Shortline Bus Posted July 9, 2011 Author Share #51 Posted July 9, 2011 Well then how would you connect such a line to Brooklyn where people can transfer to the subway. You can build a subway extension, but it seems like light rail would work on the Island for now as the is broke and already has the Second Avenue Subway on it's hands. I thought you could have these lines operated by the Port Authority which seems to have plentiful cash right now. Besides I do know Staten Islanders that complain about the bus services. It seems like light rail would ease their trip to Brooklyn, and New Jersey no doubt. Plus it would allow the transfer to the subway which I pointed out, and that would allow them to go to Manhattan as well. Personally i think the only 'lower cost' solution to improve SI 'transit' connection to Manhattan is to bulid a light rail say over the new Gothehals and connect it to (NJT) at either Elizabeth or Newark Airport and then use NJT rail to get to Midtown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablo M 201 Posted July 9, 2011 Share #52 Posted July 9, 2011 Personally i think the only 'lower cost' solution to improve SI 'transit' connection to Manhattan is to bulid a light rail say over the new Gothehals and connect it to (NJT) at either Elizabeth or Newark Airport and then use NJT rail to get to Midtown. HBLR to PATH is way faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 9, 2011 Author Share #53 Posted July 9, 2011 HBLR to PATH is way faster. I just don't think the HBLR will be extended to SI (as some of you other posters suggested)via the Bayonne Bridge because of $$$. IMO it could occur with the new Gothehals(not saying it will happen though)since it could be adding to that new crossing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted July 9, 2011 Share #54 Posted July 9, 2011 1-2 Avs. have SBS, and do not need a light rail. The tunnel has already been dug, millions have been spent, and the east side is long overdue for a subway. A light rail is not going to address future capacity needs at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 9, 2011 Author Share #55 Posted July 9, 2011 1-2 Avs. have SBS, and do not need a light rail. The tunnel has already been dug, millions have been spent, and the east side is long overdue for a subway. A light rail is not going to address future capacity needs at all. Agreed. At the very least the section between 96th and 63rd must finish. Or taxpayers would have wasted at least couple of billion dollars already. While it been a disgrace why a full length SAS running the entire East Side has never been bulit, hopefully the 1st leg will be open towards the end of this decade as now projected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted July 9, 2011 Share #56 Posted July 9, 2011 I see light rail working on Staten Island since you have empty land parallel to the Staten Island Expressway, you have plenty of lanes to work with on the Verrazano Narrows Bridge along with the Bayonne Bridge, and you have empty land next to the West Shore Expressway. Thus light rail is feasible on Staten Island. It is also possible to elevate the light rail on elevated sections of expressway on the Island. It's also less dense, and you are building on almost empty land so no NIMBY's. Also not to mention you have the abandoned North Shore Line which would work if it's light rail too, but it's better as an SIR extension so it would be compatible with the SIR itself. This is just an example. Now let's put light rail on Second Avenue. We will see parking spaces being taken, and businesses complaining about the wires. You might have pedestrians and drivers complaining about their spaces also being take away to this light rail line. In the end it just won't work. NIMBY's will halt the progress. You see how they are complaining about the construction of the Second Avenue Subway as well. In a place called Manhattan people will kill you if you propose anything they don't like. There isn't really much vacant land along the SIE. The only areas where there is really any vacant land is between, say Hylan Blvd and Slosson Avenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted July 9, 2011 Share #57 Posted July 9, 2011 How about taking lanes away from the SIE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexis4Jersey Posted July 10, 2011 Share #58 Posted July 10, 2011 Heres a Few Dense cities with LRT in Japan....or Light Railway lines... LRT is better suited for outside Manhattan , but Upper Manhattan can handle it. Also you could link a few isolated neighborhoods with Light Rail....like Co-OP and City Island. At least use LRT to connect Co-Op / City Island to the Subway and future Regional Rail stations. Hiroshima Tokyo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted July 10, 2011 Share #59 Posted July 10, 2011 Well they already extended the Hudson Bergen Light Rail up to 8th Street on purpose so it can cross the Bayonne Bridge, and this is a serious proposal. It is going to happen. When they replace the road span they will put light rail tracks up there, and this isn't just my idea this is once again a real, and serious proposal along with the reactivation of the North Shore Line. The Port Authority wants to operate a West Shore Light Rail which would parallel the West Shore Expressway. There is also an idea for a Hylan Boulevard SBS which you guys know only in my idea it's a light rail line. Since I don't see a subway line anytime soon going to Staten Island it would be a better idea to build it as a light rail line, and you can spur it off where it would parallel the Staten Island Expressway and join up with the West Shore Light Rail, or you could just build a light rail line parallel to the Staten Island Expressway, and join the West Shore Light Rail that way. I can see that by the year 2030 or 2040 Staten Island would have a massive light rail system that runs to New Jersey, and Brooklyn along with places in Staten Island that would ease the Staten Islanders commute time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted July 10, 2011 Share #60 Posted July 10, 2011 How about taking lanes away from the SIE. Yeah right, they'll scream for your head if you dare take away a lane. Not going to happen. = And what does SI have to do with the SAS? Start a new thread if you have to talk about SI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted July 10, 2011 Share #61 Posted July 10, 2011 The more lanes of highway, the more traffic. (Seems obvious, but people forget this.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
traildriver Posted July 10, 2011 Share #62 Posted July 10, 2011 Instead of using the Goethals Bridge, why couldn't a new light rail line from St. George utilizing the old North Shore line continue over the original rail lift bridge to Bayway and Elizabethport to connect with NJT, or instead extend the PATH train from Newark down that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted July 10, 2011 Share #63 Posted July 10, 2011 Because that old lift bridge is being used to haul freight (garbage). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmouse Posted July 10, 2011 Share #64 Posted July 10, 2011 Because that old lift bridge is being used to haul freight (garbage). And alot of intermodal traffic (i.e. Containers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted July 10, 2011 Share #65 Posted July 10, 2011 The best idea would be to have the new Geothals Bridge able to carry subway trains, and have the SIR cross the bridge to Newark Liberty International Airport where people can move on to the Airport, or transfer to NJT Trains, but we should be going back to the Second Avenue Light Rail which had been done in an old study, and is basically dead because of the infeasibility. Here is a link to the study. http://www.irum.org/lrtmes.pdf Also I just want to add a note that there are a lot of light rail/streetcar supporters in New York City. Staten Island is a good place to implement it, and Eastern Queens especially on the old Rockaway Beach Branch. Such a light rail line in Eastern Queens would take the load off the bus lines there. Also some places in Brooklyn like the LIRR Bay Ridge Branch can also be potential areas for light rail even though it could be feasible for subway service as well. Accept it guys. New York City has been hit by the light rail fever carried over from New Jersey where they have the Hudson Bergen Light Rail, and the Newark City Light Rail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted July 10, 2011 Share #66 Posted July 10, 2011 I don't know what New York City you've been living in, but the one that is absolutely ga-ga over light rail is not the one from reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted July 10, 2011 Share #67 Posted July 10, 2011 Here let me prove it to you. http://www.lightrailnow.org/facts/fa_lrt_nyc.htm http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/05/07/streetcars-for-brooklyn-a-new-life/ http://www.brooklynstreetcar.org/ Need any more proof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted July 10, 2011 Share #68 Posted July 10, 2011 Yeah, actual light rail being built and actual projects funded and under construction with the support of the people and politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexis4Jersey Posted July 10, 2011 Share #69 Posted July 10, 2011 I don't know what New York City you've been living in, but the one that is absolutely ga-ga over light rail is not the one from reality. Actually the thought of connecting all ends of SI to NJ by LRT is a very popular idea....all you need are new bridges or upgraded bridges. Eventually all the SI crossings will be upgraded to carry Light Rail transit connecting Northern SI - Elizabeth , Northern SI-Bayonne , and Southern SI - Perth Amboy. Half of SI works in Urban Jersey , most in Union County and Hudson County. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted July 10, 2011 Share #70 Posted July 10, 2011 Those streets were also built from the ground up for light rail in mind. Much wider streets than in NYC, which is only four lanes wide for car traffic (the other two for parking) and they took one for SBS. There is also the subway idea of it, LR is more of a self-contained package that would encompass the east side, its not like what the could be, with direct west side and brooklyn access. I was in Boston in its LR areas, its a dedicated ROW in the middle of the street for the rail service (taking approx 2.5 car lanes) along with two lanes of traffic in each direction. A lane on each side for curb parking. The street light rules applied to the railcars as well, which varied in length (stopped when cars stopped, went went cars went). I can't remember if I was able to do a left turn through the ROW cause I didnt have any need to do it when I visited. No provision for bicyclists. That's eight and a half lanes, more than what 1st/2nd avenue can muster up. Mind you, buses also ran along the street going to areas the LR didn't service. And the LR was NOT in the dense business district of downtown Boston. Upper Manhattan has excellent subway coverage, actually the most efficient area of such in the city. At least from 145th going north no place is more than a 5-10 min walk from a subway station with the lines at Lenox (ending at 148 and 7th), St Nicholas and Broadway . The streets are also much narrower than further down in Manhattan, The quality of that service is a question that is unrelated to this topic. The only place in Manhattan light rail can work: Far west side below 72nd street (and generally not on the WSH). The IRT 7av bends towards midtown on Broadway at 72nd, and after 59th there is no coverage west of 8Av (until the gets there along 42 and down 11th in the near future). It can run across 72nd, a wide avenue with less car traffic (in that section) then most crosstown thoroughfares, turn down Amsterdam/10th Av to 15th turn on 15th to the WSH, up the WSH to 22nd then a bend onto 11th. 11th Av up to 72nd completing the loop. Free secondary transfers (takes a transfer, encodes another one for use elsewhere in the system) for the at 72nd, and the at 34th. Either purchase one of the large warehouses in the area for a staging facility/barn or they can use their own land over the Hudson Railyards. The fact that its a loop (single track) minimizes space usage and allows it to make truck-like turns. Now whether this is worth the expense over existing buses that run on these avenues is another story. I'm just stating a fantasy idea that has realistic grounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted July 10, 2011 Share #71 Posted July 10, 2011 Proposal and support for light rail is as serious in this city as hell itself. http://www.plannyc.org/taxonomy/term/730 http://www.siedc.org/Capital-Projects/west-shore-light-rail Light Rail proposals are serious and they are real. They are most certainly going to pop up in this city within the next 20-30 years. It doesn't mater if we like it or not, it's coming to the Big Apple, of course they won't exist in Manhattan though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted July 10, 2011 Share #72 Posted July 10, 2011 Proposals are not evidence of want or need. Real applicable results from a built line would be far more proof. So far you've just quoted a bunch of bloggers and fantasy stuff that's 20 years down the road at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablo M 201 Posted July 10, 2011 Share #73 Posted July 10, 2011 I just don't think the HBLR will be extended to SI (as some of you other posters suggested)via the Bayonne Bridge because of $$$. IMO it could occur with the new Gothehals(not saying it will happen though)since it could be adding to that new crossing. You'll be surprised at how much interest there is to send HBLR over the Bayonne Bridge. Funds is an issue now yes, but that's being looked into. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has shown interest of putting the HBLR on the Bayonne Bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexis4Jersey Posted July 10, 2011 Share #74 Posted July 10, 2011 Proposals are not evidence of want or need. Real applicable results from a built line would be far more proof. So far you've just quoted a bunch of bloggers and fantasy stuff that's 20 years down the road at best. Actually SI is preparing to launch a study on the North Shore line and West Shore lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 11, 2011 Share #75 Posted July 11, 2011 Actually SI is preparing to launch a study on the North Shore line and West Shore lines.will the north shore connect to the HBLR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.