Look who's back: Port Authority to release study in favor of 7 to New Jersey

[bobtehpanda]

In fairness, how many of those buses are PA bound? For example, , charters, MegaBus, Bolt? And another thing, some of those companies that serve Port Authority (a Decamp, Lakeland, Suburban Transit) have routes outside the PA throughout Manhattan, so you have to take those into consideration too

 

That's kind of a chicken and egg question; low-cost carriers like MegaBus and Bolt don't use curbside space in places like Boston. Are they only on the curb or going to GWB because PA is too expensive, or are they on the curb for the sake of being on the curb? If PA is too expensive, it's because there is too much demand for too few spots.

 

It's not impossible. You have 1,600-1,700 feet if you count the break off just south of the station to the waterline between 27-28th street. Track level is 120ft at a 2.5% upgrade that's about 75-80 feet hitting the waterline the current Penn Hudson tubes are at about 75-80 feet. Gateway should be about the same if you have data that points otherwise let me know. As far as the PABT having bearly enough never have I seen a project of this scale have a price tag variance as this one. $3.7 Billion to $15.6 B wow! If you built the two at 3.7 Billion you'd have 8.2 B left so let's not count pockets yet they'll make the money happen if they want to they always do. Capacity the plan the new PABT is 160 gates with up to 7 buses per gate per hour = 1,120 per hour the question is what's the capacity for the Lincoln Tunnel? I495? With extra bus plus extra cars for the growing region  in 2025,30,40 even autonomous has limits.

 

The Penn Hudson tubes are at 80 feet at the shoreline, or at 80 feet at Penn itself? The answer to the question matters; grade is the entire reason they can't add a second East Side station after the East River tubes.

[RailRunRob]

That's kind of a chicken and egg question; low-cost carriers like MegaBus and Bolt don't use curbside space in places like Boston. Are they only on the curb or going to GWB because PA is too expensive, or are they on the curb for the sake of being on the curb? If PA is too expensive, it's because there is too much demand for too few spots.

 

 

The Penn Hudson tubes are at 80 feet at the shoreline, or at 80 feet at Penn itself? The answer to the question matters; grade is the entire reason they can't add a second East Side station after the East River tubes.

 

40 feet at Penn 2% downgrade from 9th Ave westward to an 80-90 Ft depth. East RiverTubes descent starts at about 6th Ave with a 1.5% grade so correct East Side Station faces opposition but that's a story for another day. My point was the downgrade of the Gateway Tunnel which starts its slope between 9-10th ave's under Hudson Yards and the 's possible upgrade from 33rd and 11th Ave @ a depth of 120ft to 27th and 12th Ave @ a depth of 70-75 feet to meet at the waterline or just off. It's possible cost effectiveness or better ways to do it. I can understand that POV but impossible. 

[TheNewYorkElevated]

They should connect I-495 at the Queens Midtown Tunnel to the Lincoln Tunnel so that the masses of cars going between Queens and New Jersey do not have to clog city streets.

That reminds me of Robert Moses's proposal of the Mid-Manhattan Expressway. 

[P3F]

That reminds me of Robert Moses's proposal of the Mid-Manhattan Expressway.

Moses' proposal was a bit ridiculous, having the roadway be 10 stories high. It would have required razing a decent amount of Midtown.

 

A set of tunnels is the way to go here.

[RailRunRob]

Moses' proposal was a bit ridiculous, having the roadway be 10 stories high. It would have required razing a decent amount of Midtown.

 

A set of tunnels is the way to go here.

Via? 38th street?

[P3F]

Via? 38th street?

30/31 Streets or 36/37 Streets could work. 38th would be fine as well.

 

It would be wherever it is easiest to build (less existing tunnelwork, etc.).

[Around the Horn]

The Lincoln Tunnel enters Manhattan at 39 Street and the Queens Midtown enters at 36 Street, right?

[P3F]

The Lincoln Tunnel enters Manhattan at 39 Street and the Queens Midtown enters at 36 Street, right?

The Lincoln Tunnel enters under 39th Street, and the Queens Midtown Tunnel enters under 41st Street.

 

The Lincoln Tunnel Expressway goes south to 31st Street, and the Queens Midtown Tunnel approaches go as far as 36th Street.

 

This map shows it more clearly:

[RailRunRob]

The Lincoln Tunnel enters Manhattan at 39 Street and the Queens Midtown enters at 36 Street, right?

Yep. you'd have to split the traffic Ie eastbound 38th westbound 39th maybe. Cross under the subways not too bad. Water tunnels are to the north and deep level. ESA might be something depending on the path. southernmost is better.. The question as well is where the break happens from both tunnels? At depth on the grade? Plus surveying Midtown Water mains ect.. tedious. 

[CenSin]

Moses' proposal was a bit ridiculous, having the roadway be 10 stories high. It would have required razing a decent amount of Midtown.

 

A set of tunnels is the way to go here.

He wanted everything to be above ground up high as a monument to himself.

[bobtehpanda]

30/31 Streets or 36/37 Streets could work. 38th would be fine as well.

 

It would be wherever it is easiest to build (less existing tunnelwork, etc.).

 

Highway tunnels, even short ones with no exits, tend to be ridiculously expensive and hard to engineer. The Big Dig in Boston and SR 99 in Seattle are some of the only examples we have, and they're not particularly encouraging.

[46Dover]

I was going to bring up the name Robert Moses, but wasn't sure if even this idea was his brainchild. Earlier posts confirm so it seems

[P3F]

Highway tunnels, even short ones with no exits, tend to be ridiculously expensive and hard to engineer. The Big Dig in Boston and SR 99 in Seattle are some of the only examples we have, and they're not particularly encouraging.

The Midtown tunnel would be quite a bit shorter than those at 1.4 miles. In addition, this tunnel would be less complicated because it would be directly under city streets (no real need to cut under buildings), and there would be no exits; the Lincoln Tunnel Expressway on the west side, and the existing tunnel approach on the east side, would act as exits. Also, this tunnel could be two lanes in each direction as opposed to the wider SR 99 and I-90/93 tunnels.

[bobtehpanda]

The Midtown tunnel would be quite a bit shorter than those at 1.4 miles. In addition, this tunnel would be less complicated because it would be directly under city streets (no real need to cut under buildings), and there would be no exits; the Lincoln Tunnel Expressway on the west side, and the existing tunnel approach on the east side, would act as exits. Also, this tunnel could be two lanes in each direction as opposed to the wider SR 99 and I-90/93 tunnels.

 

SR 99 is two lanes in each direction with no exits, IIRC. And just because it's under streets doesn't mean you won't need to underpin buildings; it's why East Side Access is being built in a cavern instead of at GCT's lower level.

[P3F]

SR 99 is two lanes in each direction with no exits, IIRC. And just because it's under streets doesn't mean you won't need to underpin buildings; it's why East Side Access is being built in a cavern instead of at GCT's lower level.

It would still be a worthwhile investment towards making NYC a better place in terms of transportation.

[bobtehpanda]

It would still be a worthwhile investment towards making NYC a better place in terms of transportation.

 

The best way to reduce traffic in Manhattan is to never have traffic go through it in the first place. The current toll setup encourages shopping around on local streets for the cheapest way to avoid tolls, when really all inbound crossings into Manhattan below 60th St should be tolled at the exact same rate to discourage this kind of behavior, and the VZ and outer borough bridges (including the Triboro and GWB) should have much lower tolls. I-95 should also be rerouted onto an upgraded Palisades Parkway and through 287 so you don't have all that through traffic entering the city.

 

However, either of those things is about as likely as a LI-Westchester Bridge.

[MassTransitHonchkrow]

 

 

Wouldn't you be willing to pay more now just to make sure it actually gets build instead of having a stub Second Avenue Subway.

Excellent point. Who bakes a cake in thirds anymore?

 

???? Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow ????

THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer ????

To be honest, I don't know who's gonna take a train/bus from one end of NJ to a subway train(and pay again, mind you) that will run less frequent than all of the buses and trains combined. A train to Secaucus just sounds unrealistic to me, and it won't reduce bus congestion at all.....I've been against this plan from the start.

 

When you put every single commuter bus and its ridership together with a single subway line, that'll cause more congestion for the than it has now. New Jersey Transit, along with their contractors (Coach USA, Academy, etc) have some of the highest ridership bus routes to/from PABT in their system. When the math is done, it just spells out more trouble for the , unless you can run trains every 2 minutes. There's waaaaaaaaay more bus traffic and commuter traffic with all those buses than what the deals with on a daily basis.

 

The is one of the most highly politicized lines in the system. I can almost imagine that the politicians in Queens will be against the whole thing, because it won't benefit them at all(literally speaking, it doesn't benefit Queens residents at all). Plus, I'm not quite sure how they'll implement CBTC technology all the way to Secaucus.

 

Bus terminal congestion won't go down because for one, Secaucus is out of the way for buses that go North of there. Second, building a Hoboken Station would be counter-productive. You have NJ Transit's 126 that continues to have a ridership increase, and the PATH(which lets face it, its more reliable than the ).

 

As for 10th Avenue Station, I've been against it before, and I'm still against it. There's literally no point in having that station especially since people just go to 8th Avenue or 6th Avenue for their trains. 34th Street has been a literal waste of money.

 

If the PA was smart, the first thing they would/should do is kick the jitney operators out of the port and have them pick up at the curbs. That opens up quite a few gates. They are honestly better off building a bus terminal at Weehawken while providing free shuttle service to/from Manhattan, than to do this.

 

In order for them to reduce bus congestion to the levels they want to reduce it to, they'd have to do several things.

 

1. Extend several subway lines to New Jersey, because one subway route along won't help their case.

2. Purchase extra rolling stock so they can meet this predicted demand.

3. Create station(s) that can hold the capacity.

 

Now think about it, how beneficial would it be for anyone in the long run? To me, this idea is more of a railfan's wetdream than something that would actually be beneficial to all parties in the long run.

Agreed when you put it that way.

Where is[i/] Queens at the Negotiating Table?

 

???? Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow ????

THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer ????

[P3F]

The best way to reduce traffic in Manhattan is to never have traffic go through it in the first place. The current toll setup encourages shopping around on local streets for the cheapest way to avoid tolls, when really all inbound crossings into Manhattan below 60th St should be tolled at the exact same rate to discourage this kind of behavior, and the VZ and outer borough bridges (including the Triboro and GWB) should have much lower tolls. I-95 should also be rerouted onto an upgraded Palisades Parkway and through 287 so you don't have all that through traffic entering the city.

 

However, either of those things is about as likely as a LI-Westchester Bridge.

You make a fair point about the northern part of the city, but there's nowhere to reroute I-495 in Midtown, other than underground.

 

Also, in terms of the Big Dig and SR 99 projects, those can be used as good examples, and can be learned from in order to avoid the same mistakes. (SR 99 isn't even that bad of a project. The only major issue with it is that it's been delayed multiple times.)

[Deucey]

The best way to reduce traffic in Manhattan is to never have traffic go through it in the first place. The current toll setup encourages shopping around on local streets for the cheapest way to avoid tolls, when really all inbound crossings into Manhattan below 60th St should be tolled at the exact same rate to discourage this kind of behavior, and the VZ and outer borough bridges (including the Triboro and GWB) should have much lower tolls. I-95 should also be rerouted onto an upgraded Palisades Parkway and through 287 so you don't have all that through traffic entering the city.

 

However, either of those things is about as likely as a LI-Westchester Bridge.

Must be my west coast ideals but I think it atrocious to charge people tolls to drive around to different parts of the city IF there's no other method to drive from one part to another.

 

It's why I'm against east river tolls; it's why I think people in Far Rockaway and Staten Island get screwed by City Hall/NYS: the former has to go to Nassau County then Queens to get to Brooklyn or pay $5 tolls, and the latter has to do the same to get back from Brooklyn since cars aren't allowed on the ferry.

 

Even LA metro has alternate routes/options to avoid tolls on the 91, MacArthur and Harbor Freeways.

 

I have no problem with the concept of tolling to go across county lines or states (although I fail to understand why Port Authority charges $14 cash from NJ and NY Thruway only $5 across the Tappan Zee), but to charge to go from outer boroughs to Manhattan...as much as I like trains and see the utility of the subway, penalizing drivers is a step too far - on par with charging SIers to ride the yacht AND cross the bridge.

[Union Tpke]

There are many more transit options for those who commute between Queens and Manhattan, which is why the fare should be increased. Those between Staten Island and Brooklyn, or the Rockaways and mainland Queens, or between Queens and the Bronx would get their fares lowered. This would end the bridge shopping and would reduce congestion on the streets of Manhattan. Truck drivers from Long Island going to New Jersey should not be using the Brooklyn Bridge–they should be using the Verrazano.

 

[P3F]

My opinion is that there should be at least a few free-to-use crossings. It is not okay to not be able to get off of Long Island and Manhattan without paying some kind of toll or fare.

[Deucey]

My opinion is that there should be at least a few free-to-use crossings. It is not okay to not be able to get off of Long Island and Manhattan without paying some kind of toll or fare.

I think it unfair LIers have to drive through LIC/QB and up the FDR to get off LI without paying tolls, otherwise paying ~$16 to go over the bridges to get to the rest of the country. But the system's designed to collect as much money as possible from the captive downstate population.

 

That's just beyond wrong to me.

[CenSin]

I think it unfair LIers have to drive through LIC/QB and up the FDR to get off LI without paying tolls, otherwise paying ~$16 to go over the bridges to get to the rest of the country. But the system's designed to collect as much money as possible from the captive downstate population.

 

That's just beyond wrong to me.

Well, who should pay for the upkeep of the roads then?

[Deucey]

Well, who should pay for the upkeep of the roads then?

Taxpayers, licensed drivers and vehicle registration already are. And on that note, every East River toll proposal isn't allocating toll revenue to road maintenance - each one specifies the money is for transit.

[CenSin]

Taxpayers, licensed drivers and vehicle registration already are. And on that note, every East River toll proposal isn't allocating toll revenue to road maintenance - each one specifies the money is for transit.

How should transit be paid for then? More debt?