Jump to content

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

SIR North Shore

By SIR North Shore,
in MTA Railroads

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 665
  • Created
  • Last Reply
mark1447

mark1447

Posted
Posted
heres a better idea, take that federal funding and use it instead to reverse the service cuts of this year and prevent the rate hikes of next year instead of triyng to build more onto a system than can barely maintain what it has

 

Agreed. Restore service and lower the damn fares on this system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
uptown164

uptown164

Posted
Posted
Yet again I am compelled to repeat part of my post from the New Jersey thread:

 

 

 

Connecting a single subway line, whether by Brooklyn or Manhattan, to the SIR alone is not enough to provide transportation to an enormous borough. If something is worth doing it is worth doing right, not half assing it just to get Obamabucks from the feds while they are available.

 

If they are really serious about doing this, the best options are to extend the (R) into Staten Island and extend the (1) into Staten Island. SIR, since it operates under an FRA waiver, could possibly be incorporated into a rapid transit operation sometime in the future and come under the oversight of NYCT (as opposed to MTA) and even provide a non-revenue track connection between them. However under no circumstance should subway trains run through service on SIR because a full length train such as would be required to provide proper service to the borough of Staten Island cannot platform at the SIR stations.

 

Likewise, the (1) and (R) should not connect to SIR at the same place to make a "mega terminal" - spread the riders out. Send the (R) to the SI mall via connection to SIR at Dongan Hills (the most commercialized of the intersecting SIR stops). Send the (1) to SI mall via connection to SIR at St. George and additional stops at Forest/Bard Aves, Clove Road/SI Zoo, and the College of SI along the way. That would be doing it right. It also would require more than 3 billion dollars and is unlikely to happen. But what's the point of extending a single subway line one stop into SI and calling it a day? It's not going to help people get where they need to, and it doesn't serve underserved destination areas of the borough. All it's going to do is provide a gimmick for people. And the ferry's still free, so why take a train that costs which does exactly the same thing the ferry does? The point of extending a line is to IMPROVE service, not replicate already existing service.

 

To extend the (R) tunnel provisions exist south of both 59th and 95th streets. To extend the (1) nothing exists yet, except a straight shot out of the new South Ferry station. Don't know depths though, more might be involved. It's possible to short turn ®'s at 95th still also, so that not all trains run out to SI since it may not be needed (sort of like the Rockaways and the (A)). As for the (1), something similar would need to happen there too I would say.

 

Just my 2cents...

 

Now how about we stop worrying around here what to "call" these new services and stop dicking around with imaginary rollsigns in our heads and actually think about what STOPS might be a good idea to add.

 

Well as stated previously no tunnel is going to be built from Lower Manhattan to Staten Island that would cost upwards to about 6-10 billion easily

and 5 miles across the bay far the easiest way is defiantly through brooklyn.

Now what ever gets extended can run via the old North shore line and just connect to the SIR for SI riders heading south

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fresh Pond

Fresh Pond

Posted
Posted

Now for my 2.5 cents...

 

There's no way in hell that a tunnel can be built from Lower Manhattan to Staten Island without some kind of super impossible grade. Besides, even if this "impossible grade" was somehow worked out, the price would be through the roof, a whole lot more than the $5 billion. Look how long its taking them to dig the SAS and its only about 2 miles up to 96 St. Imagine how long its gonna take for a tunnel.

 

But since everyone wanna throw out ideas, I have one. Instead of extending some subway line (or creating a new one) to connect with the SIR, why not just extend a branch of the SIR to Bay Ridge to connect with the 86 St (or 95 St) (R) station as a 2 level station complex. Since the SIR is free except at St George, the same concept can be used at one of the stations it connects to. A fare can be charged to exit the station or to transfer to the (R).

 

Yes, but there is a problem. There are no NYC Subway services that could immediately be extended to Staten Island right now. The only line would be the (G). The (G) is the most possible line to reach Staten Island because it is utilizes the same cars (R44), and it is the same in length (4 cars). The problem is it would require tunneling to reach 59th Street and continue on to Saint George. I had drawn a proposal on a map that would require the (G) to run from Church Avenue down a new tunnel on 14th Avenue to 62nd Street where it would use the Sea Beach Line or the old LIRR Bay Ridge Branch (it can carry a maximum of 6 tracks near the Sea Beach Line 2 of them could be used for subway service) and then it would run on to the SIR which would be converted into subway service. If the (G) could be extend and could use the SIR the SIR cars could have their extra equipment removed and they could be attached to the (G) cars thus making the (G) a total of 8 cars in length.
The best concept I can think of here is to create a new service to serve Astoria and terminate the (W) at 57th Street in Manhattan (I don't want to make the (W) too long) and have it run to 59th Street and branch off to Staten Island and join the SIR. The second option is to create a brown (V) replicating the <R> and have it run from Broad Street and again have it branch off 59th Street and run off to Staten Island to join the SIR.
Maybe but even if you do put it on the islands like Governor, Ellis, and Liberty it is still going to be a pain in the as* construction work. You are going to have to build stations, put equipment, etc. It would never be done not in a million years. Or maybe not in our lifetimes. The best suggestion is to stop talking about extensions and put all that money into the Second Avenue Subway. If the 3 billion helps speed up the Second Avenue Subway construction time with extra equipment and people then give it there. Staten Island would be considered after Second Avenue.

 

Not to sound rude but you contradicted yourself right there. For the first half of this thread, you was the main one throwing up ideas to send some kind of train to Staten Island.

 

You know people should now stop talking about extensions and just focus on Second Avenue. They need to know that this money has to go Second Avenue because if Second Avenue ever gets completed then we know it would be extended someday. I don't want to die knowing that people and the future generations of New Yorkers would still be under served. Listen even VanShnookenRaggen drew out his proposal and it looks the same as yours.

 

Dowtown.png

 

You do realize that this map somehow has Nassau St trains going over the Broooklyn Bridge (never gonna happen EVER) and the SAS somehow running over the Nassau St line and the SAS splitting up into multiple branches for no reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmallParkShuttle

SmallParkShuttle

Posted
Posted

The thing with federal money is that it comes with very specific guidelines for its use (in this case transportation improvement/expansion) and a deadline for use, after which the money's gone. This is why all these ideas are actually making it to the papers.

 

My opinion: get phase 2 for SAS going so that the people who pick it up and complete it 50 years down the road will have a better starting point than we do now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SIR North Shore

SIR North Shore

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Extending the SIR to Brooklyn would be more costly and defeat the purpose of the goal in mind which is to reduce transfers and travel time. I and anyone that doesn't live near the SIR, would have to catch an (R) to 86th, SIR to SI and then catch a bus from there.

 

I think though, instead of trying to link the subway to SI, which clearly is never going to happen. Savino should be pushing for an HBLR extension to SI. 8th St station is opening soon and I don't know if it was a coincidence but that station is elevated and located right at the foot of the Bayonne Bridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tokkemon

Tokkemon

Posted
Posted

You do realize that this map somehow has Nassau St trains going over the Broooklyn Bridge (never gonna happen EVER) and the SAS somehow running over the Nassau St line and the SAS splitting up into multiple branches for no reason.

 

But it's pretty! Therefore it proves his point!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roadcruiser1

Roadcruiser1

Posted
Posted

I apologize for contradicting myself yesterday. I had several ideas in my head going on, and yes I do realize the map is inaccurate about the trains on the Brooklyn Bridge or the Montague Street Tunnel connection for Second Avenue, and it's impossible to split Second Avenue into mutiple branches. The only reason why I posted that map was it served as a concept for a tunnel between Manhattan and Staten Island.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GojiMet86

GojiMet86

Posted
Posted
I know Jersey is the closest land mass to SI, but which is technically closer to SI, Bay Ridge are of Brooklyn or Battery Park area of Manhattan?

 

Bay Ridge is so much closer to Staten Island.

StatenIslandExtensionRoutes.png

The problem might be that people underestimate the distance between Manhattan and Staten Island. In reality, they are very far apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Y2Julio

Y2Julio

Posted
Posted
Bay Ridge is so much closer to Staten Island.

StatenIslandExtensionRoutes.png

The problem might be that people underestimate the distance between Manhattan and Staten Island. In reality, they are very far apart.

They probably take their geography lessons from the NYC Subway map. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R32 3348

R32 3348

Posted
Posted

Sorry for the long post you're about to see guys

 

Yes but there is a reason why there was the (Mx) it was created in case if the Broadway Line had an emergency people could use the (Mx) to get to Lower Manhattan. Since the (M) left for Sixth Avenue the service is unfilled and a new Nassau service like the <R> could do wonders especially if it is extend to Staten Island via SIR.

That wasn't the primary purpose of the (Mx). In fact, that was the primary purpose of the (W) (if the (N)(Q)(R) encountered delays in Brooklyn), plus the Lexington Ave. line also mirrors the Broadway line in lower Manhattan, so your point is moot...

Whatever service it would be it would gain a new amount of 23 stations along it's route. As time is dragging on you guys are making this impossible.

Not true. No one here is saying that the extension to SI has to run all the way down the main line to Tottenville. An extension can just as easily run down the North and West Shores, or down Victory Blvd. like stated in the article.

The distance between South Ferry and St. George's is 5 miles which is just a simple straight point A to point B calculation since any tunnel built wont be in a straight line since it needs to be build in accordance with the topography and bedrock of the New York Bay floor. That is in comparison to 2.7 miles it would be from the current bellmouths on 4th Avenue to a future terminus on Victory boulevard, which also would be build to the topography of New York harbor would would add a slight distance to the 2.7 calculation but none the less, the distance from Brooklyn to Staten Island is significantly shorter than Lower Manhattan to Staten Island and therefore the most cost effective method.

It's cheaper, but extending a subway tunnel directly to Manhattan, while longer, would provide very significant time savings, and if done right, it would practically open up Staten Island as a borough very close to Lower Manhattan. Development would boom and the money spent on the project would be made up in economic development in the borough.

Then, we have the issue of train speed vs. ferry speed. Now I'm sure of how fast the SI Ferry travels, but a train would have to be faster to entice ridership while being safe at the same time.

 

Obviously that knocks the (1) out. How about the (R)? If the Fourth Avenue line were to be extended out from 95th Street, while being a more ideal option, it is not without faults, even if it is closer to Staten Island and has access to the wider B Division cars. An extended (R) would not only be susceptible to the same problems it experiences today, you'd also have some overcrowding between Bay Ridge and 59 St due to added ridership. Then there's the bailing problem because let's face it - the (R) is a glorified feeder line. That means once the train hits 59 St, all the passengers will jump out for the (N) train, which crowds those trains.

 

No, the only real option is to create a line to Staten Island that is intended to go to Staten Island and is not an afterthought. Ironically, the best idea in this thread is a Second Avenue/Staten Island line.

IAWTP. BTW, the ferry takes about 25 minutes from South Ferry to St. George, not counting time you wait in case you missed the last ferry. A subway line would be able to traverse the Narrows in ~10 minutes (assuming a line half as long to Brooklyn would traverse the tunnel in ~5). The ferry only travels slightly under 30MPH, IINM (IDR the exact max speed in knots).

Why do we have to care about New Jersey right now. They are happy about their car culture and their cheap gas. They don't want the tunnel as of now. They can take a loan once the government heals. Then they would reconsider ARC. For now just give the money to Second Avenue, and drill the workers like hell and force them to keep digging Second Avenue. The faster the job the better.

Obviously they are not happy about their car culture and cheap gas if they considered ARC in the first place. Also, you can't "drill the workers like hell" considering that we have things like unions and souls.

The (M) and the (A) goes through four boroughs. The (F) has 43 stops, and the (2)(1)(4)(D)(R) aren't short ride either. But I do like your persistence with the <R>eincarnated route.

The (A) is only three boroughs - it goes from Manhattan, through Brooklyn, and then Queens. Unless you count the Rockaways as another borough. :P

 

The (M) does technically go through 4 boroughs, but you can essentially count the Brooklyn/Queens segment as one borough since it's relatively short.

Again people Christie wants nothing to do with the tunnel. He doesn't want the tunnel. Why would we give any money back to him when he doesn't want it. It's better if it went to Second Avenue, because unlike the ARC Second Avenue is actually under construction.

Obviously Christie wants the tunnel. There's a difference between what you want and what you are able to get. His state's budget is in very bad shape, and if he went through this project with all its cost overruns it wouldn't create any jobs since it wouldn't be sustainable. Stopping it now and reviewing costs is the best thing to do, while the budget gets better.

Well as stated previously no tunnel is going to be built from Lower Manhattan to Staten Island that would cost upwards to about 6-10 billion easily

and 5 miles across the bay far the easiest way is defiantly through brooklyn.

Now what ever gets extended can run via the old North shore line and just connect to the SIR for SI riders heading south

Not true. According to a post I made earlier on the topic, extending a subway line from Bay Ridge to Staten Island would cost about $2-3 billion dollars, including potential cost overruns and the like (in that post I put Manhattan instead of Brooklyn by accident; I misread the article). A rail tunnel directly from Staten Island to Manhattan would likely cost twice as much (around $4-7 billion?) but it would take about 1/3 of the time it normally takes to go from Manhattan to Staten Island. For comparison purposes, LIRR's East Side Access is currently valued at $7.7 billion; like this proposal it increases capacity and access to parts of the city that meet the demand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
metsfan

metsfan

Posted
Posted

So i have a better idea. You connect west 8th street on the HBLR, with some station on staten island across the bayonne bridge.

 

No tunnels, the bridge has provision for rail, connects indirectly manhattan with staten island which means sharing revenue across the established passenger lines.

 

You could then connect this cross-bridge shuttle (one on each side?) with a restored north shore, since that is FRA connected and CSX has track rights you could not connect the cross bridge line with the north shore line directly with tracks. There is space on the island for light rail along the west central corridor, and connect with a shared terminal all 3 lines and the bridge shuttle.

 

One thing though, the whole shebang will have to wait till they raise the bridge, this way you don't need to change anything after the fact. They need to raise the bridge to compete with other ports on the east coast for when the panama canal expansion is complete in a few years.

 

- A

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roadcruiser1

Roadcruiser1

Posted
Posted

Actually the Bayonne Bridge has already been proposed to be used for potential rail traffic. The Hudson Bergen Light Rail board of directors want to extend the Light Rail to Staten Island.

 

staten-island1.jpg

 

If this happens all the (MTA) needs to do is find two services or create two new services to serve the North Shore Branch and the main SIR. Yes I know the Bayonne Bridge needs to be jacked up. Once they do that the HBLR would still be able to climb the steep grade. The final height for the jack up would be 215 ft from the bottom of the roadway to the Kill Vaun Kull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept