Savino calls for subway, rail links for Staten Island with floating $3B

[Roadcruiser1]

You call those the Select Bus Service, and Limited Bus Service is not SBS. SBS in other words are also called BRT or Bus Rapid Transit, and has been implemented in NYC before, and other places successfully.

[2Line1291]

This idea was just floating in my head. A tunnel to Staten Island doesn't require the completion of SAS but since SAS would likely be complete before the Staten tunnel. I also think the North Shore Line should be branch from the subway system. So far as SAS, I'm in favor of phase 4 of re-using the abandoned tracks on the Nassau and the running down 4th Av.

 

- We all know the North Shore Line is gonna get the priority of being express so the or trains is gonna run on the NS.

- The Bay Ridge branch is already a 4th Av Local so let it be the .

- The hardest part of this puzzle was which branch has the priority of being express on 4th Ave; Sea Beach or West End? Whatever happens, one would either have the 4th Av Express or the 4th Av Local.

 

On a sidenote I say turn the Arlington Yard into a new subway yard. If that ever happens the can run from Arlington to 125th St-Lexington Av

[Roadcruiser1]

Don't see that happening. Light rail would do almost the same thing, and would be cheaper to implement since it can make it up the steep grade of the Verrazano Narrows Bridge. One of my former teachers that is an engineer mentions that that is very feasible, and would most likely be cheaper then drilling a subway tunnel to Staten Island. The problem would be however there would be less car lanes, but that is better then nothing.

[Tokkemon]

Don't see that happening. Light rail would do almost the same thing, and would be cheaper to implement since it can make it up the steep grade of the Verrazano Narrows Bridge. One of my former teachers that is an engineer mentions that that is very feasible, and would most likely be cheaper then drilling a subway tunnel to Staten Island. The problem would be however there would be less car lanes, but that is better then nothing.

 

Or, we can not waste money on an intermediate solution and just build the right thing the first time.

[2Line1291]

But think about it though, as soon as light rail riders reach the Brooklyn end of the bridge, they gonna have to transfer to a bus or the subway anyways... when u build the subway tunnel it'll give Staten a one seat ride to Manhattan and go through St. George (the bulk of Staten population)

[Tokkemon]

I'd send a tunnel straight under the harbor via Governors Island. Why can't we do this? Its been done under the Channel and in Japan. And those tunnels were five times the length of this one. What's so hard about a little tunnel to Staten Island?

[Roadcruiser1]

We still can't consider a Second Avenue Subway extension to Staten Island, because that is so far into the future we won't even talk about it. Phase 4 of the Second Avenue Subway if it's ever done would most likely be completed in the late 2040's to early 2050's. That is going to take a long time. Plus the tunnel to Staten Island either to Manhattan or Brooklyn would take at least a decade or two to be completed. It would be 2060 or 2070 by then. Most Staten Islanders are complaining for a fast solution right now. If it takes that long for a solution then I don't know what to say.

[Roadcruiser1]

It is not a little tunnel. It would be 5, and half miles long, and would take at least three decades to build considering how long it takes the Second Avenue Subway.

[Tokkemon]

Building a tunnel under a harbor and building a tunnel under a major Avenue are two different things. With pre-fabricated parts building tunnels can be done very quickly.

 

Also, I never said it would be an SAS extension to Staten Island.

[Roadcruiser1]

There are many other things to consider including bedrock, and harbor traffic. From calculations from bedrock depth the Staten Island tunnel portals would have to dip 90 feet below sea level. The Manhattan tunnel portals would have to be 110 feet below sea level. This would cause the tunnel to angle down underneath the harbor.

[CenSin]

There are many other things to consider including bedrock, and harbor traffic. From calculations from bedrock depth the Staten Island tunnel portals would have to dip 90 feet below sea level. The Manhattan tunnel portals would have to be 110 feet below sea level. This would cause the tunnel to angle down underneath the harbor.

Sources please.

[Roadcruiser1]

http://depthome.brooklyn.cuny.edu/geology/core332/geonyc.htm

http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_about/parks_divisions/capital/pd_proj_month_jun_02.html

[CenSin]

http://depthome.brooklyn.cuny.edu/geology/core332/geonyc.htm

http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_about/parks_divisions/capital/pd_proj_month_jun_02.html

Now we need an engineering geologist.

 

The Brooklyn College link doesn't seem to say anything about the tip of Lower Manhattan.

[2Line1291]

I understand light rail being the long term transportation between Staten and Bayonne, but connecting BK and Staten w/ light rail.... LMBO no I don't see that happening. But before I starting criticising RC1... Once the light rail train reaches the BK end of the Verrazano, where does it go from there

[Roadcruiser1]

Bay Ridge-95th Street people transfer from the light rail to the subway. It is almost similar to the SBS idea for Staten Island that was shot down recently. Here is what I proposed on a map.

Orange Line-Light Rail

Bay Ridge-95th Street to SI Mall via Verrazano Narrows Bridge, and Staten Island Expressway.

Pink Line-West Shore Light Rail

The Hudson Bergen Light Rail extension down the West Shore. From Annadale to Hoboken Terminal.

Blue Line-Staten Island Railway

The Staten Island Railway with the reactivated North Shore Line. St. George has been rebuilt to allow service to run from Tottenville onto the North Shore across a rebuilt Geothals Bridge to Newark Liberty International Airport. Transfer is available to the Newark Airtrain, Amtrak Keystone, and Northeast service, and the NJT North Jersey Coast Line along with the Northeast Corridor Line.

[2Line1291]

I have so much to say but imma start off with this. If you going to extend light across the Verrazano to have people transfer at 95th St, then another transfer to a or train, they mind as well take the ferry to Lower Manhattan.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

This idea was just floating in my head. A tunnel to Staten Island doesn't require the completion of SAS but since SAS would likely be complete before the Staten tunnel. I also think the North Shore Line should be branch from the subway system. So far as SAS, I'm in favor of phase 4 of re-using the abandoned tracks on the Nassau and the running down 4th Av.

 

- We all know the North Shore Line is gonna get the priority of being express so the or trains is gonna run on the NS.

- The Bay Ridge branch is already a 4th Av Local so let it be the .

- The hardest part of this puzzle was which branch has the priority of being express on 4th Ave; Sea Beach or West End? Whatever happens, one would either have the 4th Av Express or the 4th Av Local.

 

On a sidenote I say turn the Arlington Yard into a new subway yard. If that ever happens the can run from Arlington to 125th St-Lexington Av

Excellent (and very feasible) suggestion. I'd go with the because it's a shorter line than the . I'd run the in a similar operation to the Rockaways service. The North Shore line would have 24-hour service into Brooklyn while the existing SIRT line would have base service provided by a from Tottenville to St. George and be limited rush-hour service. One possible scenario could be the current SIRT express runs during rush hours being replaced by trains.

 

Meanwhile, I'd have the replace the on the Sea Beach Line and run local on 4th Avenue. This allows the to run as a sort of super express in Brooklyn with only three stops (59th, 36th and Pacific) and would be reasonably time competitive with the SI express bus routes.

[Grand Concourse]

I'd send a tunnel straight under the harbor via Governors Island. Why can't we do this? Its been done under the Channel and in Japan. And those tunnels were five times the length of this one. What's so hard about a little tunnel to Staten Island?

 

I don't remember the tunnel, but is it the very one in Japan that costs a few billion and will likely never recoup the costs to justify its existance? The Channel tunnel connects two Countries. A SI-Brooklyn/Manhattan tunnel is just two boroughs. Not even NJ-NY. I really don't see any justification for such high costs for the least populated borough. Money is needed more in Queens and Brooklyn imo.

[Tokkemon]

I don't remember the tunnel, but is it the very one in Japan that costs a few billion and will likely never recoup the costs to justify its existance? The Channel tunnel connects two Countries. A SI-Brooklyn/Manhattan tunnel is just two boroughs. Not even NJ-NY. I really don't see any justification for such high costs for the least populated borough. Money is needed more in Queens and Brooklyn imo.

 

Naturally Queens should get it first. But Roadcrusier here is SO adamant that Light Rail is the way to go, so I was offering an option to Tunnel.

[2Line1291]

I made a mistake in my idea. I was meant to say

"The hardest part of this puzzle was which branch has the priority of being express on 4th Ave; Sea Beach or West End? Whatever happens, one would either have the 4th Av Express or the 4th Av Local".

 

I also agree with the running via Sea Beach since the presently runs via 4th Av Local and Lower Manhattan late nights.

I don't remember the tunnel, but is it the very one in Japan that costs a few billion and will likely never recoup the costs to justify its existance? The Channel tunnel connects two Countries. A SI-Brooklyn/Manhattan tunnel is just two boroughs. Not even NJ-NY. I really don't see any justification for such high costs for the least populated borough. Money is needed more in Queens and Brooklyn imo.

But at the same time Staten Island is growing just like the other boroughs but at a lesser extinct, even the least served parts of Queens and Brooklyn has better transportation then Staten. So a SI-Brooklyn would be considered a high priority project

[TheKorean]

Instead of wasting money on light rail, which is going to be so much slower than buses, why not just buy more buses and run them across Verrazano instead?

[2Line1291]

When it comes to Staten why does most of everyone wanna be so freakin cheap to improving service but when it comes to the Bronx, Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn yah (not directed to everyone) wanna talk about subway extensions. No, no, no.... light rail or SBS isn't gonna solve the long term solution to decreasing traffic from Staten Island to Manhattan. If Utica Ave needs a subway, North Shore Staten needs it just as bad. Just read the title of the thread.

[Grand Concourse]

Naturally Queens should get it first. But Roadcrusier here is SO adamant that Light Rail is the way to go, so I was offering an option to Tunnel.

 

That's true, but we all know he's always going to go on about some SI-subway connection. And always posting up a map rather than a link...

I made a mistake in my idea. I was meant to say

"The hardest part of this puzzle was which branch has the priority of being express on 4th Ave; Sea Beach or West End? Whatever happens, one would either have the 4th Av Express or the 4th Av Local".

 

I also agree with the running via Sea Beach since the presently runs via 4th Av Local and Lower Manhattan late nights.

But at the same time Staten Island is growing just like the other boroughs but at a lesser extinct, even the least served parts of Queens and Brooklyn has better transportation then Staten. So a SI-Brooklyn would be considered a high priority project

 

Well that is true. However, at the moment it would probably be best to have the SIRT have a branch line going to Brooklyn to allow for a transfer. I don't think the subways can be stretched further into another borough.

 

Ridership demand doesn't seem high enough to warrant all SI platforms to accomodate a 600' train.

 

So sure I might have a bias against SI, but I still feel the main 4 needs work first and then a SI-Brooklyn connection. The very issue SI needs to worry more about is the North Shore [as you said] line to give them another north-south line and of course to develop the roads so they can allow buses to go directly east-west. So once SI becomes more maneuverable, then it can expand to Brooklyn.

[2Line1291]

But it's the North Shore Line that's being branched from the subway, not the SIR Main Line. But we all have our different opinions.

[Grand Concourse]

But wouldn't it make sense to have it branched from the SIRT? There was a possible HBLR extension into SI and maybe having the NS line be a light rail mentioned.