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

checkmatechamp13

checkmatechamp13

Posted
Posted
okay theres one main problem to address w/ having an NYCTA line go to S.I.: The Platforms on the (SIR) are 4 cars long (300 Ft). All NYCTA lines are 480 Ft-600 Feet long (8/10 60 ft cars, 8 75 foot cars, or 10/11 51 foot cars (IRT)) (excluding the (G)). Unless they put the (G) to S.I., they will have to extend the platforms.

 

here are some possible trains that could go to S.I.:

-(1)(9) it would take a long time, but re-renovate S. Ferry (to the slant like rector street on the R), send it under the water

-Have the (R) go to S.I.: Just Like the (A) going to Far Rock. & Lefferts Bl, Have the (R) go to bay Ridge & S.I.

-Put back the (W), send it to S.I. & Forget about the <R>.

-extend the (SIR) to Whitehall St, or Bklyn.

-I dunno if this is possible, but take the (R) after 95 street and extend it to S.I. via the bridge or the tunnel.

-Take the (D), have 2 services w/ an orange (D) & a yellow D, and extend the yellow D over the bridge or a new tunnel.

 

I will have more, If I think of more. I am not trying to Foam. Im just giving provisions for the S.I.R. extended.

 

or as I prefer, leave the (SIR) alone, & have a bus go over the bridge from S.I. to Bklyn.

 

The (1) is built to IRT standards, and the SIR is built to BMT standards, so, you would have to shave back the platoforms on the SIR to accomodate the (1) train (which wouldn't be too expensive compared to the cost of the rest of the project)

That is why Roadcruiser1 suggested to extend the (G)-it wouldn't require the platforms to be lengthened, and it would be cheaper than going directly to Manhattan.

 

@PhrasierCrane:

 

There is nothing wrong with his making 4.77 posts per day. He just happens to feel strongly about certain topics, and he is just trying to defend his position on them. His posts do make some sense at least from a ridership perspective, though not necessarily from a feasability perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 665
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Grand Concourse

Grand Concourse

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.

 

Totally friggin agreed!

 

There's one fatal flaw in her logic... If Staten Islanders get direct subway access to the rest of the city, then the rest of the city gets direct subway access to Staten Island. Do Staten Islanders really want that??

 

Lmao! Excellent point!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
East New York

East New York

Posted
Posted
Ok. I need to get on here for a couple of reasons. Correct the misinformation and guesses most of you are making as fact. And also because of roadcruiser1.

 

Roadcruiser1, seriously. You need to get out of the house, get a life, or get committed into a mental ward. You've been a member here for 5 months, and you already have 707 posts. I've been here 11 months and have less than half the posts you do. You post 4.77 times a day on average. That means you have days when you must be posting 40 times. Enough. You seriously have problems. You spend your entire time drawing up subway maps as if anyone cares. You actually think people think you are cool doing it. You are not. You are deeply disturbed, especially how you start insulting anyone that challenges you on your make believe subway plans.

 

If you want to get your point across that's cool. But there is no need to say he needs to get a life, etc. I'm quite sure you don't know him or his situation specifically. 2 wrongs don't make a right! If you feel he is being insulting, then cool. Address that in a tactful way.. But adding fuel to the flame will not make the situation any better. Try going about it a different way next time. Post's like this make people want to rip into you hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roadcruiser1

Roadcruiser1

Posted
Posted

I had mentioned the (G) shouldn't go to Manhattan since late July. The only reason why I picked the (G) in the first place is if you extend it a bit it could act like an extended SIR by allowing people to transfer at 59th Street and all along the Sea Beach Line till 62nd Street, and etc including the (F) on the Culver Line. The (G) doesn't have to go to Manhattan, and if it ran to Staten Island it still won't even if the SIR was allowed to be converted to a subway line it won't. It would still maintain it's name as a crosstown line. Also it's the perfect subway line to extend because it's the same length as the SIR 4 cars. So instead of bashing me in people I do make sense in my way of thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gotham Bus Co

Gotham Bus Co

Posted
Posted
The money -- which New York officials want to get their hands on after Jersey rejected it for another project -- should be used for "long-ago promised" subway and rail links here, Ms. Savino said.

 

She should have thought about that before her ancestors decided 60 years ago that they didn't want the subway!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Santa Fe via Willow

Santa Fe via Willow

Posted
Posted

An SI/Bkln subway was, is & will always be an interesting :cool: idea. That's easy. But going from being an abstract thought to reality? That's hard.

 

Resurrection of SI/Bkln ferries would be cheaper & maybe more profitable in a touri$t context. Might bring in money to neighborhoods & businesses next to, near ferry terminals.

 

In a non-commuter context, such a tunnel might be great for truck reduction in SI & Bkln.

 

That $3 billion could also be used to resurrect the North Shore SIR, extend the HBLR into SI & build a West Shore Rail-line.

 

And/or maybe improve/expand ferry routes/services also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
checkmatechamp13

checkmatechamp13

Posted
Posted
An SI/Bkln subway was, is & will always be an interesting :cool: idea. That's easy. But going from being an abstract thought to reality? That's hard.

 

Resurrection of SI/Bkln ferries would be cheaper & maybe more profitable in a touri$t context. Might bring in money to neighborhoods & businesses next to, near ferry terminals.

 

In a non-commuter context, such a tunnel might be great for truck reduction in SI & Bkln.

 

That $3 billion could also be used to resurrect the North Shore SIR, extend the HBLR into SI & build a West Shore Rail-line.

 

And/or maybe improve/expand ferry routes/services also.

 

I'm going to quote something from Wikipedia:

"At present, freight trains from the west and south destined for New York City (except for Staten Island) Long Island and Connecticut must cross the Hudson 140 miles (225 km) north of New York City at Selkirk, New York, making a detour known as the "Selkirk hurdle." "

 

This suggests to me that the best way to build the Cross Harbor Freight Tunnel is to simply have trains go over the Arthur Kill Vertical Lift Bridge and over the North Shore Rail Line, and then going through a tunnel in the St. George area. It would be cheaper than building a tunnel directly from NJ to Brooklyn.

 

You could have a shuttle branch off the tunnel and terminate in the St. George station (coming from Brooklyn), with transfers available to other SIR trains, or, if the station was rebuilt, you could through-route trains from either the Main Line or North Shore Branch to Brooklyn. I still don't think you need the full capacity of an 8-car train carrying people from Staten Island to Brooklyn.

 

If they insist that the Cross-Harbor Rail Tunnel start in Jersey City, it should still be feasable to connect a line from SI to Brooklyn to that tunnel. See this map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CrossHarborRailTunnelMap.png

 

In any case, there are plenty of transportation projects in the 5 boroughs that the money could be used for, so, one way or another, NYC should get their hands on the money before the federal government takes it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IRTFlushing7

IRTFlushing7

Posted
Posted

Maybe a ridiculous idea, but maybe run a train service to S.I via City Hall lower level. Run the (W) from 57th Street-7th Ave express to City Hall lower level and enter City Hall lower level via track switches after Canal St. From there, build a tunnel underground making a stop at Cortland St. (lower level) and continuing to Staten Island. From there, replace all the S.I.R R44's with the possible (W) 's R68/A and R160 combo.

 

Just my 2 cents.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LRG

LRG

Posted
Posted
Maybe a ridiculous idea, but maybe run a train service to S.I via City Hall lower level. Run the (W) from 57th Street-7th Ave express to City Hall lower level and enter City Hall lower level via track switches after Canal St. From there, build a tunnel underground making a stop at Cortland St. (lower level) and continuing to Staten Island. From there, replace all the S.I.R R44's with the possible (W) 's R68/A and R160 combo.

 

Just my 2 cents.......

 

That wouldn't work because south of Fulton Street the (4)/(5) start using Broadway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Santa Fe via Willow

Santa Fe via Willow

Posted
Posted
I'm going to quote something from Wikipedia:

 

"At present, freight trains from the west and south destined for New York City (except for Staten Island) Long Island and Connecticut must cross the Hudson 140 miles (225 km) north of New York City at Selkirk, New York, making a detour known as the "Selkirk hurdle."

 

This suggests to me that the best way to build the Cross Harbor Freight Tunnel is to simply have trains go over the Arthur Kill Vertical Lift Bridge and over the North Shore Rail Line, and then going through a tunnel in the St. George area. It would be cheaper than building a tunnel directly from NJ to Brooklyn.

 

You could have a shuttle branch off the tunnel and terminate in the St. George station (coming from Brooklyn), with transfers available to other SIR trains, or, if the station was rebuilt, you could through-route trains from either the Main Line or North Shore Branch to Brooklyn. I still don't think you need the full capacity of an 8-car train carrying people from Staten Island to Brooklyn.

 

If they insist that the Cross-Harbor Rail Tunnel start in Jersey City, it should still be feasable to connect a line from SI to Brooklyn to that tunnel.

 

See this map:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CrossHarborRailTunnelMap.png

 

In any case, there are plenty of transportation projects in the 5 boroughs that the money could be used for, so, one way or another, NYC should get their hands on the money before the federal government takes it back.

 

The bridges & tunnels spring to mind, as well as various other things like the Red Hook Trolley, keeping fares down, new depots/railyards, depot/railyard repair, ferries, light-rail, etc et al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
m7zanr160s

m7zanr160s

Posted
Posted
I put this one the other thread, thinkin it was this thread:

StatenIslandNewJersey.png

 

Now check out the distance between Manhattan and S.I. Certainly a tunnel between Brooklyn and S.I. would make more sense. Honestly, for a start, they (Staten Island) just need a transfer point--from SIR to subway--,until something better is worked out. I elect the (W), from Tomkinsville, S.I. to Whitehall, all local. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tokkemon

Tokkemon

Posted
Posted
Now check out the distance between Manhattan and S.I. Certainly a tunnel between Brooklyn and S.I. would make more sense. Honestly, for a start, they (Staten Island) just need a transfer point--from SIR to subway--,until something better is worked out. I elect the (W), from Tomkinsville, S.I. to Whitehall, all local. :P

 

But.... the SI Ferry already does this in less time and going directly to Manhattan where SIers need to get to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roadcruiser1

Roadcruiser1

Posted
Posted

Well who told them to reject to the subway. The people of Staten Island always rejected to the subway. They think it would bring in the dirt and the scum of New York. They even prefer to be part of New Jersey and either be connected by PATH and the HBLR instead. So blame them for opposing a connection to New York City for decades, and not the (MTA) or the IND, or the BMT, or the IRT.

 

Here look at this picture from 1919

StatenIslandProposals.jpg

On this map it says that they oppose to almost every tunnel, but why it is to keep out New York. They blame us for not connecting, but they should look at themselves. Maybe if they listen to people they would open up their little island, but it might be too late because no one has any money to give for a Staten Island connection or the time.

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