that's why NJT has a 40% fare recovery rate, all those "profitable" bus lines. It's worth noting that the same is true of NJT's commuter trains on the NEC. And it is far easier to add capacity for the future with rail based improvements into NYC rather than trying to add buses. |
|
|
|