Survey says most SI borough residents are on board for subway to Brooklyn

[Grand Concourse]

What makes you think Moses forgot? From what I read/heard he may have left the VZ bridge like that intentionally to prevent rail traffic from being a viable option. So the only way must be via tunnel from SI to Brooklyn.

 

That said, as everyone else mentioned, SI needs to improve it's own system first before expanding. Plus as it is, if the MTA can't even get the 1st phase of the SAS done, do you really expect them to take on another project to link SI to Brooklyn?

 

As to anyone still 'mad' to think of a SI to Manhattan tunnel: NO! It's 5 miles to connect a fairly low density population borough to Manhattan. For that kind of length/budget, you may as well build a new Hudson river tunnel to connect to Jersey. At least that connects to another state meaning the route will be heavily used.

 

There's just no money for all these expansions. The ones in Manhattan have to be finished first, then we can think about expansions for other boroughs.

[SIR North Shore]

What the hell?

 

There is a new HOV lane being built on the Gowanus between the verrazono & the battery tunnel that flies over the exits at shore parkway & prospect expressway. The buses would only take 15 minutes to travel between fingerboard road/SIE & south ferry in the peak direction. There's plenty of subway & bus connections right there in lower manhattan, the machines are already there at the bus loop for the M15 and Hylan Blvd is almost certainly receiving SBS in the near future.

 

Look at it this way, the MTA can cut some more express bus service that costs them more money per rider than SBS would. The S79B would be a like a faux-subway route while getting the job done just as well. And there's always the possibility that the turn-over that the S79B would receive would be great enough to cover the operating costs.

[Roadcruiser1]

We said no because it would just increase costs for the buses.

 

What makes you think Moses forgot? From what I read/heard he may have left the VZ bridge like that intentionally to prevent rail traffic from being a viable option. So the only way must be via tunnel from SI to Brooklyn.

 

That said, as everyone else mentioned, SI needs to improve it's own system first before expanding. Plus as it is, if the MTA can't even get the 1st phase of the SAS done, do you really expect them to take on another project to link SI to Brooklyn?

 

As to anyone still 'mad' to think of a SI to Manhattan tunnel: NO! It's 5 miles to connect a fairly low density population borough to Manhattan. For that kind of length/budget, you may as well build a new Hudson river tunnel to connect to Jersey. At least that connects to another state meaning the route will be heavily used.

 

There's just no money for all these expansions. The ones in Manhattan have to be finished first, then we can think about expansions for other boroughs.

 

I had a former math teacher that also has a master's degree in engineering. The Verrazano Narrows Bridge has a steep approach of about 4-5%. Most NYC Subway trains can travel up a 2-3% approach, but light rail can travel up to a 6-7% approach so they can make their way up the bridge, and although the bridge is way too light to handle subway trains it can handle light rail/streetcar trains running on the bridge without a problem. Now all we need is to install two light rail tracks on the center upper level and we are done.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Isn't the idea to get Staten Islanders into Manhattan (and the rest of the city) faster? I'm not seeing how light rail would help. One would have to take either a bus or the Staten Island Railway to this inter-borough light rail (likely to Brooklyn because anything from Richmond directly to Manhattan would take an age) then to the subway to get into Manhattan. Sorry, but I'm not seeing the time-savings here. Just saying.

 

There does need to be some kind of transit improvements between Staten Island and the rest of the city though. There also needs to be better connections as well. Unless you take a detour into Jersey, all you have is the SI Ferry or the VZN Bridge to get off of Staten Island.

 

Oh, and by the way Roadcruiser1, we know it wasn't a scientific study or survey because of the low amount of people surveyed. That point has already been established.

 

LOL... Well look at that. We actually agree on something. :eek::eek:

 

1) First of all, you act like the rail line is going to run through every single neighborhood on SI. It's not. The only areas that would be affected would be those along the current SIR and the North Shore Line if it ever gets rebuilt, and even then, areas in the South Shore are still pretty far out so they'd likely see little to no changes.

 

I "act" like that because you keep talking about "subways", "subways", "subways", as if we're in Brooklyn or something where they have subways running through most neighborhoods.

 

2) What's so good about light rail? It's still going to attract development except that it has less capacity to handle it. And if the current SIR is heavy rail, what would be the point in building a light rail from St. George to Brooklyn and/or Manhattan. You'd have to make another transfer and it would have less capacity than the current SIR, and you'd get rid of any possibility of linking it up with the subway.

 

Light rail would work for an HBLR extension because it already is light rail.

 

In any case, the point is that people can still have multiple options. They'll still have their express buses, but they'll also have the rail line if they don't want to spend the money or if there's a problem with the express bus.

 

I never said anything about light rail being so great. I said that we're probably better suited for light rail.

 

3) Isn't that the case with everybody? We'd all like somebody else to foot the bill, but if it comes down to it, I'm sure a lot of people would accept paying for it themselves.

 

Is that right? Well then if that's the case where is the money then???

 

And see #2. Light rail would make absolutely no sense to connect us to Brooklyn and/or Manhattan, and nobody has ever proposed it. The only light rail ever actually proposed was an extension of the HBLR and possibly the North Shore Rail Line if they're too stupid not to make it heavy rail.

 

But having a subway run over the Verrazano makes more sense???

[checkmatechamp13]

1) I "act" like that because you keep talking about "subways", "subways", "subways", as if we're in Brooklyn or something where they have subways running through most neighborhoods.

 

2) I never said anything about light rail being so great. I said that we're probably better suited for light rail.

 

3) Is that right? Well then if that's the case where is the money then???

 

4) But having a subway run over the Verrazano makes more sense???

 

1) You mean like those vast swaths of SE Brooklyn with absolutely no subway service that you insist are express bus dependant?

 

And alright, I'll change it to "heavy rail line" instead of subway because it would just be a connection between the existing SIR and the rest of the system.

 

2) Well, I can see how you would think that, but like I said, areas with a similar layout as SI have done decently with heavy rail (I know Miami has one and I'm pretty sure Atlanta has one as well).

 

3) Have we even been given the option of paying for it? Nobody said "Do you want an extra tax to fund the rail line?"

 

4) No and I never said it did. The connection to Brooklyn would be from St. George to the 59th Street station, or from St. George to Lower Manhattan.

 

1) As to anyone still 'mad' to think of a SI to Manhattan tunnel: NO! It's 5 miles to connect a fairly low density population borough to Manhattan. For that kind of length/budget, you may as well build a new Hudson river tunnel to connect to Jersey. At least that connects to another state meaning the route will be heavily used.

 

2) There's just no money for all these expansions. The ones in Manhattan have to be finished first, then we can think about expansions for other boroughs.

 

 

1) The key word is "fairly". If SI were a city by itself, it would be a pretty large one (population-wise), and denser than a lot of other cities (like Portland, Atlanta, and all the ones in the Sun Belt)

 

2) And why is that? The capital cost per passenger for the North Shore Rail Line is roughly the same as the SAS (for every rider served, it costs around $2,500-$3,000 up-front to build the line for each one. I forgot the exact costs)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1) You mean like those vast swaths of SE Brooklyn with absolutely no subway service that you insist are express bus dependant?

 

Oh please. Give it a rest already. Most of Brooklyn is served by subways and the areas that aren't are mainly in South East Brooklyn, so just stop already. You act like there's supposed to be a friggin subway line down every street or something.

 

2) Well, I can see how you would think that, but like I said, areas with a similar layout as SI have done decently with heavy rail (I know Miami has one and I'm pretty sure Atlanta has one as well).

 

Yeah well Staten Island isn't Miami. Two very different places, with very different needs.

 

3) Have we even been given the option of paying for it? Nobody said "Do you want an extra tax to fund the rail line?"

 

New Yorkers pay some of the highest taxes in the country. The cost for this thing would continue to escalate and spiral about. As it is now we have infrastructure projects that are being scrapped because we are broke, so where is this money supposed to come from? Furthermore, where are the priorities at if we have money for a future subway but no money to fix the current infrastructure that in some cases is literally crumbling apart?

 

I don't think you get it. The unemployment rate is still hovering around 9% and there is barely enough tax revenue coming in just to provide the basics like policemen, firefighters and other public services, let alone a subway.

 

 

1) The key word is "fairly". If SI were a city by itself, it would be a pretty large one (population-wise), and denser than a lot of other cities (like Portland, Atlanta, and all the ones in the Sun Belt)

 

And so? Still doesn't mean that we have to have a subway.

 

2) And why is that? The capital cost per passenger for the North Shore Rail Line is roughly the same as the SAS (for every rider served, it costs around $2,500-$3,000 up-front to build the line for each one. I forgot the exact costs)

 

Yeah, well comparing bus service to subway service is like night and day and the costs for creating new subways can skyrocket.

[Roadcruiser1]

Staten Island's population and density more closely matches the city of Portland than anything else, and Portland has the successful Portland Streetcar and MAX Light Rail system. A similar system would do wonders for Staten Island.

[Guest lance25]

I'm curious VG8, what would you do to get people to and from Staten Island faster than they are right now? I mean, sure the bus option is always available, but once you max out on buses, whether that's because there aren't any more buses available or because space is maxed out on the bridges, you're kind of stuck at the same place we are right now. What do you do then? Unlike commuters from Long Island or the northern suburbs, and as I mentioned in my other post, there aren't many options available. There are no mass transit options into and out of Staten Island besides the buses (which are and will continue to subjected to the traffic on the VZN and Goethal's bridges, especially if the runs are all significantly increased) and the Ferry, which runs every half-hour except rush hours on weekdays (every hour on weekends). I'm not saying bring the subway to Staten Island; I'm just saying you will hit a point where buses won't be an answer to this dilemma.

[B35 via Church]

Oh please. Another BS article by the Advance. One of the worst newspapers in the city with their shoddy reporting and stats. They interviewed 104 people on an island of almost 500,000 and then claim that an overwhelming amount of Islanders support this idea??? LOL

Exactly why I don't put much stock in surveys anymore & w/e percentages is concluded from them.....

 

hell, I'm defiantly arguing w/ some dude on another site, talkin bout 75% of american men b/w 18-25 yrs. old got a criminal record....

I (and like 30 other ppl there) state that I (they) aint got no criminal record, and we're supposedly in the minority..... lmfao.....

That's the same BS stat black women wanna pull on, as to why they can't find no good black men.... but I digress.....

 

 

I also agree w/ you about the advance.... they're worse than the bay ridge local newspaper, forgot what it's called....

 

 

 

What the f*ck are you talking about??????????? I never even said you said it was a scientific survey. The article says that the SI Advance conducted an unscientific survey and I was backing you up that it was stupid.

lmao !

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I'm curious VG8, what would you do to get people to and from Staten Island faster than they are right now? I mean, sure the bus option is always available, but once you max out on buses, whether that's because there aren't any more buses available or because space is maxed out on the bridges, you're kind of stuck at the same place we are right now. What do you do then? Unlike commuters from Long Island or the northern suburbs, and as I mentioned in my other post, there aren't many options available. There are no mass transit options into and out of Staten Island besides the buses (which are and will continue to subjected to the traffic on the VZN and Goethal's bridges, especially if the runs are all significantly increased) and the Ferry, which runs every half-hour except rush hours on weekdays (every hour on weekends). I'm not saying bring the subway to Staten Island; I'm just saying you will hit a point where buses won't be an answer to this dilemma.

 

No question about it. I would personally do what the politicians on the island are trying to do, which is provide a fast ferry on the South Shore. I would have them on the North Shore as well and I would make ferry service more frequent because while there is a lack of transportation problem here, there is also a frequency problem here too, both of which make people turned off when trying to come to or get off of the island using public transportation. The proposed fast ferry would get folks from the South Shore to Midtown in about 45 minutes, significantly cutting down on the commute and taking some cars off of the roads. You could have buses specifically created for the fast ferries which would make stops at major points to pick up and get folks to the ferry, but it wouldn't be an bus per se. More like a shuttle, similar to the shuttle bus in Riverdale that meets up with MetroNorth.

 

I also agree with Molinaro's (Borough President) proposals to improve the flow of certain major intersections that are known to bottleneck, and the widening of the SIE. We also need to make more of our roads connect better, because many of them meander to nowhere, which forces folks to clog up the main roadways since there is no other way to go unless you want to meander about through back streets. I strongly believe that we must take major steps to improve our infrastructure first and it has to be done on a budget and one that is reasonable and reachable. Any option will be expensive, but we need solutions now and many of the politicians are setting aside funds to improve our roadways. The DOT is going about it slow, but they're the key in this as well. Some of these paving projects have been utter garbage and then everyone wonders why our streets are in such bad shape. Ahem... Look no further than the DOT.

 

Another thing that the Borough President is trying to do is get more commercial trucks off of the roads. Anytime that I'm on the express bus in the morning and I look at the SIE, there are nothing but trucks lined up behind each other snarling traffic and creating a ton of pollution.

 

There also has to be a culture change on the island itself. You can improve transit all you want but many folks on Staten Island have an issue using public transportation, esp. if it isn't the express bus and you have to get more folks out of their cars because we will still need the roadways in order to get to things like fast ferries or a light rail, like the current one being pushed by Congressman Grimm. There is a stigma of sorts associated with using the local buses here and it's one reason why there is such traffic. This is why I say we should have a light rail if anything because folks would complain about crime and such if subways were built here. Many have certainly complained about the SIR being a crime problem (particularly since the days of the fare collectors were done away with) and argue that the current SIR allows crime to migrate to low crime areas, particularly on the South Shore because many of the stops are free. In other words if a rail link were created, it would need to be shown to be safe and something that people would feel comfortable riding and be made to seem upscale, otherwise people are not leaving their "fancy" cars behind. Here on the island, it's all about what type of car you drive and don't you dare be seen walking anywhere. :eek::eek:

 

Yes, it is arrogance, but that's how folks are out here. It seems like a similar mentally exists on Long Island too. People are amazed that I don't have a car here, even though I pretty much go to the city everyday. On the other hand some of them do have legitimate gripes because the local buses here can be an utter disaster, making doing simple things like grocery shopping an obstacle course.

 

One thing that folks don't realize is that folks on Staten Island do have a decent amount of disposable income, so it's not like they need public transportation per se. You have to be more creative to find ways to entice them to use public transportation and that's why I say it needs to feel upscale. I mean no one wants to leave their warm car to wait in the cold for a public local bus that may come whenever and is unreliable and in some cases not seen to be at all safe. I

m not saying that it has to be uber fancy, but make it seem fancy and more folks will use it. Same thing with the LIRR. It's not really fancy, but I'm sure fewer folks would use it if it were just a subway or something.

[Roadcruiser1]

I think something like the East River Ferry would work on the South Shore of Staten Island.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I think something like the East River Ferry would work on the South Shore of Staten Island.

 

Yeah and they would need to run late too. The one thing that they seem to do here on Staten Island is deter people from using transportation because they don't run things here long enough or frequent enough. The population on the island is growing and changing, yet the whole transportation system is geared to someone who works from 9-5. The Borough President wants more young folks my age to move here and that is not happening because the transportation here sucks, which is exactly why I'm leaving. Plain and simple. Sure you can take a cab home but that's pricey from the city and paying $45 - 50 can get old real fast. Basically my point is, Staten Island IS accessible even though it's an island. The problem is the amount of connections and waiting between the connections even with express buses. It will be very interesting to see how this tracking system works when it is rolled out to SI because that could very well entice people to at least use the express buses more and you can give folks more quicker options with fast ferries as well.

[checkmatechamp13]

1) Oh please. Give it a rest already. Most of Brooklyn is served by subways and the areas that aren't are mainly in South East Brooklyn, so just stop already. You act like there's supposed to be a friggin subway line down every street or something.

 

2) Yeah well Staten Island isn't Miami. Two very different places, with very different needs.

 

3) New Yorkers pay some of the highest taxes in the country. The cost for this thing would continue to escalate and spiral about. As it is now we have infrastructure projects that are being scrapped because we are broke, so where is this money supposed to come from? Furthermore, where are the priorities at if we have money for a future subway but no money to fix the current infrastructure that in some cases is literally crumbling apart?

 

I don't think you get it. The unemployment rate is still hovering around 9% and there is barely enough tax revenue coming in just to provide the basics like policemen, firefighters and other public services, let alone a subway.

 

4) And so? Still doesn't mean that we have to have a subway.

 

5) Yeah, well comparing bus service to subway service is like night and day and the costs for creating new subways can skyrocket.

 

1) No, you're the one acting like there's supposed to be a subway down every street. My plan would simply involve connecting the SIR to the rest of the system (Manhattan and/or Brooklyn), and reactivating the North Shore Rail Line. Every single neighborhood not along either line would see very little change because it would still be a two-fare zone. However, it would go far in making the commutes easier and giving us more options.

 

As you know, I live near Richmond Avenue and the SIE. Neither the current SIR nor the North Shore Rail Line passes near me (I mean, maybe if it's a light rail and they send it to the Teleport, instead of leaving it as heavy rail and keeping it at Arlington, but anyway). The North Shore Rail Line, by having stops in Port Richmond, Elm Park, and Arlington (all a 10-15 minute bus ride away) would make the trip to Manhattan easier, but not so easy that you'd see a ton of development all around. The same way in Brooklyn development generally slows down after you reach a certain distance from the subway.

 

A 15 minute ride from the subway would put you around the Marine Park area. The development there is dense (some attached homes and rowhouses), but there aren't any high-rises in those areas. The same thing would apply in SI (not to mention, there are plenty of areas further from the subway than mine, like Willowbrook, New Springville, etc)

 

2) What a weak argument. The point is that Miami and SI (especially when you take into account the areas bordering Miami that the MetroRail also passes through) both have fairly similar layouts, and therefore the generally concept is the same.

 

3) The last time I checked, building subways creates jobs. Part of FDR's strategy was to build our way out of the Great Depression. If these projects weren't tied up in red tape, maybe they would be "shovel-ready" and the federal government would just send the money to us.

 

Keep in mind that ARC was shovel-ready. The federal government would've funded most of it if NJ hadn't turned down the money.

 

4) Again, if areas with more car-centric layouts than ours can support better rail transit, SI can as well.

 

5) True, but the long-term benefits and cost savings still hold true.

 

Staten Island's population and density more closely matches the city of Portland than anything else, and Portland has the successful Portland Streetcar and MAX Light Rail system. A similar system would do wonders for Staten Island.

 

SI has twice the density of Portland. Portland is around 4,000 people per square mile, and SI is around 8,000 people per square mile.

 

1) No question about it. I would personally do what the politicians on the island are trying to do, which is provide a fast ferry on the South Shore. I would have them on the North Shore as well and I would make ferry service more frequent because while there is a lack of transportation problem here, there is also a frequency problem here too, both of which make people turned off when trying to come to or get off of the island using public transportation. The proposed fast ferry would get folks from the South Shore to Midtown in about 45 minutes, significantly cutting down on the commute and taking some cars off of the roads. You could have buses specifically created for the fast ferries which would make stops at major points to pick up and get folks to the ferry, but it wouldn't be an bus per se. More like a shuttle, similar to the shuttle bus in Riverdale that meets up with MetroNorth.

 

2) I also agree with Molinaro's (Borough President) proposals to improve the flow of certain major intersections that are known to bottleneck, and the widening of the SIE. We also need to make more of our roads connect better, because many of them meander to nowhere, which forces folks to clog up the main roadways since there is no other way to go unless you want to meander about through back streets. I strongly believe that we must take major steps to improve our infrastructure first and it has to be done on a budget and one that is reasonable and reachable. Any option will be expensive, but we need solutions now and many of the politicians are setting aside funds to improve our roadways. The DOT is going about it slow, but they're the key in this as well. Some of these paving projects have been utter garbage and then everyone wonders why our streets are in such bad shape. Ahem... Look no further than the DOT.

 

3) Another thing that the Borough President is trying to do is get more commercial trucks off of the roads. Anytime that I'm on the express bus in the morning and I look at the SIE, there are nothing but trucks lined up behind each other snarling traffic and creating a ton of pollution.

 

4) There also has to be a culture change on the island itself. You can improve transit all you want but many folks on Staten Island have an issue using public transportation, esp. if it isn't the express bus and you have to get more folks out of their cars because we will still need the roadways in order to get to things like fast ferries or a light rail, like the current one being pushed by Congressman Grimm. There is a stigma of sorts associated with using the local buses here and it's one reason why there is such traffic. This is why I say we should have a light rail if anything because folks would complain about crime and such if subways were built here. Many have certainly complained about the SIR being a crime problem (particularly since the days of the fare collectors were done away with) and argue that the current SIR allows crime to migrate to low crime areas, particularly on the South Shore because many of the stops are free. In other words if a rail link were created, it would need to be shown to be safe and something that people would feel comfortable riding and be made to seem upscale, otherwise people are not leaving their "fancy" cars behind. Here on the island, it's all about what type of car you drive and don't you dare be seen walking anywhere. :eek::eek:

 

 

1) The thing that I don't get is why the SI Ferry isn't a "fast-ferry". As humantransit.org (written by a professional transit planner) says, "Frequency costs and speed saves", and that's always been my feeling as well (I'd say I'm a little more pro-SBS than the average member on here, and as you've seen from the S83 proposal, the reason it's cost-neutral is because the greater frequency is made up for by reduced travel time)

 

If you had fast ferries running say, every 15-20 minutes off-peak instead of the current 30 minutes (and 10 minutes during rush hour instead of 15-20), it would definitely help out SIers. You wouldn't have that mad rush when the bus arrives a minute before the ferry departs because if you miss the ferry, the wait time is shorter, not to mention that once onboard, it'll be a faster trip.

 

As far as the fast ferry from the South Shore goes, I don't think you'll need those RailLink-style buses going to and from it. It works in Riverdale because despite what you say, most of the neighborhood could be considered urban. It makes it easier to run shuttle buses when you have an apartment building full of riders than when everybody lives in a single-family home. Slightly improved service on whatever local routes serve the fast ferry should do the trick, along with a park-and-ride.

 

2) Again, improving roads is a good short-term solution, but not good as a long-term solution. As the population of the city grows and people start to get priced further and further from Manhattan, there will be a demand for more housing here and transit is better suited to accomodating that growth than cars.

 

3) Very true.

 

4) That reminds me. I went over to Nicole Mallitakis' office to try and talk about our proposals (it was a waste because she wasn't in, and I could've scheduled an appointment by making a phone call instead of wasting 2 hours traveling across SI, but anyway) and was surprised by how much traffic there was. I knew Hylan Blvd was pretty bad (not bumper-to-bumper, but there was still a lot of traffic), so I went to Richmond Road, but the only difference was that I was stuck in traffic on an S74 instead of an S78 or S79.

 

And the reason why people have the complaints about the SIR is because it's free, not because it's heavy rail. If you had a light rail and it were still free, you'd have the same complaints. There's nothing inherently more upscale about light rail than heavy rail if that's your logic (and again, it would be stupid to make an SI-Manhattan/Brooklyn link as light rail because you'd have to make an additional transfer because it would be incompatible with the current SIR)

 

I mean, in Miami (there I go again. Why don't I just move down there. ) their MetroRail is more or less like our SIR, except that they have nice comfortable seats (and they charge a fare). If you could somehow do something like that on the subway line (which again, would really just be the SIR connected to the rest of the system), maybe that would work.

[Roadcruiser1]

SI has twice the density of Portland. Portland is around 4,000 people per square mile, and SI is around 8,000 people per square mile.

 

 

Remember Staten Island's West Shore is heavily underutilized and not developed. If we were to distribute the population evenly through the entire island the density would be more or less the same as Portland's.

 

3) The last time I checked, building subways creates jobs. Part of FDR's strategy was to build our way out of the Great Depression. If these projects weren't tied up in red tape, maybe they would be "shovel-ready" and the federal government would just send the money to us.

 

That doesn't naturally meant the US Government would hand money to you. Besides Congress killed the idea of funding all mass transit projects except for light rail and streetcar as stated recently. It is exactly the reason why so many light rail and streetcar systems are being proposed throughout the US. Plus creating jobs isn't limited to subway construction. Light rail construction can still provide the same benefits with a cheaper price tag, and you would face less problems with NIMBY's on Staten Island with a light rail system because not everyone in Staten Island like some of my teachers exactly likes the subway.

[checkmatechamp13]

1) Remember Staten Island's West Shore is heavily underutilized and not developed. If we were to distribute the population evenly through the entire island the density would be more or less the same as Portland's.

 

2) That doesn't naturally meant the US Government would hand money to you. Besides Congress killed the idea of funding all mass transit projects except for light rail and streetcar as stated recently. It is exactly the reason why so many light rail and streetcar systems are being proposed throughout the US. Plus creating jobs isn't limited to subway construction. Light rail construction can still provide the same benefits with a cheaper price tag, and you would face less problems with NIMBY's on Staten Island with a light rail system because not everyone in Staten Island like some of my teachers exactly likes the subway.

 

 

1) I consider my neighborhood to be on the West Shore and (*Looks around*), it looks pretty developed to me.

 

In any case, I don't see your point. The 8,000 per square mile is including the West Shore (I was kidding in the first comment. I know you were referring to the areas around the WSE), and Portland also has a lot of areas that are undeveloped in the northern section (probably industrial), and has more areas that are suburban (and I'm talking McMansions on a cul-de-sac suburban, not attached houses-type suburban)

 

2) Well then that's just plain stupid of Congress to only want to fund one type of transit. If heavy rail is better suited for a certain area, then they should make it easy for them to get that heavy rail.

 

And I agree that light rail can provide the same benefits, but again it's all based on the area, and in this case, heavy rail would be best for connecting us with the rest of the city and also for the North Shore Rail Line.

 

And light rail can still draw NIMBYism. Light rail is basically a fancy term for streetcars, and those are always associated with urban life. I mean, maybe the advantage of light rail is that it's quieter so you don't get the noise complaints.

[Roadcruiser1]

Well then that's just plain stupid of Congress to only want to fund one type of transit. If heavy rail is better suited for a certain area, then they should make it easy for them to get that heavy rail.

 

And I agree that light rail can provide the same benefits, but again it's all based on the area, and in this case, heavy rail would be best for connecting us with the rest of the city and also for the North Shore Rail Line.

 

And light rail can still draw NIMBYism. Light rail is basically a fancy term for streetcars, and those are always associated with urban life. I mean, maybe the advantage of light rail is that it's quieter so you don't get the noise complaints.

 

Obama can't do anything about it. The Congress building is right now full of Republicans which are conservative, and also heavy rail takes a long time to build. The best example is the Second Avenue Subway. I don't think any Staten Islander would want to go through that, and all that dust and debris would end up giving the a big lawsuit. Light rail is the only thing that works here. It can use existing bridges unlike heavy rail which requires whole new tunnels underneath the harbor and the streets. The original NYC Subway was built in areas without people to avoid the situation we are in now. It's 2011 and Staten Island has too much people for that.

[SIR North Shore]

My alias was originally created because I too want to see a subway line from SI to somewhere but it's simply not going to happen.

 

It would be in everyone's best interest for now and the near future, if the MTA were to have SBS buses using the Gowanus and terminating at South Ferry. That is the closest we could ever come and this plan would save the city millions by replacing the late night ferries with SBS buses and save the MTA money by having to run less express buses overall. If a S79 SBS were to prove itself popular, they could create a second route for mid-island & north shore, maybe using the X10, X12 or X14 routing in staten island.

 

SBS by default would be faster than the ferry, because trying to reach Fingerboard Rd/SIE by ferry & local buses could take up to 2 hours at it's worst and 1 hour at the least, while by SBS it would take 10 minutes at the least and 25 minutes in very heavy traffic. BusTime would also play role in deciding which commute would be quicker.

 

And the MTA has plans for the Bx15 SBS, so think about it, Bx15 SBS + M15 SBS + S79 SBS = train in bus form.

[qjtransitmaster]

There is a new HOV lane being built on the Gowanus between the verrazono & the battery tunnel that flies over the exits at shore parkway & prospect expressway. The buses would only take 15 minutes to travel between fingerboard road/SIE & south ferry in the peak direction. There's plenty of subway & bus connections right there in lower manhattan, the machines are already there at the bus loop for the M15 and Hylan Blvd is almost certainly receiving SBS in the near future.

 

Look at it this way, the MTA can cut some more express bus service that costs them more money per rider than SBS would. The S79B would be a like a faux-subway route while getting the job done just as well. And there's always the possibility that the turn-over that the S79B would receive would be great enough to cover the operating costs.

What would this HOV look like?

I had a feeling they were getting smart he he.

[TwoTimer]

They'd be better off going back to being part of New Jersey.

[checkmatechamp13]

Obama can't do anything about it. The Congress building is right now full of Republicans which are conservative, and also heavy rail takes a long time to build. The best example is the Second Avenue Subway. I don't think any Staten Islander would want to go through that, and all that dust and debris would end up giving the a big lawsuit. Light rail is the only thing that works here. It can use existing bridges unlike heavy rail which requires whole new tunnels underneath the harbor and the streets. The original NYC Subway was built in areas without people to avoid the situation we are in now. It's 2011 and Staten Island has too much people for that.

 

The subway tunnels would come out from St. George. You have to build new tunnels whether you use heavy rail or light rail.

 

They'd be better off going back to being part of New Jersey.

 

Staten Island was never a part of NJ. Before 1898, we were still part of NY State, just not NYC.

 

In any case, what would becoming a part of NJ accomplish? Maybe it would make it easier to get the HBLR extended down here, but that's about it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1) No, you're the one acting like there's supposed to be a subway down every street. My plan would simply involve connecting the SIR to the rest of the system (Manhattan and/or Brooklyn), and reactivating the North Shore Rail Line. Every single neighborhood not along either line would see very little change because it would still be a two-fare zone. However, it would go far in making the commutes easier and giving us more options.

 

Oh really? Let's see... You're the one that keeps bringing up the friggin' subway as the solution... I mean you make it sound like you'd have subways running down Forest Avenue and across the island. You need to clarify where exactly "subways" would run on the island and again who would pay for them because it would cost billions to build them when we're BROKE.

 

As you know, I live near Richmond Avenue and the SIE. Neither the current SIR nor the North Shore Rail Line passes near me (I mean, maybe if it's a light rail and they send it to the Teleport, instead of leaving it as heavy rail and keeping it at Arlington, but anyway). The North Shore Rail Line, by having stops in Port Richmond, Elm Park, and Arlington (all a 10-15 minute bus ride away) would make the trip to Manhattan easier, but not so easy that you'd see a ton of development all around. The same way in Brooklyn development generally slows down after you reach a certain distance from the subway.

 

A 15 minute ride from the subway would put you around the Marine Park area. The development there is dense (some attached homes and rowhouses), but there aren't any high-rises in those areas. The same thing would apply in SI (not to mention, there are plenty of areas further from the subway than mine, like Willowbrook, New Springville, etc)

 

And what's the point??? :confused:

 

2) What a weak argument. The point is that Miami and SI (especially when you take into account the areas bordering Miami that the MetroRail also passes through) both have fairly similar layouts, and therefore the generally concept is the same.

 

Nothing weak about it. You also forgot to mention that Staten Island is full of hills and we're on an island. Minor details.

 

3) The last time I checked, building subways creates jobs. Part of FDR's strategy was to build our way out of the Great Depression. If these projects weren't tied up in red tape, maybe they would be "shovel-ready" and the federal government would just send the money to us.

 

Keep in mind that ARC was shovel-ready. The federal government would've funded most of it if NJ hadn't turned down the money.

 

Yeah, that sounds great but again, you have to have the money in hand to fund the projects, which we don't have last I checked.

 

4) Again, if areas with more car-centric layouts than ours can support better rail transit, SI can as well.

 

We can but I don't think a subway works here for a number of reasons.

 

5) True, but the long-term benefits and cost savings still hold true.

 

 

SI has twice the density of Portland. Portland is around 4,000 people per square mile, and SI is around 8,000 people per square mile.

 

Yeah, yeah yeah... We're not Portland and we're not Miami. We're an island in NYC and we have different needs and a different "culture" than those two cities. You can build all you want. The question is will it serve enough people to convince them to get out of their cars?

 

1) The thing that I don't get is why the SI Ferry isn't a "fast-ferry". As humantransit.org (written by a professional transit planner) says, "Frequency costs and speed saves", and that's always been my feeling as well (I'd say I'm a little more pro-SBS than the average member on here, and as you've seen from the S83 proposal, the reason it's cost-neutral is because the greater frequency is made up for by reduced travel time)

 

That should be obvious. It can take over 30 minutes to reach the southern tip of Manhattan from St. George. Meanwhile with a fast ferry from the South Shore it can take 45 minutes to Midtown.

 

If you had fast ferries running say, every 15-20 minutes off-peak instead of the current 30 minutes (and 10 minutes during rush hour instead of 15-20), it would definitely help out SIers. You wouldn't have that mad rush when the bus arrives a minute before the ferry departs because if you miss the ferry, the wait time is shorter, not to mention that once onboard, it'll be a faster trip.

 

Well of course it would if it were actually fast.

 

As far as the fast ferry from the South Shore goes, I don't think you'll need those RailLink-style buses going to and from it. It works in Riverdale because despite what you say, most of the neighborhood could be considered urban. It makes it easier to run shuttle buses when you have an apartment building full of riders than when everybody lives in a single-family home. Slightly improved service on whatever local routes serve the fast ferry should do the trick, along with a park-and-ride.

 

First off Riverdale has sub sections. Second, the "Downtown" part of Riverdale can be considered "more urban", but Riverdale overall is far from urban. That's part of what makes it different from other parts of the Bronx. However, I'll agree with your last part about getting more folks because of the condos and co-ops, but many people do actually drive to the MetroNorth in spite of the shuttle bus, but many also use it, so it's a balanced mix up there since folks don't mind using public transportation up there unlike here on Staten Island. The point I was making was to create something that's reliable and will get people to LEAVE THEIR CARS at home and get more cars off of the road.

 

2) Again, improving roads is a good short-term solution, but not good as a long-term solution. As the population of the city grows and people start to get priced further and further from Manhattan, there will be a demand for more housing here and transit is better suited to accomodating that growth than cars.

 

Improving roads is needed PERIOD. What do you think the buses run on air??? Whether you realize it or not, the congestion on the island has a lot to do with the poor infrastructure here and it also why buses get slowed up.

 

4) That reminds me. I went over to Nicole Mallitakis' office to try and talk about our proposals (it was a waste because she wasn't in, and I could've scheduled an appointment by making a phone call instead of wasting 2 hours traveling across SI, but anyway) and was surprised by how much traffic there was. I knew Hylan Blvd was pretty bad (not bumper-to-bumper, but there was still a lot of traffic), so I went to Richmond Road, but the only difference was that I was stuck in traffic on an S74 instead of an S78 or S79.

 

Yeah well that's what you get with poor infrastructure.

 

And the reason why people have the complaints about the SIR is because it's free, not because it's heavy rail. If you had a light rail and it were still free, you'd have the same complaints. There's nothing inherently more upscale about light rail than heavy rail if that's your logic (and again, it would be stupid to make an SI-Manhattan/Brooklyn link as light rail because you'd have to make an additional transfer because it would be incompatible with the current SIR)

 

Duh... I thought I was clear as to what the reason was... Always stating the obvious as usual. And for the love of God, would you read the friggin' posts. Light rails are generally associated with more suburban areas and are seen as more "upscale". Doesn't mean that they are, but that's the whole point.

 

 

Staten Island was never a part of NJ. Before 1898, we were still part of NY State, just not NYC.

 

In any case, what would becoming a part of NJ accomplish? Maybe it would make it easier to get the HBLR extended down here, but that's about it.

 

The point was a figurative one not a literal one. Read between the lines for once. Many people say that we should become part of NJ because we're closer to NJ than NY AND we share more with NJ than we do with the rest of NYC. More suburban, etc.

 

My alias was originally created because I too want to see a subway line from SI to somewhere but it's simply not going to happen.

 

It would be in everyone's best interest for now and the near future, if the MTA were to have SBS buses using the Gowanus and terminating at South Ferry. That is the closest we could ever come and this plan would save the city millions by replacing the late night ferries with SBS buses and save the MTA money by having to run less express buses overall. If a S79 SBS were to prove itself popular, they could create a second route for mid-island & north shore, maybe using the X10, X12 or X14 routing in staten island.

 

SBS by default would be faster than the ferry, because trying to reach Fingerboard Rd/SIE by ferry & local buses could take up to 2 hours at it's worst and 1 hour at the least, while by SBS it would take 10 minutes at the least and 25 minutes in very heavy traffic. BusTime would also play role in deciding which commute would be quicker.

 

And the MTA has plans for the Bx15 SBS, so think about it, Bx15 SBS + M15 SBS + S79 SBS = train in bus form.

 

The idea isn't a bad one, but I don't know what's this obsession with reducing express bus service on the island when it's already been cut into way too much as it is. If you think SBS is faster than the express bus then I'd like to see you prove it. SBS service would still create TWO to THREE transfers, so maybe you cut down the commute time a bit, but not in comparison to a one seat ride on the express bus. That's the thing everyone is overlooking. How do we cut out so many transfers? The transfers IMO are what really makes the commute seem so long. For example, in theory if everything works out right, it should be about an hour and 30 minutes roughly from my house to Midtown using the S98 to the ferry to the subway. Meanwhile on the X30 it can be almost under an hour when there is no traffic as was the case earlier last week. No way am I going back to making three transfers and creating a longer stressful commute even for a glorified SBS bus.

[Roadcruiser1]

SBS would not do much in terms of reduction times for commuters on Staten Island. The M15 SBS only saves people 20% on travel time. It isn't much and it really isn't useful. This is an idea that has been given much thought and abandoned upon because of the long travel time, and not much reduction in travel time.

[SIR North Shore]

The idea isn't a bad one, but I don't know what's this obsession with reducing express bus service on the island when it's already been cut into way too much as it is. If you think SBS is faster than the express bus then I'd like to see you prove it. SBS service would still create TWO to THREE transfers, so maybe you cut down the commute time a bit, but not in comparison to a one seat ride on the express bus. That's the thing everyone is overlooking. How do we cut out so many transfers? The transfers IMO are what really makes the commute seem so long. For example, in theory if everything works out right, it should be about an hour and 30 minutes roughly from my house to Midtown using the S98 to the ferry to the subway. Meanwhile on the X30 it can be almost under an hour when there is no traffic as was the case earlier last week. No way am I going back to making three transfers and creating a longer stressful commute even for a glorified SBS bus.

 

No, it's not an obsession with cutting express buses.. they're a great way to travel as well but it goes without saying that if a S79 SBS branch to manhattan were created, it would deeply cut into the ridership of the X1-X9, especially the downtown-only lines. The express buses would still be just as important from Canal Street and above, but at the same time the express buses take a very long time to travel within Manhattan if you're not using a route such as the X2, X30 or X42.

[Roadcruiser1]

No, it's not an obsession with cutting express buses.. they're a great way to travel as well but it goes without saying that if a S79 SBS branch to manhattan were created, it would deeply cut into the ridership of the X1-X9, especially the downtown-only lines. The express buses would still be just as important from Canal Street and above, but at the same time the express buses take a very long time to travel within Manhattan if you're not using a route such as the X2, X30 or X42.

 

But again you aren't going to gain anything with such a long circuitous route. It's just cheaper to implement high speed ferries to South Ferry. Same benefit, cheaper cost, less time, and fewer jams in the ferry terminal.

[Roadcruiser1]

The subway tunnels would come out from St. George. You have to build new tunnels whether you use heavy rail or light rail.

 

Light rail can use the Verrazano Narrows Bridge, Geothals Bridge (although I don't see it being used in the near future), and the Bayonne Bridge. Heavy rail requires a whole new tunnel underneath the Kill Van Kull, and New York Harbor. Now in the end which is cheaper?