North Shore Rail Workshop Tonight at Snug Harbor

There is going to be a informational hearing at Snug Harbor in the 1P building tonight from 7:15 PM - 9 PM regarding the plans for the North Shore Rail Line. See this article for more information:

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/04/north_shore_railway_workshop_t.html

Should be interesting. I'd love for a heavy-rail line to be built...adds for more flexibility as it could tie in with the Staten Island Railway.

Saw something like this yesterday in am NY. I hope they get to restore the North Shore.

Should be interesting. I'd love for a heavy-rail line to be built...adds for more flexibility as it could tie in with the Staten Island Railway.

That's what I was thinking. It also offers much more capacity if the areas surrounding the line get built up.

Unfortunately, the cheapest and quickest way is BRT, which is better than nothing, though I agree that heavy rail is best.

That's what I was thinking. It also offers much more capacity if the areas surrounding the line get built up.

Unfortunately, the cheapest and quickest way is BRT, which is better than nothing, though I agree that heavy rail is best.

I really don't think the North Shore of Staten Island warrants BRT because there's nothing really there other than houses.

Well, look at Queens Boulevard before the subway was built-there was barely anything there. Now it is one of the most crowded lines in the city. It shows how much development can take off when a rapid transit line is built.

From what happened at the meeting, it looks like the option that they are seriously considering is light rail. Since they want to get to the Teleport , they want to raise the line to South Avenue and make a left turn down South Avenue to go to the Teleport.

Thay say that since west of about Union Avenue there is freight service, they would have to physically separate the 2 trains, or else have to build the passenger trains to a very high standard. I suggested that the line start the grade to South Avejue at Union Avenue, since it would have to get to street level anyway (assuming they use LRT)

Well, look at Queens Boulevard before the subway was built-there was barely anything there. Now it is one of the most crowded lines in the city. It shows how much development can take off when a rapid transit line is built.

Even a month after the IRT Flushing Line was finished, the area surrouding 33rd was virtually barren.

Even a month after the IRT Flushing Line was finished, the area surrouding 33rd was virtually barren.

A month is not long enough. Maybe a decade or so.

I meant Queens Boulevard on the lines. That was only after a month though, and just one station. I remember looking at a picture of a trolley car around Union Turnpike/Queens Boulevard before the subway was built. It was virtually rural. Now, that station itself gets over 26,000 riders per day, and almost 8 million riders per year.

Ah, the 'build it and they will come' mantra. If it is mostly homes though, I kinda doubt the point of rebuilding the rail line. But maybe if people takes the bus to the NSRL to get to St george, then it'll be worth it. But again, if there really isn't the ridership, why invest? Hell converting it into a bus ROW, maybe it can do the same job?

Ah, the 'build it and they will come' mantra. If it is mostly homes though, I kinda doubt the point of rebuilding the rail line. But maybe if people takes the bus to the NSRL to get to St george, then it'll be worth it. But again, if there really isn't the ridership, why invest? Hell converting it into a bus ROW, maybe it can do the same job?

It's cheaper to run a train than it is to run a bus. I could see ridership on the S40/90 plummeting drastically along the majority of Richmond Terrace because there will be an alternate form of transportation, which for the most part is better.

The routes along the North Shore of Staten Island are among the most crowded on the Island (but even their numbers are puny compared to the most-used routes in the city). The buses keep getting more and more crowded. Eventually, the MTA will have to keep adding more buses, whereas trains are much more cost-effective, making it possible to actually reduce the bus service slightly.

In a way, this is a smaller version of the SAS. The buses in the corridor represent the Lexington Avenue Line and the NSRR represents the SAS. Eventually, the buses won't be able to handle the capacity, so more buses will be needed, which in the long run is much less cost effective (and does less for the communities) than a train.

They say that the new line would get the same number of passengers (approximately) in the 5 miles that it travels that the main line gets in 14 miles, meaning that it is much more cost-effective on the North Shore than on the South Shore.

Ah, the 'build it and they will come' mantra. If it is mostly homes though, I kinda doubt the point of rebuilding the rail line. But maybe if people takes the bus to the NSRL to get to St george, then it'll be worth it. But again, if there really isn't the ridership, why invest? Hell converting it into a bus ROW, maybe it can do the same job?

Sometimes BRT is not always the answer to everything

Well, do they know for sure if a LRT will be worth such the cost and investment? I figure you can use the ROW for buses [artics] and those buses can also be used on other lines across SI. The point is that as long as the ROW is only for public transit, then it really doesn't matter what runs on it.

Well, do they know for sure if a LRT will be worth such the cost and investment? I figure you can use the ROW for buses [artics] and those buses can also be used on other lines across SI. The point is that as long as the ROW is only for public transit, then it really doesn't matter what runs on it.

It actually DOES matter to a certain extent. You do not know how much people understand clearly the concept of bus rapid transit. And plus, how is bus rapid transit going to be implemented? What features?

Checkmate is right: you do not want to underestimate the number of potential riders. Buses (regardless of articulated or even biarticulated) do have a limit in how many passengers can be carried at a certain time. Ordering too many buses would be dollars. And you would probably have to build a new depot for these buses because they would probably fill up other depots. And plus, you would want to have the depots for additional (and regular) bus service. You do want to maintain the level of bus service in the island.

Certain BRT lines in this country, like the Geary route in SF, are planned so that LRT could replace it in the future. If ridership patterns skyrocket when the route is built as a BRT, they would bring up suggestions to convert it into LRT. By that time, conversion would be even more costly than to initially build the thing as a LRT.

IMO, the best solution is, convert it for light rail use first. If there's a greater demand for a link to the mainline SIR, then convert it to heavy rail standards. And there might be a possibility to connect the line with the HBLR, so LRT does help out.

Certain BRT lines in this country, like the Geary route in SF, are planned so that LRT could replace it in the future. If ridership patterns skyrocket when the route is built as a BRT, they would bring up suggestions to convert it into LRT. By that time, conversion would be even more costly than to initially build the thing as a LRT.

 

IMO, the best solution is, convert it for light rail use first. If there's a greater demand for a link to the mainline SIR, then convert it to heavy rail standards. And there might be a possibility to connect the line with the HBLR, so LRT does help out.

Hem, that was exactly what I was thinking about - a BRT set up to pave the way for an eventual conversion to LRT. But again, I see what you mean another good point.

Okayc I don't know if you guys have seen the abandoned parts of the area, but BRT for this study is impossible. The line has a ROW, some part that's adjacent to Richmond Terrace, some parts that aren't. I was skateboarding to my friends house all the way from the ferry terminal to Port Richmond (needed the excercise lol) a few years back and I followed the patof the ROW along Richmond Terrace. Sone parts of it us recessed next to the street, then it goes elevated and then follows its own path in an open cut between houses. Whenever you guys are free next time, take the S40/90 from the ferry to Howland Hook and you'll see what I mean, or better yet, I'll do a walking tour of my own and take photos and post them here.

Okayc I don't know if you guys have seen the abandoned parts of the area, but BRT for this study is impossible. The line has a ROW, some part that's adjacent to Richmond Terrace, some parts that aren't. I was skateboarding to my friends house all the way from the ferry terminal to Port Richmond (needed the excercise lol) a few years back and I followed the patof the ROW along Richmond Terrace. Sone parts of it us recessed next to the street, then it goes elevated and then follows its own path in an open cut between houses. Whenever you guys are free next time, take the S40/90 from the ferry to Howland Hook and you'll see what I mean, or better yet, I'll do a walking tour of my own and take photos and post them here.

That too: BRT fully segregated could be a good thing, but you do need access ramps for emergency reasons, and the ROW provides inadequate room to build such ramps, IMO.

It actually DOES matter to a certain extent. You do not know how much people understand clearly the concept of bus rapid transit. And plus, how is bus rapid transit going to be implemented? What features?

 

Checkmate is right: you do not want to underestimate the number of potential riders. Buses (regardless of articulated or even biarticulated) do have a limit in how many passengers can be carried at a certain time. Ordering too many buses would be dollars. And you would probably have to build a new depot for these buses because they would probably fill up other depots. And plus, you would want to have the depots for additional (and regular) bus service. You do want to maintain the level of bus service in the island.

 

Certain BRT lines in this country, like the Geary route in SF, are planned so that LRT could replace it in the future. If ridership patterns skyrocket when the route is built as a BRT, they would bring up suggestions to convert it into LRT. By that time, conversion would be even more costly than to initially build the thing as a LRT.

 

IMO, the best solution is, convert it for light rail use first. If there's a greater demand for a link to the mainline SIR, then convert it to heavy rail standards. And there might be a possibility to connect the line with the HBLR, so LRT does help out.

The only problem with converting is that if the LRT line causes the population density to increase around the line, and then it is converted to heavy rail, you would have to close the line down for a few years and go through the exoense of converting it from LRT to heavy rail.

I don't really think the HBLR would be merged with the line with the reason being that the Bayonne Bridge is 151 feet above sea level, meaning that the train would have to desend down to the North Shore Line which is below street level at that point. You would probably have to loop the line around to get the grades down to a reasonable level.

The only problem with converting is that if the LRT line causes the population density to increase around the line, and then it is converted to heavy rail, you would have to close the line down for a few years and go through the exoense of converting it from LRT to heavy rail.

I don't really think the HBLR would be merged with the line with the reason being that the Bayonne Bridge is 151 feet above sea level, meaning that the train would have to desend down to the North Shore Line which is below street level at that point. You would probably have to loop the line around to get the grades down to a reasonable level.

Agreed 100%. Besides, the Bayonne Bridge would have to be modified in order to accommodate the HBLR, which, for the most part, is highly unlikely, as well as building a bridge solely for the HBLR between Jersey and Staten Island.

Just link the North Shore Line to the Staten Island Main South Shore Line at Saint George and call it a day. Much more flexibility and much less headaches. The only issue is that there are parts where private property has been built along the passage of the ROW so the MTA would have to buy out those private properties.

The only problem with converting is that if the LRT line causes the population density to increase around the line, and then it is converted to heavy rail, you would have to close the line down for a few years and go through the exoense of converting it from LRT to heavy rail.

I don't really think the HBLR would be merged with the line with the reason being that the Bayonne Bridge is 151 feet above sea level, meaning that the train would have to desend down to the North Shore Line which is below street level at that point. You would probably have to loop the line around to get the grades down to a reasonable level.

Well yeah, it would be difficult to bring the HBLR over (citing both technical reasons and possibly, political reasons). But the main determinant to whether what mode of transport should be done should be based on population and demand.

For HRT to be effective, the demand for the corridor must be high and that the predicted ridership is high enough to make it necessary for the line to be built. As for LRT, LRT does not warrant that high of ridership.

TBH, I don't think WE should decide what they should get. Let THEM decide what they want.

By the way, I think these websites are interesting and have a lot to do with the North Shore Rail:

http://www.rpa.org/pdf/RPA_tomorrows_transit.pdf (Shows which neighborhoods are in need of more mass transit options, by calculating density, poverty, and feasability)

http://www.siedc.org/images/PDF/WSLRPhaseII_FINALREPORT.pdf (A report on the West Shore Light Rail, which would connect with the North Shore Line)

http://www.auto-free.org/lrt-staten.html (Talks about rail connections to NJ)

I call Heavy Rail.

This is what I had in mind (I did it in my fantasy map):

The North Shore line would utilize the bridge across to New Jersey, where it could use the old Morristown & Erie Railway to connect to the Elizabeth station, and the Cranford Junction. On the second map, the trains can use the CSX to travel right next to the coast. A stop can be made at the Neward Airport. A little above that, a connection can made constructed so that trains can either run on the PATH to WTC or Herald Square, or on the Northeast Corridor to travel into Penn Station. I'd rather see heavy rail on the line than light rail.