Vistausss Posted October 23, 2013 Share #51 Posted October 23, 2013 If Christie is willing to fund a connection from Secaucus to Manhattan and the doesn't want to extend the , then why doesn't Christie talk with PATH instead? I'm pretty sure that with the right funding PATH would love to have another line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RtrainBlues Posted October 23, 2013 Share #52 Posted October 23, 2013 The simplest solution is to have the PATH train accept the Unlimited Metrocard, but PATH refuses to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted October 23, 2013 Share #53 Posted October 23, 2013 What's your opinion on this idea sending the down 11 Av then onto 23 St as a crosstown route to 2 Av. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted October 24, 2013 Share #54 Posted October 24, 2013 If the line ever enters the state of New Jersey what status would it have legally? Would it be considered an inter-state subway system? Are there any other interstate subway systems in the US ? It couldn't be compared to PATH or the SIRT which both have some type of grandfathered railroad status and are considered railroads and not subway systems. I can recall the severing rail links at New Lots Ave on the and south of old Unionport-East 180th St station where trackage once connected to railroads. The rumor back then was that the was trying to avoid any hint of a connection with federal rules. IMO a train going to New Jersey would be an interstate move and possibly be subject to federal regulations. Perhaps some of our more knowledgeable posters can venture their opinions on the possible legal status of this extension. I don't know if the answer lies with the federal DOT, FRA, or some other agency but I'm sure someone way up the food chain would have to rule on this before a shovel hits the dirt. Imagine an NYCT T/O in a NJ courtroom case about a 12-9. See what I'm getting at ? I would rather see the city and the spend the little money they have to flesh out and upgrade the existing system. Just my opinion. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick44 Posted October 24, 2013 Share #55 Posted October 24, 2013 I've always thought the and trains should terminate at the Javits Center. Obviously, the is going there for a big reason, but I also think the should get an extension to the Javits Center and two additional subway stops, one on 14th St/10th Av and the other on 23rd St/11th Av. Giving a subway connection to the High Line, Chelsea Piers, and another to the Jacob Javits Center with the train. Also brings a growing Chelsea more direct connections to the train, which is already utilized by Chelsea residents and shoppers, etc. This also may reduce any potential and current bottle-necking on the 8th Avenue Line. Also, the to NJ is a no-no. And mayors of NYC do not have control over the , since it is a state organization. They can make empowering suggestions and complaints, just like your local state senator or city councilman. But the state and/or the doesn't necessarily have to listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted October 24, 2013 Share #56 Posted October 24, 2013 @Trainmaster5: SIRT and PATH aren't technically considered railroads because if they were then they would fall under FRA regulation. Which they don't. They are officially called "rapid transit system". The only interstate rapid transit lines I can think of are PATCO Speedline and PATH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 24, 2013 Share #57 Posted October 24, 2013 @Trainmaster5: SIRT and PATH aren't technically considered railroads because if they were then they would fall under FRA regulation. Which they don't. They are officially called "rapid transit system". The only interstate rapid transit lines I can think of are PATCO Speedline and PATH. Isn't PATH under an FRA waiver due to an old Penn-Central era interlocking? WMATA is interstate for obvious reasons, but that's a very weird case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted October 24, 2013 Share #58 Posted October 24, 2013 Isn't PATH under an FRA waiver due to an old Penn-Central era interlocking? WMATA is interstate for obvious reasons, but that's a very weird case. You're right about PATH... SIRT is classified as a railroad, but its not under FRA oversight like PATH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted October 24, 2013 Share #59 Posted October 24, 2013 In that case PATCO is probably the only most notable example with their Speedline because it crosses state lines without being under FRA oversight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted October 24, 2013 Share #60 Posted October 24, 2013 St. Louis Metrolink light rail crosses state lines too. It crosses between Missouri and Illinois. As far as I know, it's not subject to FRA oversight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 24, 2013 Share #61 Posted October 24, 2013 St. Louis Metrolink light rail crosses state lines too. It crosses between Missouri and Illinois. As far as I know, it's not subject to FRA oversight. Light rail would never be included under FRA oversight; it would fall under the FTA, which I believe is drafting regulations (but only for heavy rail). The only thing they're subjected to is Buy America regulations (which may be less stringent after the TPP and EU-US trade negotiations) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainmaster5 Posted October 24, 2013 Share #62 Posted October 24, 2013 @Trainmaster5: SIRT and PATH aren't technically considered railroads because if they were then they would fall under FRA regulation. Which they don't. They are officially called "rapid transit system". The only interstate rapid transit lines I can think of are PATCO Speedline and PATH. PATH does fall under FRA oversight, at least according to Wiki (FWIW). The SIRT is a different thing altogether. IIRC the FRA was the reason they ran modified equipment in the first place. From what I've gathered only the separate, unconnected, freight line is still under FRA. I was actually wondering where to find the relevant documents to clear this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted October 24, 2013 Share #63 Posted October 24, 2013 @bob: Well, the trade negotiations will not happen anytime soon. The EU just announced they cancelled the negotiation, at least for the time being. Btw, Hiawatha in Minnesota is under FRA oversight, not FTA, and that is light rail. @Trainmaster5: I stand corrected on PATH. But yes, SIR is under FRA but only the freight operation. The commuter operation is not. But that still leaves PATCO's Speedline as the only interstate FRA line... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 27, 2013 Share #64 Posted October 27, 2013 @bob: Well, the trade negotiations will not happen anytime soon. The EU just announced they cancelled the negotiation, at least for the time being. Btw, Hiawatha in Minnesota is under FRA oversight, not FTA, and that is light rail. @Trainmaster5: I stand corrected on PATH. But yes, SIR is under FRA but only the freight operation. The commuter operation is not. But that still leaves PATCO's Speedline as the only interstate FRA line... Are you sure you're not talking about the Hiawatha Amtrak service, which is also in Minnesota? All the sources I have found indicate that the only agencies Metro Transit ever talked to about the Hiawatha Line were the Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted October 27, 2013 Share #65 Posted October 27, 2013 I'm talking about Hiawatha from Metro (now called the Blue Line). Maybe my source is wrong then. So that leaves PATCO's Speedline as the only example. Maybe they should talk to PATCO some time to see how one would do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted October 28, 2013 Share #66 Posted October 28, 2013 Why are we so excited to extend the into New Jersey or down the West Side right now? A subway line to Staten Island isn't even existent. We need to take care of our city first before doing other things. I also maintain a doubt that the would run down the West Side Highway. At best it would be extended down to the 14th Street area where it would connect with the . If any subway line were to go down the West Side it did be better off as a new subway line due to the fact that the Interborough Rapid Transit uses such a narrow rail car. The West Side Line would be better off using the Independent Subway System or the Brooklyn Manhattan Transit system width. It handles more people. That's why even if a subway extension to New Jersey does happen (really far in the future) it did be better off as an line extension. It handles more people than the ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted October 28, 2013 Share #67 Posted October 28, 2013 The to NJ is one thing, but it's rather cheap to extend the in Manhattan compared to extending a subway line to Staten Island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted October 28, 2013 Share #68 Posted October 28, 2013 The to NJ is one thing, but it's rather cheap to extend the in Manhattan compared to extending a subway line to Staten Island. Still I did prefer a line similar to the one being constructed at Second Avenue. However it did run on the West Side and that would be the only difference.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 28, 2013 Share #69 Posted October 28, 2013 Still I did prefer a line similar to the one being constructed at Second Avenue. However it did run on the West Side and that would be the only difference.......... The FWS does not need a full subway line - it has service on Broadway north of 72nd. Why are we so excited to extend the into New Jersey or down the West Side right now? A subway line to Staten Island isn't even existent. We need to take care of our city first before doing other things. I also maintain a doubt that the would run down the West Side Highway. At best it would be extended down to the 14th Street area where it would connect with the . If any subway line were to go down the West Side it did be better off as a new subway line due to the fact that the Interborough Rapid Transit uses such a narrow rail car. The West Side Line would be better off using the Independent Subway System or the Brooklyn Manhattan Transit system width. It handles more people. That's why even if a subway extension to New Jersey does happen (really far in the future) it did be better off as an line extension. It handles more people than the ........... The problem with a Staten Island subway is that the ferry would be faster in every case unless you built a straight-shot tunnel from the Battery, which is not very cost effective at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted October 28, 2013 Share #70 Posted October 28, 2013 Agreed. The only part of the far West Side where a new subway line would be needed is between 14th and 72nd Streets. Elsewhere on the West Side, the is close enough to serve the FWS well, except above 168th St, where the does the job. I think an effective way to serve the far West Side with a new line would be to extend the current extension to 14th St and branch a new north-south 9 train off of the extension that continues up 11th Ave. At 11th and 57th, the 9 would shift over to Amsterdam Ave at then continue up Amsterdam to Broadway & 72nd St to connect with the , and trains. From there, the 9 can be connected to the Broadway Local tracks and supplement the Uptown. This way, the would also have the added benefit of being physically connected to the rest of the A Division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted October 28, 2013 Share #71 Posted October 28, 2013 @bob: To be fair, it's not so much about the ferry being faster, it's the fact that one could have one-seat ride to/from SI. Also, no one said to connect to Battery. Express buses cover that part so the subway would most likely connect to Brooklyn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 29, 2013 Share #72 Posted October 29, 2013 @bob: To be fair, it's not so much about the ferry being faster, it's the fact that one could have one-seat ride to/from SI. Also, no one said to connect to Battery. Express buses cover that part so the subway would most likely connect to Brooklyn. Unless people are getting off the at Bay Ridge for other buses in Brooklyn (and there aren't too many frequent bus services west of Culver), the majority of people who would utilize that connection would probably take an and then switch to an express the first chance they get, just like Bay Ridge riders do today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadcruiser1 Posted November 1, 2013 Share #73 Posted November 1, 2013 What are you guys talking about. I already did the statistics a few threads back for ridership on the West Side Lines and they beg to differ. They are all comparable to the ridership on the Lexington Avenue Line. The problem is cost.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted November 1, 2013 Share #74 Posted November 1, 2013 What are you guys talking about. I already did the statistics a few threads back for ridership on the West Side Lines and they beg to differ. They are all comparable to the ridership on the Lexington Avenue Line. The problem is cost.......... The problem is where the hell you would put a new line. The most obvious choice for a West Side Line, 11th Avenue (to tie into the ) is not optimal - the 7 needs all the train capacity it can get, and cannot split tracks between services - look at the to see what happens when a crowded Queens service shares tracks with a Manhattan local service. In addition, north of 72nd St it parallels broadway by less than a full block, and completely merges with Broadway at Cathedral Pkwy. Building under the West Side Highway is not recommended, particularly because its northern portion is bordered by a park on one side and the Hudson on the other. In addition, at least a significant portion of the West Side Highway was built on fill, so it would not be wise. It would also be an absolute disaster in the event of a severe rainstorm - West St was designed specifically to act as a collecting area for water so that building infrastructure would not be damaged. There is nothing on 9th Av to serve; it would serve the exact same markets as the IND, and serve no new ones. That would basically leave 10th/Amsterdam, which is on the right side of the Lincoln Tunnel crossing and also directly serves the area around the High Line. You also have to keep in mind that not all ridership on the West Side lines can be adequately served by a new trunk line further out. A significant amount of ridership on both lines is heading south of 23rd or east to Midtown via the , neither of which would really be helped out (unless you solved the former by extending down West St, which would be problematic due to reasons mentioned previously). Expect West Side IRT and IND ridership to drop by a few points or more upon opening of East Side Access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted November 1, 2013 Share #75 Posted November 1, 2013 There's also the idea of tying together the and . It would be done in phases. The Steinway Tunnel would have to be completely replaced, and in the years it takes to do that, the current from Grand Central to the new section would be increased to BMT standards and become the . The Queens portion could also be converted to BMT, and become the (Astoria would have to go on only one service at this time. QBP to Vernon-Jackson could be a shuttle if used at all). Then when it's all finished, you would have Main St. to Canarsie, and diamond express in Queens to Myrtle-Wyckoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.