Cuomo Steps Into Transit Fray With Ideas for After ‘Summer of Hell’

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Overall its politics as usual. Deblasio needs to Step up and stop getting punkd by Cuomo left and right. he does need to push for the needs of NYC more, especially with our subways. But at the end of the day the subway is run by the MTA and the MTA is state. Now who runs the state. Yeas, we need to find where the Money will cone from. thats always been the issue. It doesn't grow from nowhere. So why isn't Cuomo stating that these stations are costing too much taxpayer money? Does he? No, he cuts the ribbon to open them and calls it a win for him.

Its not what Cuomo (and deblasio) are or aren't getting done. Its how they are going about it. I dont feel sorry for either one. They are letting us pay for their battling in the long run. Cuomo is only "looking out for NYC" to stick it to deblasio. Do we really need state police patrolling the city? They dont know the city. In my 39 years I've never seen state police in NYC until recent.

Some may see Cuomo "doing a lot for NYC" but the question is is he doing it correctly? THATS what bit comes down to. Stations on SAS ate too expensive. I didnt hear either politician Complain. Aietrain LGA goes the wrong way. Does Cuomo care? No, as long as it gets done he can pat himself on the back.

Penn station. Who owns it and runs it? A national agency. All Cuomo can do is ask congress to take action. Yeah, there's a lot of things on his plate so to speak. Some of it isn't suppose to be all on his shoulders. And what the public sees is him only around to take praise and credit. Deblasio is bad in his own way. He's not sticking up for us as he should. if something for the city isn't getting done by the state like its suppose to be, then where's his pressure on Cuomo. Where's the asking for planning and reviews and back up on certain projects?

I get what you're saying VG8. I truly do. but at the end of the day, the governor runs the state. And even if funding isn't there, the call for getting the wheels in motion Or something should be. Its shows the public your looking out for their needs. Especially during times that aren't great like our subway system.

 

He should be there when times are bad and not just for ribbon cutting. THATS the issue most have with him.

And it doesn't mean deblasio is off the hook. He's just smart enough to let the gov take the heat since he want to take the praise. One must take both. Not just one or the other.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

What's funny is I don't see anything changing, especially if de Blasio is re-elected.  Since we're talking about the as a whole, de Blasio can help make bus service better above ground.  He recently said at a press conference that he can't do anything about the subways, but that the situation above ground was hellish and that he has a plan to deal with it (without bringing up buses).  I'm waiting to see what that plan is.  It was on the news, but I haven't heard anything about it since, so we'll see.

[Far Rock Depot]

What's funny is I don't see anything changing, especially if de Blasio is re-elected. Since we're talking about the as a whole, de Blasio can help make bus service better above ground. He recently said at a press conference that he can't do anything about the subways, but that the situation above ground was hellish and that he has a plan to deal with it (without bringing up buses). I'm waiting to see what that plan is. It was on the news, but I haven't heard anything about it since, so we'll see.

All he can do is fix the traffic flow on streets. Which really he messed up in the first place with Vision Zero. The MTA instructs their drivers to drive 5 mph lower than the speed limit, which deblasio reduced to 25 city wide. So now buses go 20. Which makes people not use the bus cause everything else is faster. This leads to a reduction in service. Its a cascading effect.

But the buses are also NYCT and BC, which is MTA which goes back to Cuomo. But its not the MTA infrastructure thats the problem with buses. Its Vision Zero. So when it comes to the buses themselves, deblasio can't do a thing even though its not the buses. What can he do? Fix vision zero. Allow buses. A little breathing room to move faster.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[GojiMet86]

All he can do is fix the traffic flow on streets. Which really he messed up in the first place with Vision Zero. The MTA instructs their drivers to drive 5 mph lower than the speed limit, which deblasio reduced to 25 city wide. So now buses go 20. Which makes people not use the bus cause everything else is faster. This leads to a reduction in service. Its a cascading effect.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

Yep.

 

And there is still a need to solve the ever decreasing bus ridership that started years ago.

[Far Rock Depot]

Yep.

 

And there is still a need to solve the ever decreasing bus ridership that started years ago.

Its the same issue. More people come to the city. That includes by car. It got faster to travel underground. So surface ridership declined. Not its worse cause of vision zero. Buses run slower. Drivers are kinda shook when it cones to vision zero so they are going to drive that bus at 20mph and not race a yellow light. Its not just their job they gotta worry about now but also their freedom. No one sees that though. So if deblasio wants better bus service first step is fixing vision zero....and not think that SBS fixes everything, cause it doesn't.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[Via Garibaldi 8]

All he can do is fix the traffic flow on streets. Which really he messed up in the first place with Vision Zero. The MTA instructs their drivers to drive 5 mph lower than the speed limit, which deblasio reduced to 25 city wide. So now buses go 20. Which makes people not use the bus cause everything else is faster. This leads to a reduction in service. Its a cascading effect.

But the buses are also NYCT and BC, which is MTA which goes back to Cuomo. But its not the MTA infrastructure thats the problem with buses. Its Vision Zero. So when it comes to the buses themselves, deblasio can't do a thing even though its not the buses. What can he do? Fix vision zero. Allow buses. A little breathing room to move faster.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

I'm of the belief that traffic flow IS the main issue as to why buses are so terrible. In fact, NYC has the slowest buses in the entire nation.

 

http://nyc.streetsblog.org/2016/10/06/mta-dont-ask-us-to-do-more-to-fix-nyc-buses-were-doing-enough/

 

In 2014, the average speed for buses in NYC was 7.4 mph, and I have to believe that it is even slower in 2017.

[Far Rock Depot]

I'm of the belief that traffic flow IS the main issue as to why buses are so terrible. In fact, NYC has the slowest buses in the entire nation.

 

http://nyc.streetsblog.org/2016/10/06/mta-dont-ask-us-to-do-more-to-fix-nyc-buses-were-doing-enough/

 

In 2014, the average speed for buses in NYC was 7.4 mph, and I have believe that it is even slower in 2017.

Part of that is increased traffic. The other part is Vision Zero. Both the mayor can fix. Its not the buses, or maintenance. Thats NJTs issue. Here its the traffic flow and laws. Who wants to be on a bus going 20 in a 25 and having to compete with other traffic unless there's no other way?

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[BreeddekalbL]

Part of that is increased traffic. The other part is Vision Zero. Both the mayor can fix. Its not the buses, or maintenance. Thats NJTs issue. Here its the traffic flow and laws. Who wants to be on a bus going 20 in a 25 and having to compete with other traffic unless there's no other way?

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

and yet i get told that vision zero is good, vision zero is a disaster it increases congestion, and it's malarkey that they forcing SBS on woodhaven blvd with vision zero,  and the fact they makin them wait out in the street with a little island, when an out of control car crashes into the stop they gonna do what LA did when someone crashed into the bus station in the middle of the freeway.

[Far Rock Depot]

and yet i get told that vision zero is good, vision zero is a disaster it increases congestion, and it's malarkey that they forcing SBS on woodhaven blvd with vision zero, and the fact they makin them wait out in the street with a little island, when an out of control car crashes into the stop they gonna do what LA did when someone crashed into the bus station in the middle of the freeway.

I'm not against SBS on Wood haven. But they do need to make some changes to the plan. Those bus stops being in the median need to be one of those changes. But having the Q52/53 as SBS would help Rockaway commuters until a rail solution is met (similar reason why the M15 got SBS). SBS went from a bus rapid transit option where rail lines aren't fully available (fordham, east side, main st, woodhaven) to the mayor's stupid solution to a problem he actually created (crosstown routes, Utica. Hyland blvd).

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[Mtatransit]

1 million, to improve the subway... Lol any commuter that uses the subway 7 days a week could tell you something the MTA could change...

I'm not against SBS on Wood haven. But they do need to make some changes to the plan. Those bus stops being in the median need to be one of those changes. But having the Q52/53 as SBS would help Rockaway commuters until a rail solution is met (similar reason why the M15 got SBS). SBS went from a bus rapid transit option where rail lines aren't fully available (fordham, east side, main st, woodhaven) to the mayor's stupid solution to a problem he actually created (crosstown routes, Utica. Hyland blvd).

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

SBS was supposed to be an actual improvement to bus service, instead more and more we see our mayor shoving it down our throats, and with each SBS comes less actual BRT feature. Some SBS won't even qualify calling it a Limited bus.

[Deucey]

And send the trains to where? Its still gonna see the same amount of traffic. All that would really do is shift the problem from Penn to another location. Its why I personally dont like the "Rethink NYC" idea. First thing to do is fix the existing infrastructure. Then expand on it I.e. new tunnels across the river. Its not the fact that Penn is a terminal that's the issue, its the bottlenecking at each end and the aging equipment.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

Say LIRR's Hempstead lines continue through Penn on the Hackettstown Line; Port Washington line continues on the NEC to Trenton; Oyster Bay on the Raritan Valley line, and Banylon continues on the Jersey Coast Line. Trains all end up being through service - stops at Penn for two minutes each way and continues onward.

 

No delays waiting for platforms to clear, minimal switching , and bottlenecks lessened.

 

That wouldn't mitigate many of the problems related to capacity and wear and tear at Penn?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Say LIRR's Hempstead lines continue through Penn on the Hackettstown Line; Port Washington line continues on the NEC to Trenton; Oyster Bay on the Raritan Valley line, and Banylon continues on the Jersey Coast Line. Trains all end up being through service - stops at Penn for two minutes each way and continues onward.

No delays waiting for platforms to clear, minimal switching , and bottlenecks lessened.

That wouldn't mitigate many of the problems related to capacity and wear and tear at Penn?

I have to agree with you. There was a report on this very idea. Have all trains run through Penn Station and it speeds up a lot of things.

[Far Rock Depot]

Say LIRR's Hempstead lines continue through Penn on the Hackettstown Line; Port Washington line continues on the NEC to Trenton; Oyster Bay on the Raritan Valley line, and Banylon continues on the Jersey Coast Line. Trains all end up being through service - stops at Penn for two minutes each way and continues onward.

 

No delays waiting for platforms to clear, minimal switching , and bottlenecks lessened.

 

That wouldn't mitigate many of the problems related to capacity and wear and tear at Penn?

So basically a SEPTA style of routing. Nope.

And before I go deeply into all the flaws, here's a few major ones: motive power, crew qualifications, signals, etc....

Plus having thru trains like that would actually reduce the reliability of trains on either end. You got a delay on the pt wash, now the hackettstown suffers. Problems in the Hudson river tubes, now the LIRR suffers more than before.

 

On paper it looks good. In operational reality, it really doesn't solve anything.

 

And if you ask me ReThinkNYC is a bunch of people who think they can play operations planning with a real RR while having no knowledge of how an actual RR works.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[BreeddekalbL]

I'm not against SBS on Wood haven. But they do need to make some changes to the plan. Those bus stops being in the median need to be one of those changes. But having the Q52/53 as SBS would help Rockaway commuters until a rail solution is met (similar reason why the M15 got SBS). SBS went from a bus rapid transit option where rail lines aren't fully available (fordham, east side, main st, woodhaven) to the mayor's stupid solution to a problem he actually created (crosstown routes, Utica. Hyland blvd).

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

 

1 million, to improve the subway... Lol any commuter that uses the subway 7 days a week could tell you something the MTA could change...

SBS was supposed to be an actual improvement to bus service, instead more and more we see our mayor shoving it down our throats, and with each SBS comes less actual BRT feature. Some SBS won't even qualify calling it a Limited bus.

 

bloomberg created  bx12, the m15, the M34/34A, the S79, The BX41 and THE B44 sbs routes the M60 could count but was delayed the real ones created by deblasio's malarkey vision zero could be the M86,The Q44, the B46 LTD, M23 and M79 (q70 doesn't really count since there is no bus lanes but was created by prince andrew)

[Around the Horn]

Say LIRR's Hempstead lines continue through Penn on the Hackettstown Line; Port Washington line continues on the NEC to Trenton; Oyster Bay on the Raritan Valley line, and Banylon continues on the Jersey Coast Line. Trains all end up being through service - stops at Penn for two minutes each way and continues onward.

 

No delays waiting for platforms to clear, minimal switching , and bottlenecks lessened.

 

That wouldn't mitigate many of the problems related to capacity and wear and tear at Penn?

Congratulations, you just opened Pandora's box...

 The through pair you suggest are terrible. First off, the levels of service are completely different and the times trains run to NYP are completely different. For example, Oyster Bay is rush hours only, Raritan Valley is non-peak hours only.

Second, the ridership levels on these lines are not even close to each other. One side of each line is guaranteed to carry air.

Third, you now have a massive rolling stock problem, NJT's fleet can only run on overhead catenary and LIRR can only run on third rail.

Fourth, through running does absolutely nothing to increase capacity, because the same physical limits still exist.

[BreeddekalbL]

Congratulations, you just opened Pandora's box...

 The through pair you suggest are terrible. First off, the levels of service are completely different and the times trains run to NYP are completely different. For example, Oyster Bay is rush hours only, Raritan Valley is non-peak hours only.

Second, the ridership levels on these lines are not even close to each other. One side of each line is guaranteed to carry air.

Third, you now have a massive rolling stock problem, NJT's fleet can only run on overhead catenary and LIRR can only run on third rail.

Fourth, through running does absolutely nothing to increase capacity, because the same physical limits still exist.

 

LOL me and Lincoln MchMahon(if you are here say yo) are getting into it with some one named liam who works at rethinkNYC 

[bobtehpanda]

Really, the only corridor that kind of makes sense to through run would be NJT NE Corridor - New Haven Line, but we kind of threw that opportunity out the window by tossing out ARC Alt G.

[Deucey]

Congratulations, you just opened Pandora's box...

The through pair you suggest are terrible. First off, the levels of service are completely different and the times trains run to NYP are completely different. For example, Oyster Bay is rush hours only, Raritan Valley is non-peak hours only.

Second, the ridership levels on these lines are not even close to each other. One side of each line is guaranteed to carry air.

Third, you now have a massive rolling stock problem, NJT's fleet can only run on overhead catenary and LIRR can only run on third rail.

Fourth, through running does absolutely nothing to increase capacity, because the same physical limits still exist.

That's why I asked - these lines were all part of the same corporation until the Conrail situation in the 70s, so it would seem logical to someone like me that merging two systems would deliver more benefits and possibly lower long term costs and immediate headaches.

 

But if it ain't gonna work...

[FLX9304]

Cuomo is not saying anything about how the MTA is mismanaged. You see him trying to encourage the MTA to cut the fat?

 

 

 

 

 

And Trump's approval rating is at an all-time low. Guess he's doing something wrong...

Lololololololol. I am not saying a word about this, bc I already know.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[RR503]

Honestly this topic is a perfect demonstration of why we can't fix our transit system. Our leaders spend so much time finger pointing and deriding each other's solutions that nothing gets done and funding gets pulled to make political points. In the last 20ish hours we've produced seven pages of -- interesting -- but almost wholly destructive argument on who's fault what is.

 

See, if electeds could see beyond their egos and accept a second person at ribbon cuttings, we *maybe* would be able to get something done. And many of the solutions here would actually be feasible with cooperation. SBS could really be BRT if DOT put its heart into it. Through running could be managed if NJT/LIRR talked and began to integrate, etc.

 

I have to go now, but I can assure myself that when I check this topic again later, there will be seventy angry posts telling me why I'm wrong. Oh well.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So basically a SEPTA style of routing. Nope.

And before I go deeply into all the flaws, here's a few major ones: motive power, crew qualifications, signals, etc....

Plus having thru trains like that would actually reduce the reliability of trains on either end. You got a delay on the pt wash, now the hackettstown suffers. Problems in the Hudson river tubes, now the LIRR suffers more than before.

 

On paper it looks good. In operational reality, it really doesn't solve anything.

 

And if you ask me ReThinkNYC is a bunch of people who think they can play operations planning with a real RR while having no knowledge of how an actual RR works.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

It doesn't work because of the archaic outdated infrastructure we have. I lived in one of the oldest countries around and they have a much better rail system than we do. They invest and more importantly the upgrades LAST. Here we want a billion for this and that and the materials used are utter garbage. That's another issue. I don't think it'll change anytime soon. When you spend the kind of money the is spending on these stations, they should be in much better shape.

[Lance]

Oh come on now.  I don't think the issue is as easy as you're making it sound.  Even if the money was there, given how long it took the to complete SAS, it would be God knows how many more years before we saw anything.  What's your solution to that?

 

I also disagree about Penn Station.  The Port Authority would not take over all of Penn Station, certainly not the tracks.  If Cuomo has to go to the Feds to beg for money every time something needs fixing there as he's currently doing, we're in deeper trouble than anything the Port Authority could ever get us into.  Why not shift some of the financial burden to someone else (Cuomo has also proposed having an independent contractor come in and take over the current project being carried out by Amtrak, which would likely mean it getting done quicker AND cheaper).  Let the Port Authority or a private entity take over the Concourse area, and let the track maintenance and infrastructure be taken care of by someone with knowledge.

I never said it would be easy. I just said that's what needs to be done to bring the system up to meet the demands of the 21st century. You can throw a bunch of buses at the Lexington Ave line but that really won't do much as the roads above are just as congested.

 

On the subject of Penn Station and the potential for Port Authority involvement, we're going to have to agree to disagree there. Given the last decade of mismanagement from the PA on its most critical projects, that agency has not given me any confidence to be able to properly manage the concourses at Penn Station. Besides, the main problem at Penn Station is not the concourse, but rather the tracks. Yes, the station is in the basement at the whims of the Garden above, but that isn't something any public or private interest can fix, not without moving the Garden from its perch. That's why the focus as of late has been on the Empire-Moynihan project at the old Farley Post Office.

 

On the subject of the tracks, the crux of the issue here at Penn Station, the problem is not a lack of experience and know how on the situation at hand. Part of the problem, like with everything else, is a lack of adequate funding for the maintenance and track rehab required. The other is a matter of logistics. Penn Station serves as the terminal for both New Jersey Transit and the LIRR along with operating as a through station for Amtrak. There simply isn't an ideal time to do the required work without inconveniencing riders, which is why the original plan was to spread it out over the course of several months.

 

Long-term, for Penn Station and the associated cross-river traffic, new tunnels need to be built across the Hudson to alleviate the ever-growing congestion. Also needed is an expansion of the number of tracks for the station itself. Recent events have shown there simply aren't enough tracks available when something goes wrong.

 

That's besides the point.  Hurricane or not, the hired a contractor that didn't do their due diligence to ensure that the new station was built to keep water out.  They knew about the problem too and still didn't fix it properly.  

While we can agree the MTA really cut corners by neglecting to put waterproofing measures in the station, South Ferry was always doomed in Hurricane Sandy. That station acted like a bathtub for all of the water and there was simply nowhere for that water to go with the new station as deep as it is. The major problem with South Ferry is the same one that affected most of the area, a lack of adequate water pumping measures for the immediate coastal areas. All of the waterproofing in the world won't do anything if you can't remove the water before it destroys everything.

 

Would it be smarter for LIRR and NJT to reunite (a la Penn Central) and run through-trains to reduce delays and possibly infrastructure wear and tear?

No. That would just create new problems. Also, for the record, despite operating under the same umbrella, none of the Pennsylvania Railroad, NYC Railroad or New Haven commuter routes operated beyond their pre-merger routes.

 

Say LIRR's Hempstead lines continue through Penn on the Hackettstown Line; Port Washington line continues on the NEC to Trenton; Oyster Bay on the Raritan Valley line, and Banylon continues on the Jersey Coast Line. Trains all end up being through service - stops at Penn for two minutes each way and continues onward.

 

No delays waiting for platforms to clear, minimal switching , and bottlenecks lessened.

 

That wouldn't mitigate many of the problems related to capacity and wear and tear at Penn?

While I cannot proclaim much detailed knowledge about the various LIRR and NJT train routes, I feel that creating these so-called super routes would not help matters. As mentioned previously, it will do nothing but kill reliability across the board for these routes. It also won't do anything to solve the wear and tear problems at Penn Station as the trains will continue to use the tracks there. They just won't terminate there.

 

It doesn't work because of the archaic outdated infrastructure we have. I lived in one of the oldest countries around and they have a much better rail system than we do. They invest and more importantly the upgrades LAST. Here we want a billion for this and that and the materials used are utter garbage. That's another issue. I don't think it'll change anytime soon. When you spend the kind of money the is spending on these stations, they should be in much better shape.

You hit the nail on the head on that one. In other countries, elected officials actually put the necessary effort required to ensure their transportation infrastructure is always in good working order. In this country, our politicians view infrastructure as something we can continue to kick down the road until either the capacity maxes out (and then some) or if the structures just collapse into itself. And no, that isn't a problem localized to the MTA or the state of New York. Part of the problem, especially here, is the ever-present cost overruns and that has to change otherwise we will never get our transportation network to match that of other developed countries. However, we do seriously need to invest in the infrastructure to not only ensure it lasts for the next generation, but also expands to meet demand.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1. I never said it would be easy. I just said that's what needs to be done to bring the system up to meet the demands of the 21st century. You can throw a bunch of buses at the Lexington Ave line but that really won't do much as the roads above are just as congested.

 

On the subject of Penn Station and the potential for Port Authority involvement, we're going to have to agree to disagree there. Given the last decade of mismanagement from the PA on its most critical projects, that agency has not given me any confidence to be able to properly manage the concourses at Penn Station. Besides, the main problem at Penn Station is not the concourse, but rather the tracks. Yes, the station is in the basement at the whims of the Garden above, but that isn't something any public or private interest can fix, not without moving the Garden from its perch. That's why the focus as of late has been on the Empire-Moynihan project at the old Farley Post Office.

 

On the subject of the tracks, the crux of the issue here at Penn Station, the problem is not a lack of experience and know how on the situation at hand. Part of the problem, like with everything else, is a lack of adequate funding for the maintenance and track rehab required. The other is a matter of logistics. Penn Station serves as the terminal for both New Jersey Transit and the LIRR along with operating as a through station for Amtrak. There simply isn't an ideal time to do the required work without inconveniencing riders, which is why the original plan was to spread it out over the course of several months.

 

Long-term, for Penn Station and the associated cross-river traffic, new tunnels need to be built across the Hudson to alleviate the ever-growing congestion. Also needed is an expansion of the number of tracks for the station itself. Recent events have shown there simply aren't enough tracks available when something goes wrong.

 

2. While we can agree the MTA really cut corners by neglecting to put waterproofing measures in the station, South Ferry was always doomed in Hurricane Sandy. That station acted like a bathtub for all of the water and there was simply nowhere for that water to go with the new station as deep as it is. The major problem with South Ferry is the same one that affected most of the area, a lack of adequate water pumping measures for the immediate coastal areas. All of the waterproofing in the world won't do anything if you can't remove the water before it destroys everything.

 

 

3. You hit the nail on the head on that one. In other countries, elected officials actually put the necessary effort required to ensure their transportation infrastructure is always in good working order. In this country, our politicians view infrastructure as something we can continue to kick down the road until either the capacity maxes out (and then some) or if the structures just collapse into itself. And no, that isn't a problem localized to the MTA or the state of New York. Part of the problem, especially here, is the ever-present cost overruns and that has to change otherwise we will never get our transportation network to match that of other developed countries. However, we do seriously need to invest in the infrastructure to not only ensure it lasts for the next generation, but also expands to meet demand.

1.  That's the thing though.  If the tracks are being dealt with by another entity, and you leave the PA or a perhaps even a private operator to manage the concourses, that alleviates the pressure on one entity to take care of the entire station particularly from a financial standpoint.  I don't know what sort of arrangement exists with Grand Central, but it clearly can be looked at as a model if you will as to how such projects can be done right.  I'm aware of the fact that Grand Central likely had much more capacity from a track standpoint but still.  

 

2.  I agree, but surely this is something that had to be known prior to this project being undertaken (the pumping problem and the water problem at that station in general).  The put the blame squarely on the contractor (which from a contractual standpoint they should), but per Michael Horodniceanu, they (which includes the ) were aware of the water issues as the project pushed forward, but simply couldn't fix them, so that begs the question of why would you open a brand new station knowing that there are water problems that haven't been addressed? Did they think they would just go away? lol I worked in the construction industry long enough to know that something like that is just all sorts of wrong.  When a project is supposedly complete, there's a punch list, and you go through everything to confirm that the specifications of the project have been met, including any change orders that may have been put in along the way.  I don't know how that big one got "overlooked".

 

3. I also notice that the stations I've used overseas (both subways and commuter rails) are usually ordinary (nothing spectacular), but they function the way that they should, which is moving people from point A to point B efficiently.  We need to focus more on doing the basics better.

[Wallyhorse]

While I cannot proclaim much detailed knowledge about the various LIRR and NJT train routes, I feel that creating these so-called super routes would not help matters. As mentioned previously, it will do nothing but kill reliability across the board for these routes. It also won't do anything to solve the wear and tear problems at Penn Station as the trains will continue to use the tracks there. They just won't terminate there.

Save for a few special situations (like for example on Belmont Stakes day and if Belmont hosts the Breeders' Cup a limited number of NJ Transit through trains between Trenton and Belmont Park), you're probably right on through service.  SEPTA in Philly in fact just changed around some of their through lines (on the Regional Rail) to improve on-time performance.

[Far Rock Depot]

LOL me and Lincoln MchMahon(if you are here say yo) are getting into it with some one named liam who works at rethinkNYC

I'm following that myself. Every time that guy post something I have so many comments in his posts all over pointing out Evey little thing wrong with it. One time that Liam guy even blocked me from commenting on one of his posts.

 

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

[Brooklyn]

I don't why the bulk of this thread is about DeBlasio....the MTA is mostly STATE--in other words, CUOMO. So much ado about nothing, but I guess some just like to argue.

 

Regarding the thru running, I say no.

 

Ultimately, I think NJT should have its own tracks and stations and abandon Penn Station--maybe have deep tracks under 42nd st (or 39/40th st) with stops at 8-9th Av (Port Authority) and Lexington (Grand Central). It'll go under the East River and reconnect with its yard in LIC. More people would be served this way, and you'd have a nice link with the buses at PA.

 

Keep it simple, simply two platforms, four tracks like Metro North at 125th st, or stacked stations to save space like the 4,5,6 trains at 59th or 86th st....have the LIC bound trains be on top and the NJ trains on the bottom. And yes, a large diameter tube carrying 4 tracks or separate ones.

 

On the Jersey side, I'd add a station at either Palisade and 32nd st or Route 1/9 (with a gigantic park and ride).

 

Let Amtrak and LIRR have Penn.

 

Just my two cents.