|
|
| Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel (1362895) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 7 |
||
|
| (1363055) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Aug 17 23:22:00 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 23:03:00 2015. How is that an argument to not expand capacity?It's an argument as to who has a viable financial interest in paying to expand capacity. Neither NYC nor NJ get any income taxes from NJ residents who work in NYC. The income tax receipts to NYS generated by these NJ commuters does not justify the expense of additional Hudson River rail tunnels. |
|
|
| (1363056) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Aug 17 23:23:00 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 22:55:37 2015. And had they bothered to build the bridge without the participation of the other railroads, they would have run into this in 1912:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_facilities_doctrine |
|
|
| (1363057) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 17 23:49:20 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Aug 17 23:23:00 2015. A quick read of the article suggests that ALL of the others should have been given access to Penn Station. The capacity of the tunnels but not the station would have been strained and when PRR had to build the second pair, the tenants should have paid enough for their usage to fund the third/fourth tracks.. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1363058) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 17 23:51:28 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Aug 17 23:22:00 2015. We simply disagree about the economics. |
|
|
| (1363059) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Aug 17 23:57:25 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 17 23:49:20 2015. Back in 1912 however, the outcome would not have been so clear. The "essential facilities" would have included any means of access, but could have been extended in all likelihood to the terminal itself and at worst, they would have to be assessed the same internal accounting that the railroad would apply to its own equipment.Since that decision, the doctrine has been applied to many other means of access and the legal advice is often just "don't put yourself in that position, just don't build it at all and hope somebody ELSE is dumb enough to pay for it." :( |
|
|
| (1363060) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by TerrapIN StatiON on Tue Aug 18 00:05:47 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 22:46:32 2015. I'm not buying that. |
|
|
| (1363063) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:11:31 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Aug 17 23:22:00 2015. But the economic impact of the tunnel is larger than just what the state can get out of it in terms of taxes. |
|
|
| (1363064) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:19:21 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Mon Aug 17 16:13:24 2015. The money flows back to NJ on the rail line. It's the same as CT's budget being propped up by taxes and money coming up the New Haven Line. There just isn't a giant river with two decaying tunnels on that line.That is completely and utterly false. NYC requires its suburbs just as much as the suburbs require NYC. NYC should utilize ferries more too. Why go for the most expensive, least convenient mode possible? You're looking at a billion dollars to construct the waterfront infrastructure, then hundreds of millions of dollars per boat, all to deliver passengers to the edge of Manhattan for $4.00 a ride at best if you're going to go with a large vessel. Amtrak needs to be at a point where 3 are active at any given time, and the 4th can be out for an extended period of time for maintenance, which is a sustainable way to operate the tunnels, especially given that the two existing North River Tunnels need extensive maintenance post-Sandy and post-100 years of trains running through them. That's a good point. NYC's failure to secure the tunnel portals against flooding during Sandy should push them to finance the commuter tunnels to a greater degree than they otherwise would. |
|
|
| (1363065) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:21:48 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Joe V on Mon Aug 17 18:10:29 2015. Most commuters ride buses and PATH anyway, not NJT.Because we've done nothing to improve commuter rail access to Manhattan in more than a century. If we'd built the Holland Tunnel and left it at that then we'd be in a comparable situation. But with the doubling of rail traffic which can be realized after building out Gateway we'll be in a position to relieve PABT and PATH once the North River tunnels are completed. |
|
|
| (1363066) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:23:46 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Aug 17 17:14:36 2015. Where? NYC is effectively built out. What isn't built on is maintained as a setback. Who is going to up-zone in the expanded flood zones we're seeing after Sandy? LI has even worse prospects for upzoning or even greenfield construction. The same is true of Westchester county. So where are these people supposed to go in NYS? |
|
|
| (1363067) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Tue Aug 18 06:22:33 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Aug 17 23:22:00 2015. Are you saying NJ residents who work in NYC don't pay any NJ state income taxes? |
|
|
| (1363068) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 06:29:14 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Aug 17 20:54:08 2015. The global numbers speak for themselves.I am not interested in how crowded your MDT train is. |
|
|
| (1363069) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 06:34:15 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:21:48 2015. Whatever the excuse, it still shows NYPS is not a major player is accessing Manhattan from NJ, and a very, very minor player in the Manhattan job market.Gateway won't do much about PATH nor PABT. It does nothing for lower Manhattan, the Uptown Line is fed mostly by people who do not have access to NJT, except Hoboken, which is not that much to begin with. We have been through this many times with you before. Gateway does not build a single parking spot at any rail station. Do not expect a big wave of bus passengers to switch. |
|
|
| (1363070) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 06:38:40 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by VictorM on Tue Aug 18 06:22:33 2015. Are you saying NJ residents who work in NYC don't pay any NJ state income taxes?Please re-read one of my previous posts. NJ residents who work in NYC pay both NYS and NJ income taxes. However, any taxes paid to NYS are deducted dollar for dollar from their NJ income tax payment. The net result is that they don't pay income taxes to NJ for their income earned in NYC. |
|
|
| (1363071) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 06:40:45 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 22:46:32 2015. You can tell people to stop moving to Bushwick, Wiliamsburgh, Caroll Gardens, and Ridgewood all you like. They won't listen. These are younger people who insist upon paying inflated values and living on a good subway line close to work. Free choice and free market.My cousin's son lives in an expensive apartment in Manhattan, despite family protests that he live with his folks in Rockville Centre cheaply and take the LIRR. He won't do it. NYC is competing quite well on a global scale. Cuomo is not going to budge. He can't even fund enough MTA projects, and the MTA hasn't even budgeted all things that they should be. |
|
|
| (1363072) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 06:42:34 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:11:31 2015. But the economic impact of the tunnel is larger than just what the state can get out of it in terms of taxes.If that is the case, then the cash flow should reflect that. Otherwise, Adam Smith's invisible hand will stay away. |
|
|
| (1363073) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 06:45:11 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 23:03:00 2015. #7 to Secaucus would be far better at getting after the bus congestion than Gateway, and cost avoidance of rebuilding the PABT for $10B. Most regions that buses serve aren't served by rail, or rail is too damned slow, like Bay Head, High Bridge, and Hackettstown, and it is not just because of the transfer at Newark.But you are opposed to #7 too. |
|
|
| (1363074) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 06:50:33 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:23:46 2015. With the Sandy argument, we should evacuate and abandon the whole Jersey Coast from Seabright to Cape May and the Passaic River towns (Bound Brook now has a flood wall).The only safe place to put them without more exurbia sprawl is Queens and Brooklyn north of Kings Highway and the South Conduit road. |
|
|
| (1363076) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Tue Aug 18 06:53:33 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 06:38:40 2015. Excuse my lack of knowledge re: non-resident tax rates, but do NJ residents working in NYS pay the same tax rates to NYS as do NYS residents? |
|
|
| (1363078) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 06:59:09 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 22:46:32 2015. Deciding to stay within NYS inflates real estate values within NY while allowing half the region to be underinvested.I thought the Secaucus pig farms were an appropriate land use. :=) If NYC is going to compete on a global scale it needs to fully utilize the entirety of the Metro area without regard to petty parochial squabbles. If NJ wants to be included in the Metro area, then it must pay its dues to join. Its contribution has been to raid NYC business with promises of lower expenses. Their business model is similar to that of jitneys raiding franchise bus routes. NJ should not expect NYC or NYS to help perpetuate that business model. |
|
|
| (1363079) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 07:05:50 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:23:46 2015. If you have watched Queens like I have over the past 50 years, there is no such thing as "built out".Some large private homes in Kew Gardens have given way to Garden apartments and large, brick apartment buildings, much like the ones built in the 1930's. Younger folks are moving into the very tenements my Grandparents could not wait to get out of in the 1950's, and are packing into the L and M trains. Floors are being added to Brownstones in Brooklyn to add more apartments, and they cost $1.5 million each. Other than the disgusting Newtown Creek area, none of that flooded with Sandy. |
|
|
| (1363081) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 07:42:55 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by VictorM on Tue Aug 18 06:53:33 2015. Excuse my lack of knowledge re: non-resident tax rates, but do NJ residents working in NYS pay the same tax rates to NYS as do NYS residents?That depends. They do not pay local income taxes, which residents of NYC and Yonkers do. So, they are deadbeats for NYC compared to local residents. The tax rate table is the same as for NYS residents. Their total income is used to determine their gross liability. This is then pro-rated for the percentage of income that derives from NYS sources. |
|
|
| (1363082) | |
Re: Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Aug 18 07:47:20 2015, in response to Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by heypaul on Mon Aug 17 22:27:49 2015. Hire the cons, the tunnel under the river should only take ablut a month.ROAR |
|
|
| (1363094) | |
Re: Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by heypaul on Tue Aug 18 10:29:15 2015, in response to Re: Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Aug 18 07:47:20 2015. Unfortunately, one of them succumbed to a hail of bullets. With only one worker, it will take two months. |
|
|
| (1363095) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by displaced angeleno on Tue Aug 18 10:33:13 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 22:46:32 2015. Agreed.Much urban research has focused on the harm that suburbanization and its cousin regional fragmentation have done by creating distortionary economic effects (zoning, housing, local regulation) through local legislation at a time when it is pretty much agreed that most of these problems need to be solved from a regional perspective. |
|
|
| (1363119) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by VictorM on Tue Aug 18 12:27:52 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 07:42:55 2015. Thanks for the information. |
|
|
| (1363134) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Aug 18 15:12:10 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 22:48:06 2015. Yes, it was a misunderstanding. |
|
|
| (1363135) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Aug 18 15:18:00 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Mon Aug 17 22:55:37 2015. Don't worry, he'll bring it up again in 2-3 weeks. :-) |
|
|
| (1363139) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 18 16:08:06 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Aug 17 14:15:46 2015. The bigger picture is the region rises or sinks as a whole. As WillD pointed out, NY completes against the low tax states for middle income jobs and against global centers like London, Tokyo, Duabi, etc for high-income jobs. As it stands right now, NY isn't offering either the financial incentive the low cost areas do or the whiz-bang infastructure the global centers do. We really do need to step our game up. |
|
|
| (1363140) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 18 16:09:28 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Sun Aug 16 20:19:15 2015. some other state financing their low taxes on the federal dole.Stop voting to constantly increase the size and expense of the federal government and problem solved! |
|
|
| (1363146) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 16:50:28 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 18 16:08:06 2015. The bigger picture is the region rises or sinks as a whole.When somebody makes an appeal to the greater good, it's time to hold onto one's wallet. NY completes against the low tax states for middle income jobs The problem is that NJ is one of those low tax states that raided NYC for middle income jobs. If this is a regional issue, then taxes ought to be uniform throughout. Is NJ willing to raise its taxes to NYC's levels to become a "regional" player? ...and against global centers like London, Tokyo, Duabi, etc for high-income jobs. NYC living costs are considerably below those of London and Tokyo. As it stands right now, NY isn't offering either the financial incentive the low cost areas do or the whiz-bang infastructure the global centers do. We really do need to step our game up. According to NYS Controller's report, from 2009 to 2014 NYC experienced an employment growth in excess of 11% and a wage growth of approximately 27%. Both figures are considerably better than the US average. They are even more ahead of London's and Tokyo's. I'd say NYC has stepped up its game. Its current problem is that those left behind want a piece of its action. |
|
|
| (1363156) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:21:05 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 17 21:43:22 2015. More would come through NJT if there was any room for them. And direct trains from the north with the loop that never got built for lack of anywhere for the trains to go. With the tunnels, more trains will run, and NJ property values will go up, so revenues, at least at the local level, will go up. |
|
|
| (1363157) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:22:02 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Aug 17 23:22:00 2015. Property taxes and increased wealth for New Jerseyans who own homes. It's all for NJ, so NJ needs to pony up most of the dough. NY and the federal government should add a little, just for the sake of Amtrak. |
|
|
| (1363158) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:22:26 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 17 23:49:20 2015. Hmmmm, so by that logic, NJT should pay for the third and fourth since Amtrak took over from the PRR? |
|
|
| (1363159) | |
Re: Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:24:35 2015, in response to Re: Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Aug 18 07:47:20 2015. Those guys are amateurs. They should hire El Chapo's guys. They could get it done in a week. They also have experience with railroad tunnels, the Dannemora guys don't. |
|
|
| (1363160) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:32:51 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:19:21 2015. Admittedly, it's not representative of high-wage jobs, but in terms of jobs in Manhattan, 71% of the people live in NYC. NYC is a machine in and of itself, while the suburbs (and the budgets of NJ and CT) are substantially dependant on NYC.There are some places that ferries make more sense, and some places that would just be easier to get to. There is already a ferry system, it's just pathetic. Why is PATH so popular? Ferries surely could take some of that traffic if they had the same frequency as PATH. NYC already has ferry terminals, and they are cheap to build, you just find a place to plop one, and put a floating dock there. OK, nothing is that simple in NYC, but it pales compared to other infrastructure. I'm not saying we should just plop a bunch of ferries in the North River and abandon Gateway, but in a city like NYC, all viable transportation options should be utilized. I don't think they had a lot of choice when Sandy came. That they were able to get most of the system back up and running as quickly as they did is a testament to the workers of the various branches of the MTA. That being said, we are where we are, and 4 tunnels gives a clear path to increasing the number of trains into Penn while fixing the original North River Tunnels. And in the long term, a schedule that tightly schedules 3 tunnels is pretty resilient if there are 4... any one can go out of service and things won't melt down. If one goes out of service for some reason now, things melt down. |
|
|
| (1363162) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 18 18:37:41 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 16:50:28 2015. When somebody makes an appeal to the greater good, it's time to hold onto one's wallet.True. This however does have it's merits. The problem is that NJ is one of those low tax states that raided NYC for middle income jobs. If this is a regional issue, then taxes ought to be uniform throughout. Is NJ willing to raise its taxes to NYC's levels to become a "regional" player? No, NYC should lower it's taxes to make itself more competitive as a place to conduct business. I'd say NYC has stepped up its game. Its current problem is that those left behind want a piece of its action. True. |
|
|
| (1363164) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:42:21 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 16:50:28 2015. NYC needs better infrastructure, and more affordable housing, which will require more capacity on the subway system, as well as other infrastructural improvements.Even though NYC has the largest subway system in the world (I know, depending on how you count), there are still some improvements to that, and a LOT of improvements that need to happen to the regional rail system. The existing system isn't the best in the United States, it's just by far the least bad in the United States. |
|
|
| (1363165) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 18:50:03 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:21:05 2015. When property values go up, there should be a quid pro quo rate reductions so that it is revenue neutral. |
|
|
| (1363167) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 19:18:38 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 18 03:23:46 2015. I'm not sure exactly what the flood zones look like, but there is lots of land in NYC that is underutilized, the best of which is along the Brooklyn/Queens waterfront. There's an idea out there somewhere for light rail to open this area up. There are other areas in the city as well that should be redeveloped as high-rise residential. There is plenty of room yet for NYC to grow. It grew out for a few hundred years, and in the past century, it's been growing up. The upward trend will continue. |
|
|
| (1363170) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 19:48:57 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:22:02 2015. It's all for NJThere's a problem. NJ residential property taxes are deductible from NJ income taxes. Localities may benefit from increased taxes. NJ, the state, will benefit much less. |
|
|
| (1363171) | |
Re: Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Aug 18 19:54:04 2015, in response to Re: Reluctance Is Due to Dannemora Tunnel Debacle...Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Aug 18 07:47:20 2015. They would have to build a prison on one side of the river first so that the cons could break out of it. Government being what it is, that would probably cost as much and take as long to build as the tunnel. :( |
|
|
| (1363173) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 19:55:00 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 18 18:37:41 2015. NYC should lower it's taxes to make itself more competitive as a place to conduct business.NYC has a successful tax strategy; NJ does not. You are advocating that NYC should follow NJ's example. NYC is already more competitive as a place to conduct business. It's also investing in businesses of the future with the Cornell-Technion science center on Roosevelt Island. NYC has not been a technology center since RCA moved to a campus setting in South Jersey and Bell Labs moved to NJ. The Cornell-Technion Center may be Bloomberg's greatest legacy to NYC. |
|
|
| (1363178) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Aug 18 20:23:11 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 18:50:03 2015. no, revenue has to rise to support service costs. |
|
|
| (1363195) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 20:58:54 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Aug 18 19:48:57 2015. And it brings more money into the NJ economy, as the money flows down the rails. Just like for Fairfield County. |
|
|
| (1363196) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 20:58:57 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 18:50:03 2015. Why? That doesn't make any sense. If houses are worth more, then people should pay more taxes on them. |
|
|
| (1363218) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Wed Aug 19 01:48:33 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 20:58:57 2015. Trouble is, when houses are worth less, people are frequently not paying less for them. |
|
|
| (1363231) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Aug 19 03:16:51 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 18 18:32:51 2015. Why is PATH so popular?Because PATH gets you to 6th Ave as opposed to the Hudson waterfront. NYC already has ferry terminals, and they are cheap to build, you just find a place to plop one, and put a floating dock there. If you're talking capacity on the order of what would be provided by the Gateway tunnels then you're going to be looking at something more like the SI Ferries than anything operated by NY Waterways. A "cheap" floating dock is not an option in that case. You're gonna need something more like Whitehall, which will likely run a billion dollars by the time all the environmental impact statements are done. but in a city like NYC, all viable transportation options should be utilized. IMHO cost effectiveness, especially in terms of operational cost, should be prioritized. Ferries are about the worst option from an operational cost standpoint. |
|
|
| (1363232) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Aug 19 03:23:19 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 06:34:15 2015. Whatever the excuse, it still shows NYPS is not a major player is accessing Manhattan from NJ, and a very, very minor player in the Manhattan job market.But the impact of Midtown Direct on parallel services into Hoboken and PABT shows that passengers value a one seat rail ride into Manhattan. Commuter rail expansions provide the most viable means of growing the transit market share across the Hudson in a sustainable manner. The market share may be small for the time being due to underinvestment, but it's by far the easiest to grow given some funding. Gateway won't do much about PATH nor PABT. That remains to be seen. Passengers currently transferring at Hoboken may give up on PATH once they're provided with a one seat ride into Manhattan. And if one bus operator sued NJT for "poaching" their riders despite no new parking lots being built along the Morristown line, that would seem to indicate your premise is fundamentally unsound. |
|
|
| (1363233) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Aug 19 03:31:24 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Joe V on Tue Aug 18 06:45:11 2015. Most regions that buses serve aren't served by rail, or rail is too damned slow, like Bay Head, High Bridge, and Hackettstown, and it is not just because of the transfer at Newark.Again, Midtown Direct trains to Dover are slower than the buses on parallel routes into PABT, yet passengers fled the buses and the bus operator sued NJT. So your conclusion that passengers will not be tempted by a one seat rail ride into Manhattan is specious at best. But you are opposed to #7 too. I'm only opposed to the #7 as a standalone solution to the cancellation of ARC because it does nothing to solve Amtrak's issue of fixing their century old tunnels. But if we can integrate the #7 extension into the Gateway tunnel then that'd be a great way to get quite a bit more bang for the buck. But while we absolutely need the Gateway tunnels into Manhattan regardless of whether the subway moves forward, there is no similar need for the #7 extension to be pursued independent of the Gateway tunnel. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 7 |
||
