|
|
| Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel (1362895) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 7 |
||
|
| (1363808) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Aug 24 07:10:14 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Sat Aug 22 20:44:17 2015. On big days the sport still is popular, especially since for instance the Triple Crown events have been pushed further into the evening (something that could even happen further next year with the Kentucky Derby now that there is no longer the threat of a mega boxing pay-per-view that night). That can expand again, and has somewhat, but it requires events like the Breeders' Cup joining the rest of the sports world by being at night. Not being at night sets the sport back in the eyes of a generation where events like that in many of their minds has to be at night or it's not relevant. |
|
|
| (1363821) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 24 11:21:09 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Joe V on Fri Aug 21 18:18:07 2015. I mean for routes bound for Manhattan (or Newark). In that regard, they're kicking Nassau and Suffolks ass. That's more of the target I'm talking about, not local suburb to suburb travel |
|
|
| (1363822) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 24 11:22:27 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Fri Aug 21 17:24:17 2015. Yes, but how so? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1363843) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Mon Aug 24 17:10:40 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 24 01:21:09 2015. If you look at the data, there is a MASSIVE increase in bike ridership. There are steady increases in transit usage. The downturn in car usage is pretty small, because cars still hold the vast majority of the market. The number of car commuters still dwarfs everyone else nationwide. Certain cities are exceptions to the rule, NYC being the first exception, but that's more limited by the lack of space to store and drive the cars that can't be there than anything else. |
|
|
| (1363846) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Mon Aug 24 17:15:29 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 24 11:22:27 2015. That's where a lot of the money in the state comes from. Those people earn money, buy expensive houses, have people fix up their expensive houses, go out to eat, buy stuff at stores, etc, etc. CT is the richest state in the US, remove the New Haven Line and NYC and it wouldn't be anywhere close on it's own. |
|
|
| (1363854) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 24 17:38:44 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Mon Aug 24 17:10:40 2015. actually, today Streetsblog presented a rise in VMT.http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/08/21/fhwa-gleefully-reports-that-driving-is-rising-again/ concurrently, BART has been gaining riders which makes rush hour almost likew a real subway. we still have the morons who stand in the doorway slowing ingress/egress, and those who remain seated mid-car until the train has stopped at their station. can't find where I read the ## earlier today, but SF car % of commuters is down 4% over recent years. |
|
|
| (1363914) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Tue Aug 25 11:46:08 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Mon Aug 24 17:15:29 2015. But you still haven't explained to me how that money that's getting spent in the municipalities reaches the state. My understanding is most of that money spent in stores, on houses, at restaurants, goes to local, not state taxes. Unless I'm understanding everything wrong? |
|
|
| (1363917) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Aug 25 11:50:39 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by NIMBYkiller on Tue Aug 25 11:46:08 2015. My understanding is most of that money spent in stores, on houses, at restaurants, goes to local, not state taxes.In NY it's about half and half. Not sure in CT. |
|
|
| (1363966) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 25 17:33:50 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 24 17:38:44 2015. SF is a tough one, since they have a rise of private busses now whisking people away to Silicon Valley to work. It's not public transit, and it's not private autos either. |
|
|
| (1363997) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Aug 25 19:57:51 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 24 17:38:44 2015. Not interested in detailed thoughts about the tech buses, but a full bus is WAY less destructive of our air than 45 SOVs. The lesson here is that the "creative class" millennials have little interest in the cultural deserts near the Silicon Valley offices where they work. The gain for public transit is that Caltrain has nearly perfect balance between techies commuting from SF and suburbanites commuting to SF. No empty trains in rush hours. |
|
|
| (1364002) | |
Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel) |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 25 20:11:23 2015, in response to Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Dave on Sun Aug 16 08:10:58 2015. What about build new bus only tunnels into a new basement level of the PABT? Build a new underground concourse at PABT and have twin two-lane tubes (one under 41st and another under 40st) that would run under the Hudson and then directly to the turnpike. This would easily double NJT bus capacity into Manhattan and take some pressure off the rail system. |
|
|
| (1364008) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 25 20:19:29 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Aug 25 19:57:51 2015. I'm not sure the tech busses are less destructure of the air than 45 San Francisco cars. Maybe if the busses are new and well maintained, but older busses might be beat by 45 Prii or other AT-PZEVs.That being said, there is no physical room on the highway, nowhere to park them where the tech workers are living, and the CO2 emissions from the bus are surely quite a bit lower. And the tech companies are probably going to be innovators with electric busses or some other more environmentally friendly fuel. The experience of the tech workers cannot be extrapolated out to the larger population as a whole. They are extremely well paid, can afford insanely high rents and real estate prices in SF, and are often workaholics. Does Caltrain really serve reverse commuters? Are any of the offices that close to the train stations? Google, Apple, Microsoft's California Office, and Intel are all far away from the tracks, hence the bus systems. eBay is near light rail, but not heavy rail from SF, EA, Facebook (near a freight spur, not passenger), and Yahoo! (light rail only) are in the same situation. Google is by far the largest user of the tech shuttle system. |
|
|
| (1364013) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Aug 25 20:46:13 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Tue Aug 25 20:19:29 2015. Caltrain says it has reverse commute parity. My own anectdotal experrience coming north in PM rush from Palo Alto was a very full train until we got to 22nd St. The tech buses are generally newish.The experience of the tech workers does extrapolate to the extent that they drive the rental market in SF and desirable parts of the East Bay. |
|
|
| (1364018) | |
Re: Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel) |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Tue Aug 25 21:17:46 2015, in response to Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel), posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 25 20:11:23 2015. What about building Star Trek transporters, then we wouldn't need new bus tunnels? People could transport themselves directly to their final destination. |
|
|
| (1364030) | |
Re: Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Aug 25 22:48:48 2015, in response to Re: Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel), posted by Dave on Tue Aug 25 21:17:46 2015. Or better yet ... I *love* it! :) |
|
|
| (1364035) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Aug 25 23:47:15 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Aug 23 13:27:15 2015. $$$ |
|
|
| (1364048) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 26 05:57:22 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Aug 22 19:16:33 2015. LOL! |
|
|
| (1364049) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 26 05:58:38 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Andrew Saucci on Sat Aug 22 18:46:35 2015. Contraceptive mentality? Sure, your holiness. |
|
|
| (1364057) | |
Re: Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel) |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Aug 26 08:11:44 2015, in response to Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel), posted by shiznit1987 on Tue Aug 25 20:11:23 2015. Do not need to build new bus tunnel. Just take over the Lincoln Tunnel, 100% Buses only during the rush hours.ROAR |
|
|
| (1364060) | |
Re: Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Aug 26 08:47:33 2015, in response to Re: Build bus tunnels directly into PABT? (was: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel), posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Aug 26 08:11:44 2015. How socialist of you. :) |
|
|
| (1364116) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Wed Aug 26 17:55:27 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Aug 25 20:46:13 2015. It's not the big tech firms then, it's other small firms that are located close to train stations. Maybe someday they'll electrify that thing, as the diesels can't get out of their own way. I was shocked when I rode on it, and it didn't feel like we were accelerating. I'm used to Shore Line East and MN, where you have 1000HP per car. Caltrain has larger cars with 450HP per car. |
|
|
| (1364121) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Aug 26 18:31:12 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Wed Aug 26 17:55:27 2015. well, the history is that the local MPO (Metropolitan Transportation Commission) has stalled on funding for Caltrain--both electrification and the tunnel to the "PABT west" that is being built to keep money going to BART as cost overruns (I'm shocked) happen on whatever project they are building. So, the electrification spoken of in the early 90s is still just talk. It might happen after SAS phase 2. And, yes any of us with experience of real commuter services knows Caltrain is sub par. That said, it still is gaining riders. If they could force the NIMBYs to shut up and get both the wires and a real 4 track mainline, we could see ridership soar. |
|
|
| (1364217) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Thu Aug 27 19:18:52 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Aug 26 18:31:12 2015. Do they need a 4-track main? I would think the NIMBYs would want electrification... less noise and diesel exhaust, but then again, NIMBYs aren't exactly rational in the first place... |
|
|
| (1364225) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Aug 27 19:49:43 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by ElectricTraction on Thu Aug 27 19:18:52 2015. given that CAHSR is planned to co locate, yes.As to nolise,yes at least one press report quoted one of the NIMBYs as rejecting electrification because of "increased noise". Of course, ALL of these suburban dumps only exist because the train line has been there for a century and change. |
|
|
| (1364227) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Aug 27 19:55:25 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Aug 26 05:58:38 2015. He used to go to the church across from Penn Station. So yeah. |
|
|
| (1364236) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Aug 28 00:48:14 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Aug 27 19:49:43 2015. yes at least one press report quoted one of the NIMBYs as rejecting electrification because of "increased noise"Well, FWIW, there is construction noise, noise from increasing numbers of trains passing through and blowing horns at stations and grade crossings... Of course, ALL of these suburban dumps only exist because the train line has been there for a century and change. Yeah, but even if the railway didn't magically exist, the development pressures would have created most of the suburban infrastructure that you see now, and there's a high chance that most of the residents don't use Caltrain, so it's "nuisance" that some of them wish would go away. It almost did given how weak ridership became, but people kept riding, and they bothered improving the service. :-) |
|
|
| (1364240) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 01:55:50 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Aug 28 00:48:14 2015. NIMBYs never have a case. Why try making one for them? |
|
|
| (1364241) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 01:57:54 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by NIMBYkiller on Wed Aug 19 14:31:40 2015. Re-read what he said. He wants fewer evacuation routes out of Manhattan, whether road or rail. |
|
|
| (1364242) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Aug 28 01:58:52 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Aug 28 00:48:14 2015. The NIMBYs are whining abouit noise and traffic jams, but then when Caltrain and or the HSR folks say well how aboout grade separation, then the NIMBYs cry about having the towns desecrated by a "wall". I have thought for a while that the HSR route should turn east from SFO under the Bay and completely skip all the ingrates. |
|
|
| (1364243) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 02:00:03 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by WillD on Sun Aug 16 20:16:06 2015. You're the delusional rail hater because you want the passenger rail out of the private sector like the false gods in government you worship.Never mind that you want far fewer evacuation routes out of the city if any cataclysm were to ensue. The city is still vulnerable to earthquakes and hurricanes, never mind "man-caused disasters" as some of those god-kings referred to them; so face the fact that your government god-kings on the left stuck us with roads versus rails. |
|
|
| (1364244) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 02:01:56 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Elkeeper on Sun Aug 23 11:52:02 2015. Thanks for at least being candid about the causes.They don't mind more than doubling the cost of ESA, which didn't require new tunnels under the East River, though. |
|
|
| (1364245) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 02:04:55 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Aug 28 01:58:52 2015. There any way to have the HSR line parallel the Bay Shore Freeway? |
|
|
| (1364248) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 28 03:31:29 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 02:00:03 2015. Dude ... you're seriously starting to sound scary. :( |
|
|
| (1364251) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Aug 28 06:22:17 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 28 03:31:29 2015. Starting? I've been showing his insanity to everyone for years. |
|
|
| (1364299) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 14:44:05 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Aug 28 01:58:52 2015. NIMBYs never seem to learn. When staten Island residents complained about the noise form the traffic along the SI Expwy, walls were erected to muffle the noise. Some of the residents when interviewed then complained that with the walls up, they could no longer check the expwy for traffic congestion before getting on and finding themselves in a traffic jam instead of having the option of taking local streets. Be careful what you wish for. You may get it and it just may not achieve the desired result. |
|
|
| (1364305) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 14:56:18 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 02:01:56 2015. In a sense ESA did require new tunnels under the East River in the form of the lower levels of the 63 St Tube. |
|
|
| (1364317) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 15:23:10 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 14:56:18 2015. Those are not new tunnels. They are pre-existing tunnels.Yet the amount of money spent on ESA thus far ought to have paid for an extension through lower Manhattan (including new stations there) and new tunnels under the East River in order to join up with the Atlantic Avenue branch in Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1364324) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by ElectricTraction on Fri Aug 28 15:48:48 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Aug 27 19:49:43 2015. Ah, I see. So it's really for CAHSR. The NIMBYs have gotten to a new low of making absolutely no sense. You'd think they'd be screaming for the wires to go up. I wouldn't blame them for that, since it's mutually beneficial to people living along the line, and making CalTrain get out of it's own way. |
|
|
| (1364332) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 28 16:25:49 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Aug 28 06:22:17 2015. This appears to be a new level. |
|
|
| (1364333) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Aug 28 16:42:40 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 14:44:05 2015. Maybe they wanted noise walls with Pella Impervia windows. |
|
|
| (1364341) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 17:33:12 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 15:23:10 2015. Although they are pre existing, they were built for the specific purpose of bringing the LIRR into the Grand Central area and in fact, AFAIK, into GCT itself which would have of course required certain tracks to be dedicated with LIRR third rail. |
|
|
| (1364349) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Aug 28 17:54:54 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 17:33:12 2015. Actually, not GCT, but 48th and 3rd terminal, a PATH-like terminal. |
|
|
| (1364356) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 18:06:13 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Joe V on Fri Aug 28 17:54:54 2015. OK, thanks although I had heard that GCT was in the running at one point. |
|
|
| (1364382) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 21:31:09 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by randyo on Fri Aug 28 17:33:12 2015. Ah, so the government flunkies lied again.$4 billion and open in 2009. That was the first promise for ESA. If you're going to spend three times that amount, then do what I suggested and connect it to the Atlantic Avenue Branch, right? I noticed that one can draw a straight line under Houston Street between Hoboken Terminal and the Bushwick Branch too. The PANY(NJ) would not mention that, though. (Possible Union Station location? The Houston Street area could stand some redevelopment.) |
|
|
| (1364384) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Aug 28 21:34:53 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 28 02:00:03 2015. Damn dude. So not only are you pro-highway, but your rationale for being anti-transit is that your highway will be used by some latter day Lot when the almighty rains fire and brimstone down upon wicked, evil New York City?I always think you've shown us just how crazy you are, but then you set out to smash the record books and show us how truly detached from reality you can be. |
|
|
| (1364740) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 31 13:25:42 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Aug 23 10:17:33 2015. But what are the benefits of ONE subway extension vs TriboroRX? Yes, there are huge swaths of the city that have no subway access, but how many subway extensions will it take to serve them all? |
|
|
| (1364741) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 31 13:26:18 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sun Aug 23 10:17:33 2015. But what are the benefits of ONE subway extension vs TriboroRX? Yes, there are huge swaths of the city that have no subway access, but how many subway extensions will it take to serve them all? TriboroRX could have a greater benefit in terms of cost/mile |
|
|
| (1364742) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 31 13:27:55 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Aug 21 17:58:40 2015. Much of eastern Queens could be better served by restructuring the way LIRR operates/charges in Queens. Same could be said for the Bronx with Metro North. Far cheaper than extending the subway and allows those costly subway extensions to be made to where they are truly needed. |
|
|
| (1364744) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 31 13:54:35 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 31 13:25:42 2015. Once again, we are arguing from the "we only have money for insufficient expansion--whom do we ignore". This is why we need a new political order starting with starving the five sided money pit in Virginia. |
|
|
| (1364748) | |
Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Aug 31 14:01:15 2015, in response to Re: Cuomo Reluctant To Dig Deep For New Hudson Rail Tunnel, posted by NIMBYkiller on Mon Aug 31 13:27:55 2015. Yes, it is long past time to simply integrate LIRR and MN within the 5 boros into NYCT fare media with full fare cross honoring. Taxpayers don't care what color the cars or the workers uniforms are; what they know is that all of the transit is funded by their taxes. Fares are just disincentive user fees. |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 7 |
||
