Jump to content

Transit study will look into running 7 train into New Jersey


BM5 via Woodhaven

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It's very simple.  NJ residents pay taxes and their previous governor hasn't been funding their system the way that he should've. That isn't our problem. That's NJ's problem and therefore let them solve their problems with THEIR money.  

You've missed the point I was trying to make. Yes, what you said is true, and I believe that NJ should pay a proportional amount of the cost of any cross-Hudson transit improvements, but we need to think in a more regional sense. Like I said, the benefits for new or improved Hudson crossings is a two-way street. I hate Christie as much as anyone, but I'm not going to be vindictive and withhold much-needed regional transit improvements from New Jersey as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, officiallyliam said:

You've missed the point I was trying to make. Yes, what you said is true, and I believe that NJ should pay a proportional amount of the cost of any cross-Hudson transit improvements, but we need to think in a more regional sense. Like I said, the benefits for new or improved Hudson crossings is a two-way street. I hate Christie as much as anyone, but I'm not going to be vindictive and withhold much-needed regional transit improvements from New Jersey as a result.

It has nothing to do with being vindictive.  That's like saying that Connecticut needs transit improvements, but having NYC pay for it. The whole idea is absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

What an unbelievably silly premise for a question. Just because it's called the NYC Subway doesn't mean that it can't cross borders. When they built the London Underground, they didn't stop at the borders of the City of London because they named it after London; it serves the region. Stop thinking about this as we live in one state, they live in a different state - we live in the same metropolitan area. Why should people who live in Jersey City and work downtown be treated differently from someone who lives in Queens and works in Manhattan, or differently from someone who lives in lower Westchester and works in the Bronx? We're all contributing to the economy and society of our region.

It's a symbiotic relationship; not only New Jersey stands to benefit from better transit integration with NYC. And as I posted above, that doesn't have to mean (and I don't think it should mean) an extension of the (7) line.

I don’t think your getting what I’m saying. I LIKE the idea of the (7) being extended, but I’m trying to be realistic. If we want to have better transit integration with New Jersey, there’s go to be another way rather than speding billions of dollars and having it take decades to be completed. I would be saying the same thing if they wanted to extend the (2) to Westchester or the (5) to Connecticut. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

You've missed the point I was trying to make. Yes, what you said is true, and I believe that NJ should pay a proportional amount of the cost of any cross-Hudson transit improvements, but we need to think in a more regional sense. Like I said, the benefits for new or improved Hudson crossings is a two-way street. I hate Christie as much as anyone, but I'm not going to be vindictive and withhold much-needed regional transit improvements from New Jersey as a result.

What was it - last year? - people were busy trying to figure out how to fund the new PABT and Gateway and got mad when Andrew said “it’s NJ’s problem” when asked about NY’s contribution?

It’s the truth though. NJ needs to get to New York, NJ needs to pay for it since it’s a priority for them and the reverse - going to NJ - an option for us.

If NJ wants a subway spur or extension, let them build it and fund (MTA) for its maintenance up to the part of NY-built track starts.

But it’s not our responsibility to make life easier for NJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There should be some more New York-New Jersey rapid transit lines, keep the pressure off some of the NJ-NY buses, the PABT, and maybe even siphon off the jitneys.

Yes, New Jersey has to pay its part.

Yes, the MTA, New York, New Jersey, and the PANJNY have to get their shit together when it comes to their finances.

Yes, there has to be a will in New Jersey's part to do it.

I just really wish there would be genuine and full-effort comprehensive plans that don't involve some half-assed (7) extension to Secaucus. It seems nobody is interested in doing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

There should be some more New York-New Jersey rapid transit lines, keep the pressure off some of the NJ-NY buses, the PABT, and maybe even siphon off the jitneys.

Yes, New Jersey has to pay its part.

Yes, the MTA, New York, New Jersey, and the PANJNY have to get their shit together when it comes to their finances.

Yes, there has to be a will in New Jersey's part to do it.

I just really wish there would be genuine and full-effort comprehensive plans that don't involve some half-assed (7) extension to Secaucus. It seems nobody is interested in doing more.

I would encourage an actual bi-state transport authority to develop and coordinate transit on both sides of the river, but given how badly run PA, NJT and (MTA) are, it’d end up another drain to put money in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe there should be strings attached to such a project. New Jersey pays for all of it, and in return for diverting a (7) trains to serve non-New Yorkers, New Jersey will also pay for an extension downtown towards World Trade Center. The Flushing Line would be branched at its southern end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lance said:

Rather than focusing on the same stale idea time and again, perhaps it's time to deal with the elephant in the room. The crisis with NJ Transit is not going to get any better with an extension of the Flushing line, nor are the capacity problems with the Hudson River tunnels between Jersey and Penn Station. People's cross-river commutes are not going to get any better until this issues are dealt with. This is not a problem that can be offset by a subway, even if the PA were to pick up the tab.

Even if NJ Transit's crisis was resolved, and their tracks paved with gold, you wouldn't see one iota more of capacity going from there to NYC. The existing tunnels -- all of them -- are maxed out and then some. NJT and Amtrak have got creative with adding capacity where they can -- MLVs, high density signalling -- but the reality is that save for a few single level sets that come in from the NJCL and NEC, there's simply no way to add capacity. And remember, the tunnels are a constraint, yes, but the station itself is too. And that is most certainly NY's problem. So yes, these issues won't be solved with any extension of the (7) line, but unless we add capacity of some sort between the two states, we're just gonna hurt everyone involved -- including NY. 

And FWIW, I know many, many people who transfer from NJT to PATH at either Hoboken or Newark Penn to avoid the obscene fares on NJT to Penn. A trip from Avenel to 34th st is 298/month on NJT only, but if you change at Newark or Hoboken for PATH, you pay 179+89 = 268. It adds up -- that there difference is $360 a year. So in that way, you gain cap. 

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It's very simple.  NJ residents pay taxes and their previous governor hasn't been funding their system the way that he should've. That isn't our problem. That's NJ's problem and therefore let them solve their problems with THEIR money.  

So when a hurricane hits, say, Texas, we shouldn't fund rebuilding efforts because it's their issue that they don't have good zoning protocols and flood protection mechanisms?

More pertinently, should New York not help fund Gateway because that's an NJ/points south problem? We have no control over Amtrak/NJT, so following the logic of those in this thread, we should have nothing to do with paying for it. 

If you answer yes to that last one, go do some reading on regional interdependence, if you answer no, then you're being a hypocrite if you oppose helping pay for a new subway/PATH tunnel under the river. That tunnel will in all likelihood serve more people than any Gateway ever would -- that's the nature of a subway. 

Despite what all you New York chauvinists think, we need NJ just as much as they need us. Sure, we have the offices, but what are all those desks worth without anyone to sit at them? This juvenile calculus of "tunnel from NJ = NJ's problem" that I'm seeing is just that -- juvenile. We stand to gain from more trans-hudson capacity just as much as they do. You may not live in New Jersey, but New Jerseyans who commute to NY are contributing to the economy of the city just as much as someone from Westchester. They're patronizing stores, earning pay, and increasing GDP. If we don't see the value in investing in that, then I don't know what we've come to. 

19 minutes ago, Deucey said:

I would encourage an actual bi-state transport authority to develop and coordinate transit on both sides of the river, but given how badly run PA, NJT and (MTA) are, it’d end up another drain to put money in.

The PA is that agency. They can and need to do it. 

 

So in essence what I'm saying is that if the Port Authority demonstrates that they need us New Yorkers' help in funding whatever they choose, we should be there with cash. It's necessary for our survival as a city. We've got to get out of these idiotic mental silos and see the regional picture. We aren't a constellation of neighborhoods or cities or states. We are a single, cohesive, interdependent unit, and must act like one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RR503 said:

So when a hurricane hits, say, Texas, we shouldn't fund rebuilding efforts because it's their issue that they don't have good zoning protocols and flood protection mechanisms?

More pertinently, should New York not help fund Gateway because that's an NJ/points south problem? We have no control over Amtrak/NJT, so following the logic of those in this thread, we should have nothing to do with paying for it. 

If you answer yes to that last one, go do some reading on regional interdependence, if you answer no, then you're being a hypocrite if you oppose helping pay for a new subway/PATH tunnel under the river. That tunnel will in all likelihood serve more people than any Gateway ever would -- that's the nature of a subway. 

Despite what all you New York chauvinists think, we need NJ just as much as they need us. Sure, we have the offices, but what are all those desks worth without anyone to sit at them? This juvenile calculus of "tunnel from NJ = NJ's problem" that I'm seeing is just that -- juvenile. We stand to gain from more trans-hudson capacity just as much as they do. You may not live in New Jersey, but New Jerseyans who commute to NY are contributing to the economy of the city just as much as someone from Westchester. They're patronizing stores, earning pay, and increasing GDP. If we don't see the value in investing in that, then I don't know what we've come to. 

A hurricane is a different story.  Let's focus on the issue-at-hand here.  New Jersey has a governor just like we do whose job is to fund their transportation system, and if he isn't, then why are we responsible for them?  New Jersey sure as hell isn't stepping in to help us with our subway crisis, nor should they.  That's why we pay taxes and they pay taxes.  The problem is New Jersey isn't funding their transportation system the way that they should be.

Quote

So in essence what I'm saying is that if the Port Authority demonstrates that they need us New Yorkers' help in funding whatever they choose, we should be there with cash. It's necessary for our survival as a city. We've got to get out of these idiotic mental silos and see the regional picture. We aren't a constellation of neighborhoods or cities or states. We are a single, cohesive, interdependent unit, and must act like one. 

Uh no we should not be there with cash.  We have our own crisis, so where in the hell did we suddenly come up with monies to help NJ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It has nothing to do with being vindictive.  That's like saying that Connecticut needs transit improvements, but having NYC pay for it. The whole idea is absurd.

 

3 hours ago, Dannny said:

I don’t think your getting what I’m saying. I LIKE the idea of the (7) being extended, but I’m trying to be realistic. If we want to have better transit integration with New Jersey, there’s go to be another way rather than speding billions of dollars and having it take decades to be completed. I would be saying the same thing if they wanted to extend the (2) to Westchester or the (5) to Connecticut.

Connecticut and Westchester are different. There is far less traffic between where the subway ends in the Bronx and the areas that are immediately outside of the city there. There are no large centers of employment or areas of dense housing just beyond the (1)(2)(4) or (5) in the Bronx, making those areas bad places for subway expansion. The opposite is true for the areas that lie immediately across the Hudson from Manhattan. I agree that New York City shouldn't foot the whole bill for subway expansion into New Jersey, but comparing that to building subways in Westchester or Connecticut is comparing apples and oranges.

3 hours ago, Deucey said:

It’s the truth though. NJ needs to get to New York, NJ needs to pay for it since it’s a priority for them and the reverse - going to NJ - an option for us.

Here's the thing, though - rapid transit expansion will change that. It's not like extending a subway line into Hoboken or Jersey City, or improving and integrating PATH, would be building a purely commuter service - i.e. one that would serve the sole purpose of bringing people one way in the morning and the other in the afternoon. Jersey City, Hoboken, and Newark are CBDs in their own right, and there's nothing saying that someone couldn't have a morning commute from Brooklyn to Jersey City, or from Queens to Hoboken, or the Bronx to Newark. As I said before, a new, improved, better-integrated rapid transit service will be a two-way street. Any of the extensions that I proposed above wouldn't simply be NYC dropping cash on infrastructure that would have no benefit to New Yorkers. It would open up new opportunities for people who live here to get to other parts of the metropolitan region. That's why this is so important.

7 minutes ago, RR503 said:
55 minutes ago, Deucey said:

I would encourage an actual bi-state transport authority to develop and coordinate transit on both sides of the river, but given how badly run PA, NJT and (MTA) are, it’d end up another drain to put money in.

The PA is that agency. They can and need to do it. 

What we need is a true, regional agency along the lines of Transport for London or the STIF in the Paris area, that would be able to properly integrate and coordinate the various transport modes in the region - the subways (including PATH), buses, ferries, and regional rail services. This would be able to replace all the regional agencies - the MTA (and its components), NJT, PATH, NY Waterway - with one cohesive system that reflects the nature of the metropolitan area as one not separated by state or county borders.

11 minutes ago, RR503 said:

This juvenile calculus of "tunnel from NJ = NJ's problem" that I'm seeing is just that -- juvenile. We stand to gain from more trans-hudson capacity just as much as they do. You may not live in New Jersey, but New Jerseyans who commute to NY are contributing to the economy of the city just as much as someone from Westchester. They're patronizing stores, earning pay, and increasing GDP. If we don't see the value in investing in that, then I don't know what we've come to. 

You're exactly right. The metropolitan region extends beyond the city borders, and it always has. Remember there was a time when Queens and Brooklyn weren't part of New York City, and while I'm not proposing to annex Hudson County as the sixth borough, the principle is the same. The integration between Brooklyn and New York (Manhattan) today is seamless, in large part because of rapid transit. There's absolutely no reason that we couldn't say the same about North Jersey, and there is immense value for both New York and New Jersey in being a more cohesive region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

 

Connecticut and Westchester are different. There is far less traffic between where the subway ends in the Bronx and the areas that are immediately outside of the city there. There are no large centers of employment or areas of dense housing just beyond the (1)(2)(4) or (5) in the Bronx, making those areas bad places for subway expansion. The opposite is true for the areas that lie immediately across the Hudson from Manhattan. I agree that New York City shouldn't foot the whole bill for subway expansion into New Jersey, but comparing that to building subways in Westchester or Connecticut is comparing apples and oranges.

Here's the thing, though - rapid transit expansion will change that. It's not like extending a subway line into Hoboken or Jersey City, or improving and integrating PATH, would be building a purely commuter service - i.e. one that would serve the sole purpose of bringing people one way in the morning and the other in the afternoon. Jersey City, Hoboken, and Newark are CBDs in their own right, and there's nothing saying that someone couldn't have a morning commute from Brooklyn to Jersey City, or from Queens to Hoboken, or the Bronx to Newark. As I said before, a new, improved, better-integrated rapid transit service will be a two-way street. Any of the extensions that I proposed above wouldn't simply be NYC dropping cash on infrastructure that would have no benefit to New Yorkers. It would open up new opportunities for people who live here to get to other parts of the metropolitan region. That's why this is so important.

What we need is a true, regional agency along the lines of Transport for London or the STIF in the Paris area, that would be able to properly integrate and coordinate the various transport modes in the region - the subways (including PATH), buses, ferries, and regional rail services. This would be able to replace all the regional agencies - the MTA (and its components), NJT, PATH, NY Waterway - with one cohesive system that reflects the nature of the metropolitan area as one not separated by state or county borders.

You're exactly right. The metropolitan region extends beyond the city borders, and it always has. Remember there was a time when Queens and Brooklyn weren't part of New York City, and while I'm not proposing to annex Hudson County as the sixth borough, the principle is the same. The integration between Brooklyn and New York (Manhattan) today is seamless, in large part because of rapid transit. There's absolutely no reason that we couldn't say the same about North Jersey, and there is immense value for both New York and New Jersey in being a more cohesive region.

New Jersey's rapid growth is New Jersey's problem.  We have our own rapid growth here that we can't handle.  We have a housing crisis, a transportation crisis and so on, and yet we're supposed to focus on another state with taxpayer dollars?!?? I mean what are you people thinking?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The problem is New Jersey isn't funding their transportation system the way that they should be.

Who's to say in 75 years if NY/NJ as we know it will even exist? I think we're going to have to move to regional Jurisdictions. Everything is interconnected now hands down. Jobs, Housing stock.. transport. State borders and jurisdictions are all man-made.Why couldn't you change the rules to better fit the current situation?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RailRunRob said:

Who's to say in 75 years if NY/NJ as we know it will even exist? I think we're going to have to move to regional Jurisdictions. Everything is interconnected now hands down. Jobs, Housing stock.. transport. State borders and jurisdictions are all man-made.Why couldn't you change the rules to better fit the current situation?  

Taxes aren't interconnected, and until they are, I can't fathom many New Yorkers giving the okay to their tax dollars going to another state to deal with their transportation problems when we can't get around here in NYC on the subway.  Makes absolutely no sense.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Taxes aren't interconnected, and until they are, I can't fathom many New Yorkers giving the okay to their tax dollars going to another state to deal with their transportation problems when we can't get around here in NYC on the subway.  Makes absolutely no sense.  

Again Man-made rules..  Taxes could be interconnected. Not an issue. State Jurisdictions aren't sustainable when it comes to growth. The New York metro area definitely fits that criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

New Jersey sure as hell isn't stepping in to help us with our subway crisis, nor should they. 

Yes, this is true - because the subway today is contained within the borders of New York. This is like saying we pay for NJT to replace its intra-state bus fleet, which nobody is proposing. This is about inter-state transportation and how that stands to benefit both parties.

6 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

New Jersey's rapid growth is New Jersey's problem.  We have our own rapid growth here that we can't handle.  We have a housing crisis, a transportation crisis and so on, and yet we're supposed to focus on another state. I mean what are you people thinking?? 

New Jersey's (at least the areas closest to the city's) rapid growth and New York City's rapid growth are not two separate, distinct phenomenons. When the Brooklyn Bridge was designed and built, New York and Brooklyn were two separate cities, growing simultaneously because of their proximity. That's why they built the bridge - to facilitate better connections between the two cities. The same goes for Manhattan and Jersey City or Hoboken. Further to your point, though, integrating Jersey into our transport system could actually do wonders to alleviate the housing and job crisis here in NYC. Suddenly, it is much easier to live in Jersey and work in Manhattan, as it's just as easy to reach Midtown as it is from central Queens or western Brooklyn. Now we've freed up housing space in the city proper by greatly expanding the supply of housing. The same goes for jobs - if the (L) was extended as I suggested, now I can live in Queens and work in Hoboken, and have a nearly identical commute to my current one from Queens to school in Chelsea. The supply of jobs available to people is better distributed, and the supply and the demand for housing is better distributed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

New Jersey's (at least the areas closest to the city's) rapid growth and New York City's rapid growth are not two separate, distinct phenomenons. When the Brooklyn Bridge was designed and built, New York and Brooklyn were two separate cities, growing simultaneously because of their proximity. That's why they built the bridge - to facilitate better connections between the two cities. The same goes for Manhattan and Jersey City or Hoboken. Further to your point, though, integrating Jersey into our transport system could actually do wonders to alleviate the housing and job crisis here in NYC. Suddenly, it is much easier to live in Jersey and work in Manhattan, as it's just as easy to reach Midtown as it is from central Queens or western Brooklyn. Now we've freed up housing space in the city proper by greatly expanding the supply of housing. The same goes for jobs - if the (L) was extended as I suggested, now I can live in Queens and work in Hoboken, and have a nearly identical commute to my current one from Queens to school in Chelsea. The supply of jobs available to people is better distributed, and the supply and the demand for housing is better distributed.

It's funny I've been to a few economic forms were the idea was being floated of interconnecting the Metro Area Counties to make a special independent district. Kinda like a Washington DC. Unify the region. I think it's a possibility just have to get past the current generation of thinking. Especially with Cities becoming more economic engines outputting on the scale of Countries. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, RR503 said:

Keep in mind that these riders would be largely getting off in Midtown -- creating space for Queens (7) riders.

The other alternatives, if I had to guess, are probably extending the (L), maybe some sort of new PATH line, maybe a NJT extension from Hoboken, or just augmenting existing services in various ways (through running, moving block signaling on the NEC, IDK what else). 

Extending the (L) is EXACTLY what  I would do.  That probably would spur having ALL stations on the line not already 600 feet extended to that and maybe also doing that for the rest of the Eastern Division.  The cars are bigger and if all stations get extended as part of it would be a win-win for all on the Canarsie line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

Extending the (L) is EXACTLY what  I would do.  That probably would spur having ALL stations on the line not already 600 feet extended to that and maybe also doing that for the rest of the Eastern Division.  The cars are bigger and if all stations get extended as part of it would be a win-win for all on the Canarsie line.

What does the (L) have to do with the rest of the Eastern division? The (L) is pretty much isolated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

New Jersey's rapid growth is New Jersey's problem.  We have our own rapid growth here that we can't handle.  We have a housing crisis, a transportation crisis and so on, and yet we're supposed to focus on another state with taxpayer dollars?!?? I mean what are you people thinking?? 

Most people moving to New Jersey used to reside in New York and were priced out cause Bloomberg and other pols were creating a playground for the rich... To say that it's entirely New Jersey's problem is disingenuous.

 

45 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

New Jersey's (at least the areas closest to the city's) rapid growth and New York City's rapid growth are not two separate, distinct phenomenons. When the Brooklyn Bridge was designed and built, New York and Brooklyn were two separate cities, growing simultaneously because of their proximity. That's why they built the bridge - to facilitate better connections between the two cities. The same goes for Manhattan and Jersey City or Hoboken. Further to your point, though, integrating Jersey into our transport system could actually do wonders to alleviate the housing and job crisis here in NYC. Suddenly, it is much easier to live in Jersey and work in Manhattan, as it's just as easy to reach Midtown as it is from central Queens or western Brooklyn. Now we've freed up housing space in the city proper by greatly expanding the supply of housing. The same goes for jobs - if the (L) was extended as I suggested, now I can live in Queens and work in Hoboken, and have a nearly identical commute to my current one from Queens to school in Chelsea. The supply of jobs available to people is better distributed, and the supply and the demand for housing is better distributed.

THIS^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

Extending the (L) is EXACTLY what  I would do.  That probably would spur having ALL stations on the line not already 600 feet extended to that and maybe also doing that for the rest of the Eastern Division.  The cars are bigger and if all stations get extended as part of it would be a win-win for all on the Canarsie line.

It probably wouldn't spur that at all, and I certainly wasn't thinking that when I proposed this. While the new stops would be built 600' long, my knowledge of the (L) line tells me that extending a lot of the platforms would be a big pain. There's a possibility that a couple of small platform extensions could allow the (L) to be 9 cars long (which might actually be possible now, I'm not sure) but fleet availability makes that impossible.

As for the rest of the Eastern Division (and I don't want this to become the main topic of conversation), there are several stations where extending to 600' would simply be a no-go without rebuilding the elevated structure: Myrtle-Broadway, Broadway Junction, Myrtle-Wyckoff, Forest Avenue, Fresh Pond Road, Metropolitan Avenue (and probably some others) are unextendable in their current state because of switches, curves, or a combination of the above. This is a whole other thing entirely.

16 minutes ago, Around the Horn said:

Most people moving to New Jersey used to reside in New York and were priced out cause Bloomberg and other pols were creating a playground for the rich... To say that it's entirely New Jersey's problem is disingenuous.

Exactly. But allowing NJ residents better access to NYC, and NYC residents better access to NJ, will make the whole situation more equitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless I'm missing something in this New York vs New Jersey argument in this thread many people overlook the obvious. Who runs PATH ? Everybody talks about NJT, MNRR, the LIRR, Amtrak, whatever. Who should pay for an improvement to a regional transport issue ? Does the PANY&NJ ring a bell ? Last time I looked this bi-state agency was run by both states.Funded by whom ? Taxpayers and tolls from both sides of the Hudson. Just like the region's major airports. Much of the arguments presented are flat out stupid and parochial, at least in my opinion. Let's try to elevate the discussion folks. The Gateway, Amtrak, Hudson River tunnels should all be talked about. Quite frankly we've had this idea brought up quite a few times over the last decade on this very site. If you've been around the block like I have you realize that transportation issues , whether inter or intra state are talked about ad nauseum with no improvements except to some consulting firm's bottom line. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

Yes, this is true - because the subway today is contained within the borders of New York. This is like saying we pay for NJT to replace its intra-state bus fleet, which nobody is proposing. This is about inter-state transportation and how that stands to benefit both parties.

New Jersey's (at least the areas closest to the city's) rapid growth and New York City's rapid growth are not two separate, distinct phenomenons. When the Brooklyn Bridge was designed and built, New York and Brooklyn were two separate cities, growing simultaneously because of their proximity. That's why they built the bridge - to facilitate better connections between the two cities. The same goes for Manhattan and Jersey City or Hoboken. Further to your point, though, integrating Jersey into our transport system could actually do wonders to alleviate the housing and job crisis here in NYC. Suddenly, it is much easier to live in Jersey and work in Manhattan, as it's just as easy to reach Midtown as it is from central Queens or western Brooklyn. Now we've freed up housing space in the city proper by greatly expanding the supply of housing. The same goes for jobs - if the (L) was extended as I suggested, now I can live in Queens and work in Hoboken, and have a nearly identical commute to my current one from Queens to school in Chelsea. The supply of jobs available to people is better distributed, and the supply and the demand for housing is better distributed.

Oh please. People are fleeing NYC in drives because our subways are a mess. I had to cancel a meeting tonight because I was stuck on a damn subway train. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Trainmaster5 said:

Unless I'm missing something in this New York vs New Jersey argument in this thread many people overlook the obvious. Who runs PATH ? Everybody talks about NJT, MNRR, the LIRR, Amtrak, whatever. Who should pay for an improvement to a regional transport issue ? Does the PANY&NJ ring a bell ? Last time I looked this bi-state agency was run by both states.Funded by whom ? Taxpayers and tolls from both sides of the Hudson. Just like the region's major airports. Much of the arguments presented are flat out stupid and parochial, at least in my opinion. Let's try to elevate the discussion folks. The Gateway, Amtrak, Hudson River tunnels should all be talked about. Quite frankly we've had this idea brought up quite a few times over the last decade on this very site. If you've been around the block like I have you realize that transportation issues , whether inter or intra state are talked about ad nauseum with no improvements except to some consulting firm's bottom line. Carry on.

Until we can get to our destinations within NYC, talking about extending subways to another state is just downright foolish and reckless. It's like trying to teach a kid how to do tricks on a bike and they can't even ride it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.