Transit study will look into running 7 train into New Jersey

[RR503]

 

1 hour 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.  

Dude. The whole point of the Port Authority is that it interconnects the two pots of taxes.

Saying that NJ's transport issues are just theirs is just downright ignorant of the reason we need these investments -- commutation. Once again, if we are to have an economically vital city, we need those workers from NJ, so we need to help them cross the goddam river. That is literally what the PA is designed to facilitate, and given that, it's time to let it do its job. 

10 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

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. 

Exactly. They're fleeing to...New Jersey. Do you ever wonder why the PATH is the only transit system left in the region with consistently increasing ridership? If we don't deal with that, we'll get a new  coming under the river. 

7 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

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 in a bike and they can't even ride it. 

Why is the inability of people in NJ to get to work any less important than those in, say, Queens? Both are necessary components of our city's economy, both situations should be rectified by the applicable agencies as soon as is possible, and both situations will involve contributions from NYS/C. I ask again, do you oppose funding for Gateway?

Also, FWIW, I don't think throwing cash at our subway is gonna make it great again. We're in a crisis of management more than one of funding. If you don't believe me, look at that graph in the NYTimes crowding piece. Maintenance related delays are flat. It's our operational situation that's killing us, and no number of Subway Action Plans and maintenance expenditures can change incompetent system planning and management. 

[Trainmaster5]

6 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

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. 

Methinks you're getting all worked up over nothing IMO. We already have a subway running between the states. It's called PATH and although it's not under the umbrella like the or the any improvement to it is a regional expense of the bi-state agency. Let the foamers have their wet dreams. Nobody believes the   is gonna fund this. BTW kids who can't ride bikes yet can still learn how to do tricks . YOUTUBE. You're getting old VG8, lol.

[Wallyhorse]

1 hour ago, officiallyliam said:

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 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 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.

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

It's been noted before most of the stations actually can handle nine-car trains as it is as they were built to handle eight-car trains of BMT Standards that were 67 feet in length per car, or 536 feet (obviously nine 60-foot cars would be a tight fit).  You're looking at about a 65 foot extension in most cases/  

[officiallyliam]

47 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

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. 

Cite your source for that. People are leaving the city in droves? Tell that to all the new buildings in my area which are being constructed and occupied, the higher ridership on the trains, and the increased people on the subway. Where are all these desperately-fleeing people going?

44 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

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. 

What's the difference about crossing state lines? People have mentioned time and time again the existence of the Port Authority, the agency set up to do exactly this. What, really, is the difference, in terms of the impact on commuting, real estate, and employment opportunities for New Yorkers, between extending a subway line to Brooklyn and extending a subway line to Hoboken? I don't see how opening up rapid transit access for more residents of the region is a trick.

23 minutes ago, Trainmaster5 said:

Methinks you're getting all worked up over nothing IMO. We already have a subway running between the states. It's called PATH and although it's not under the umbrella like the or the any improvement to it is a regional expense of the bi-state agency. Let the foamers have their wet dreams. Nobody believes the   is gonna fund this. BTW kids who can't ride bikes yet can still learn how to do tricks . YOUTUBE. You're getting old VG8, lol.

Exactly right - that's why I suggested that a better first step in terms of making trans-Hudson rapid transit journeys better isn't any big-ticket subway extension, but a simple organizational change: integrating the PATH system with the NYC Subway. Former-PATH lines can continue to be funded jointly (through the Port Authority) but should be properly integrated in terms of fares. The trans-Hudson lines deserve to be shown on the subway map as what they are: a subway under the river.

[U-BahnNYC]

2 hours 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 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

I agree, NJ and NY are interconnected on many levels and the economy benefits from that overall. However, I don't advocate for using NYC subway lines as a means to relieve crowding across the Hudson.

You mention London having one consolidated system, TfL. But remember that the Underground (equivalent of our subway), with the exception of a piece of the Central Line in Northeast London, runs strictly in the boundaries of the city. Anything that connects suburbs or outlying areas is a different entity (e.g. Overground, DLR, etc). Our subways as they are, are already limited by ancient building codes and infrastructure, the small IRT cars on the being a prime example.

Wouldn't it better to build something like London's crossrail that would finally connect New Jersey, Midtown AND Queens/JFK airport? A ground up project built with immense capacity for the future, quick travel speeds, etc, all while having a different name - not the subway, not the PATH - and a different fare. It's ambitious, yes, but I think only ambitious can actually save our upcoming infrastructure crisis in the NY region.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, RR503 said:

 

Dude. The whole point of the Port Authority is that it interconnects the two pots of taxes.

Saying that NJ's transport issues are just theirs is just downright ignorant of the reason we need these investments -- commutation. Once again, if we are to have an economically vital city, we need those workers from NJ, so we need to help them cross the goddam river. That is literally what the PA is designed to facilitate, and given that, it's time to let it do its job. 

Exactly. They're fleeing to...New Jersey. Do you ever wonder why the PATH is the only transit system left in the region with consistently increasing ridership? If we don't deal with that, we'll get a new  coming under the river. 

Why is the inability of people in NJ to get to work any less important than those in, say, Queens? Both are necessary components of our city's economy, both situations should be rectified by the applicable agencies as soon as is possible, and both situations will involve contributions from NYS/C. I ask again, do you oppose funding for Gateway?

Also, FWIW, I don't think throwing cash at our subway is gonna make it great again. We're in a crisis of management more than one of funding. If you don't believe me, look at that graph in the NYTimes crowding piece. Maintenance related delays are flat. It's our operational situation that's killing us, and no number of Subway Action Plans and maintenance expenditures can change incompetent system planning and management. 

Then let the Port Authority fund another subway for New Jersey then without NY taxpayer dollars. Everyone's commutes are important, but at the same time, I don't live in NJ. I live and pay taxes in NY. Therefore I care about transportation here for New Yorkers. Everything else is secondary.

[bobtehpanda]

When New Jersey starts paying all the MTA taxes and fees that the City does, then they can get to the back of the line behind Bayside, Rosedale, Queens Village, Marine Park, Fordham, and all the other dense places in the city that still don't have direct train access and have paid those taxes for 50 years.

[officiallyliam]

4 minutes ago, U-BahnNYC said:

I agree, NJ and NY are interconnected on many levels and the economy benefits from that overall. However, I don't advocate for using NYC subway lines as a means to relieve crowding across the Hudson.

You mention London having one consolidated system, TfL. But remember that the Underground (equivalent of our subway), with the exception of a piece of the Central Line in Northeast London, runs strictly in the boundaries of the city. Anything that connects suburbs or outlying areas is a different entity (e.g. Overground, DLR, etc). Our subways as they are, are already limited by ancient building codes and infrastructure, the small IRT cars on the being a prime example.

Wouldn't it better to build something like London's crossrail that would finally connect New Jersey, Midtown AND Queens/JFK airport? A ground up project built with immense capacity for the future, quick travel speeds, etc, all while having a different name - not the subway, not the PATH - and a different fare. It's ambitious, yes, but I think only ambitious can actually save our upcoming infrastructure crisis in the NY region.

The London thing is complicated. Most of the system runs within the boundaries of Greater London; this was not the case when the lines were built. Greater London is a fairly new concept designed to bring about cohesive regional planning for the London area, and, in terms of land area the densest urban parts of London make up a small amount of Greater London, which also includes very suburban areas of north, south, and west London. The Greater London concept is actually something I'd like to bring stateside so that we here in NYC could see similarly integrated regional planning, not planning that is rooted in territorial thinking and which stops at state or county lines. As I touched on above, though, when the London Underground was built, the idea of Greater London was decades away, and the lines were planned to serve the independent counties bordering the City of London - showing that political boundaries do not equal commuting boundaries.

Now, to the Crossrail point: to put it simply, yes we should build a system, though I think the best system for New York would actually emulate Thameslink, not Crossrail. More legacy commuter lines would enter shorter central trunk sections before fanning out again in the opposite suburbs. This system works to facilitate longer journeys across the region, for example, from Babylon to Manhattan, Stamford to Manhattan, or Hicksville to Brooklyn, and then journeys which aren't possible on one system today: Flushing to Newark, Mineola to Montclair, New Haven to New Brunswick. When it comes to short journeys, such as Jersey City to Manhattan, or Hoboken to Brooklyn, a metro-style service is better suited, just as it is for Manhattan to Brooklyn trips. Regional Rail should not be for a different fare, though. Maybe a zoned fare system outside the city, but within the city it should be a flat fare tied to the subway.

[RR503]

20 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Then let the Port Authority fund another subway for New Jersey then without NY taxpayer dollars. Everyone's commutes are important, but at the same time, I don't live in NJ. I live and pay taxes in NY. Therefore I care about transportation here for New Yorkers. Everything else is secondary.

You're missing the crucial point here: while the subway's ridership base may not be NYers, it is absolutely necessary for NY. How do we expect to sustain our city sans workers? Commutation doubles Manhattans population daily. Many of those people are not paying the same taxes as us, yet we still provide them with transportation as if we didn't, we'd have no economy. This is the whole point of the Port Authority -- it takes funding from both states, and invests it in projects that bring regional goods -- like increased trans-Hudson capacity, better port/airport facilities, etc. 

So I ask again, do you not think NY should contribute towards Gateway?

19 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

When New Jersey starts paying all the MTA taxes and fees that the City does, then they can get to the back of the line behind Bayside, Rosedale, Queens Village, Marine Park, Fordham, and all the other dense places in the city that still don't have direct train access and have paid those taxes for 50 years.

No one is suggesting that the MTA build it. This is a question about the Port Authority, and whether they should invest in doing their jobs. 

[Dannny]

32 minutes ago, officiallyliam said:

journeys which aren't possible on one system today: Flushing to Newark, Mineola to Montclair, New Haven to New Brunswick. When it comes to short journeys, such as Jersey City to Manhattan, or Hoboken to Brooklyn, a metro-style service is better suited, just as it is for Manhattan to Brooklyn trips. Regional Rail should not be for a different fare, though. Maybe a zoned fare system outside the city, but within the city it should be a flat fare tied to the subway.

Ah-ha, I see, would you like to pay for the funding of that? I agree with what your saying, but lets be real. This isnt a perfect world, and Unless a magician would wave his magic wand, and this Regional Rail system could be FREE and BUILT OVERNIGHT, Then im all for it. But that's not going to happen, so lets put it to rest. Do you really think Jersey would chip in to pay for these extensions? And for that matter any state? NO, no states going to help pay for a expansion of our system into their territory, even if its also benefiting them.

Im all for future expansions, but for right now, lets focus on fixing our OWN system before we go out and expand, or else were going to have even more problems on our hands than we already do..

[CenSin]

If Christie were still governor and talking to the media about this project: “We’re gonna build a subway line to connect with the , and we’re gonna make New York pay for it!”

I will remain highly skeptical of this project until New Jersey can show some monetary commitment.

[P3F]

There's nothing wrong with New Jersey residents having more rapid transit options. If new lines have enough capacity and go to the right places, they can even take pressure off of PABT.

What is wrong, is proposing that the  (a New York state-run agency) should be paying for the construction and/or operation of such service.

To supporters of this idea: redirect your interest to the PA.

[checkmatechamp13]

2 minutes ago, CenSin said:

If Christie were still governor and talking to the media about this project: “We’re gonna build a subway line to connect with the , and we’re gonna make New York pay for it!”

I will remain highly skeptical of this project until New Jersey can show some monetary commitment.

Don't ask me why, but somehow that reminded me of Trump saying "Yeah, we'll make Mexico pay for that wall". 

[RailRunRob]

1 hour ago, U-BahnNYC said:

You mention London having one consolidated system, TfL. But remember that the Underground (equivalent of our subway), with the exception of a piece of the Central Line in Northeast London, runs strictly in the boundaries of the city. Anything that connects suburbs or outlying areas is a different entity (e.g. Overground, DLR, etc). Our subways as they are, are already limited by ancient building codes and infrastructure, the small IRT cars on the being a prime example.

Central, Metropolitan and the Bakerloo at one point. 

[B35 via Church]

3 hours ago, RR503 said:

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. 

Mighty funny how it's "we" (NYS) needing to be there with cash, but it's "we" (NY/NJ) that's supposed to be this coupled unit..... Fact of the matter is, when it comes time to pay the piper, the whole "we" are the world bit, goes out the window (Nassau county knows alllll about that)....

Where is this same train of thought of NJ needing to be there with cash, as well? .

5 hours ago, CenSin said:

Maybe there should be strings attached to such a project. New Jersey pays for all of it, and in return for diverting a  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.

** crickets **

3 hours ago, RailRunRob said:

State Jurisdictions aren't sustainable when it comes to growth.

This isn't sim city 3000.... Sorry man.

4 hours ago, officiallyliam said:

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.

Would like to see this happen, but I'm not holding my breath for it to happen.....

Such a concept is drastically different from "hey, let's run the over the Hudson" & have NJ sit back in the cut at NY's expense......

3 hours 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.

I don't see what you're getting at.... Since there are former NY'ers residing in NJ, NJ's growth is somehow NY's problem?

I think you're trying to point out the cause of NJ's growth.... It is still NJ's responsibility to address it....

[Around the Horn]

18 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

I don't see what you're getting at.... Since there are former NY'ers residing in NJ, NJ's growth is somehow NY's problem?

I think you're trying to point out the cause of NJ's growth.... It is still NJ's responsibility to address it....

I was trying to say that real estate policies in New York are essentially pushing all these people to Jersey City and Hoboken (among other areas), overwhelming the existing infrastructure as they continue to commute to Manhattan.

Therefore, New York and New Jersey should split the financial responsibility of a new tunnel into Manhattan (regardless of mode). VG8's argument sounded to me like New Jersey should front the full cost, which I don't agree with.

EDIT: Just for the record, I'm pro another tunnel between NY and NJ, not necessarily pro to NJ. If the appears to be the best option, then so be it...

One big issue I have with this current planning process is that they are assuming from the start that the is the way to go. IMO all options (PATH, , NJT from Hoboken, etc, etc) should be studied at once in one study and put up against each other... Let the best option win.

[RailRunRob]

5 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

This isn't sim city 3000.... Sorry man.

I don't know man. The most profitable region in our country is going to have to stay competitive. There's way too much complication in getting things done due to Imaginary lines drawn by someone 200 years ago. As was stated in 1898 Two Cities and some towns Decided they were stronger together and unified for it's growth and future. In context doesn't sound so crazy.. All im saying this is going come up at some point I can almost guarantee just a matter of time. Art Imitates life Sim City it is. 

[bobtehpanda]

4 hours ago, RR503 said:

No one is suggesting that the MTA build it. This is a question about the Port Authority, and whether they should invest in doing their jobs. 

Who is going to pay the salaries, the maintenance, the operations costs? Those dedicated taxes fund operations, not capital plans. Any agreement that the MTA will be able to ink is about as good as an IOU - look how far agreements on dedicated taxes and guaranteed funding for Student Metrocards got the MTA. The Port Authority has a subway it can manage all by its damn self. And this is before we get into whether or not those old, rickety stations under 42 St can even handle Jersey commuters in addition to those from Queens.

2 hours ago, RailRunRob said:

I don't know man. The most profitable region in our country is going to have to stay competitive. There's way too much complication in getting things done due to Imaginary lines drawn by someone 200 years ago. As was stated in 1898 Two Cities and some towns Decided they were stronger together and unified for it's growth and future. In context doesn't sound so crazy.. All im saying this is going come up at some point I can almost guarantee just a matter of time. Art Imitates life Sim City it is. 

People have sung the same song and dance about New York for the past 100 years. It was Detroit, then it was Chicago, then it was LA, now it's the Bay and Houston and whatnot. All these second-tier cities still haven't caught up to the best.

There is so much development capacity in New York locked up behind abritrary laws that quite frankly, doing anything for New Jersey is a misallocation of resources that could go to strengthening the network here, providing the needed schools and the housing, etc. Want to know the real reason New Jersey never got as developed? Geography. The fact that the Meadowlands and the Palisades exist means that unlocking development capacity is extremely difficult. The nearest developable land after that, Rutherford and Newark, are nearly 10 miles from Times Square as the crow flies, nearly as far away as Jamaica. All the land from Jamaica to Times Square is not at maximum potential; we've still got a lot of space left.

[RR503]

9 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Mighty funny how it's "we" (NYS) needing to be there with cash, but it's "we" (NY/NJ) that's supposed to be this coupled unit..... Fact of the matter is, when it comes time to pay the piper, the whole "we" are the world bit, goes out the window (Nassau county knows alllll about that)....

Where is this same train of thought of NJ needing to be there with cash, as well? .

Times NJ was there with a thick wad of cash helping us with things that would have little positive effect (negative in some cases) for them:

-Building WTC's buildings (both times)

-Rebuilding JFK's terminals 

-Constructing new terminals at LGA

-Building the Oculus

-Red Hook Container Terminal upkeep

-Howland Hook upkeep

So, don't you think it's time we returned the favor, especially given that we'd benefit greatly too?

6 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Who is going to pay the salaries, the maintenance, the operations costs? Those dedicated taxes fund operations, not capital plans. Any agreement that the MTA will be able to ink is about as good as an IOU - look how far agreements on dedicated taxes and guaranteed funding for Student Metrocards got the MTA. The Port Authority has a subway it can manage all by its damn self. And this is before we get into whether or not those old, rickety stations under 42 St can even handle Jersey commuters in addition to those from Queens.

I agree. Remember, this study is evaluating more than just the  to NJ, so the construction of another PATH line will be in the cards. 

 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

11 hours ago, RR503 said:

You're missing the crucial point here: while the subway's ridership base may not be NYers, it is absolutely necessary for NY. How do we expect to sustain our city sans workers? Commutation doubles Manhattans population daily. Many of those people are not paying the same taxes as us, yet we still provide them with transportation as if we didn't, we'd have no economy. This is the whole point of the Port Authority -- it takes funding from both states, and invests it in projects that bring regional goods -- like increased trans-Hudson capacity, better port/airport facilities, etc. 

So I ask again, do you not think NY should contribute towards Gateway?

No one is suggesting that the MTA build it. This is a question about the Port Authority, and whether they should invest in doing their jobs. 

Let's stop bringing up all of these different projects. My stance is we should NOT be extending our subways into other states with NY taxpayer money. The focus should be on fixing the current crisis. Who gives a damn about the subways going to NJ when we currently can't get anywhere even within Manhattan? You refuse to acknowledge that and keep talking about how we need to focus on regional BS. New Yorkers are angry. We can't get to work on-time or make meetings because of this constant BS with the subways. The Gangway project has nothing to do with our subways, which are in crisis. I support regional improvements but not at the sake of compromising our already fragile subway system.

If we were talking about this and our subways ran the way that they should, I'd say sure, let the Port Authority consider doing it, but that isn't the case right now. This seems to be one of these extensions that looks great on paper.

[RailRunRob]

7 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

People have sung the same song and dance about New York for the past 100 years. It was Detroit, then it was Chicago, then it was LA, now it's the Bay and Houston and whatnot. All these second-tier cities still haven't caught up to the best.

There is so much development capacity in New York locked up behind abritrary laws that quite frankly, doing anything for New Jersey is a misallocation of resources that could go to strengthening the network here, providing the needed schools and the housing, etc. Want to know the real reason New Jersey never got as developed? Geography. The fact that the Meadowlands and the Palisades exist means that unlocking development capacity is extremely difficult. The nearest developable land after that, Rutherford and Newark, are nearly 10 miles from Times Square as the crow flies, nearly as far away as Jamaica. All the land from Jamaica to Times Square is not at maximum potential; we've still got a lot of space left.

1

Umm, there's some fact there. Zoning prob had something do with that as well. Some of these areas served as commercial and industrial hubs and feeders for the region and City due to there proximity to NYC.. Shipping and good's.. Geography  I have to look at places like Secaucus and Moonachie built on the same marsh that occupies the overall area. I have a friend that just locked a Condo in Harrison that's starting to fill in that gap Between Newark About 7 miles from Manhattan It's 7 miles from Inwood to Midtown. So what is Developable? And it's about 4 miles of open space These areas had the same conditions and were developed  My point in all of this why wouldn't you take maybe a Bergen,Hudson,Union, Essex and part of Passaic add Westchester, Rockland Fairfield to the 5 boroughs and Nassau at the very least and create some type of integrated Metro District? Wouldnt that alleviate some of the issues we have now? Better integrated transport and services.Even opening up the housing market with more supply, options, and cost. Maybe that land between Jamaica and Midtown would be a bit more affordable. 

[RailRunRob]

58 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

with NY taxpayer money.

Stop with the Tax.. that's your rent for parking your derrière in Riverdale. NJ residents pay NY a handsome amount of tax as well. Employees as well as visitors. It's all interconnected whether you understand it or not doesn't make it not true. Look The PA is looking into it. I think both States understand whats on the table They both have something substantial to lose If there were any issues with these bi-State links. All cards and options need to be on the table. Path,  , NJT ,bus. It's so crazy to me when people talk about existing laws and restrictions. As if they weren't new Or nonexisting at some point with people opposing them as well. You have to be resourceful, creative and diligent to keep moving forward. Stagnation = death.. decline. Keeping it the way it is may not be an option is all I'm saying. 

[Dannny]

On a final note, lets keep something in mind. The Article talks about how the  will LOOK INTO running it into Jersey. It means its just a proposal, NOT a definite plan. There's a reason why their doing a study, to see if its a good idea or not, and it it will work or not. If this were a perfect plan, then there would be no need to do a study, they would start building immediately. When they sit down to discuss the this plan after the study, the first thing their going to discuss is the timing. They agreed it going to take 20+ years to complete. Then, whats going to be the second thing? FUNDING! Now theres the real dilemma, sure they can ask the Port Authority, and Jersey's government to pay for half the project, but whats going to happen when they say "It is your transit and subway system, its not our jurisdiction to pay for your extensions, upgrades, and modernization, even if it involves our state"? So then what's next? The  will wind up paying for the whole thing. And then whenever there's a delay, the people of Jersey are going to start complaining and blaming the  for the delay, now not only are we going to listen to New York bitch about the delays, but now were going to have to deal with another state complaining about the same thing and taking no responsibility for it. And as for the idea brought up on here about A Regional Transit system, Sure lets expand our system to Pennsylvania, and while were at it, lets just keep expanding to California, Canada, New Mexico, etc... Hey someone on here brought up the London Chunnel, connecting  Paris and London, why shouldn't we do the same? Why don't we have the  run into France? and once all this is done, slap the  with the bill, just because its our system and subway cars.

My point is New Jersey wont suffer and come crumbling to the ground if we don't expand the  to Hoboken. Our system systems the one crumbling. We actually need as much help and service it can get, this includes SAVING MONEY!! We also need to save those 20+ years to focus on our OWN system.  This expansion will only add the the underlying issue in the further.

I rest my case.

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, RR503 said:

Times NJ was there with a thick wad of cash helping us with things that would have little positive effect (negative in some cases) for them:

-Building WTC's buildings (both times)

-Rebuilding JFK's terminals 

-Constructing new terminals at LGA

-Building the Oculus

-Red Hook Container Terminal upkeep

-Howland Hook upkeep

 

So, don't you think it's time we returned the favor, especially given that we'd benefit greatly too?

The position that suggests that we (NY/NJ) should be benefactors of each other, I don't have a problem with..... However, the notion that NY hasn't done enough for NJ its rather mind-boggling to me..... Didn't know that NY was somehow indebted to NJ....

...and FTR, my position is not that things should remain status quo as far as connecting both states (via public transportation)  goes,.... The issue I'm having, is with this specific proposal....

 

28 minutes ago, Dannny said:

On a final note, lets keep something in mind. The Article talks about how the  will LOOK INTO running it into Jersey. It means its just a proposal, NOT a definite plan. There's a reason why their doing a study, to see if its a good idea or not, and it it will work or not. If this were a perfect plan, then there would be no need to do a study, they would start building immediately. When they sit down to discuss the this plan after the study, the first thing their going to discuss is the timing. They agreed it going to take 20+ years to complete. Then, whats going to be the second thing? FUNDING! Now theres the real dilemma, sure they can ask the Port Authority, and Jersey's government to pay for half the project, but whats going to happen when they say "It is your transit and subway system, its not our jurisdiction to pay for your extensions, upgrades, and modernization, even if it involves our state"? So then what's next? The  will wind up paying for the whole thing. And then whenever there's a delay, the people of Jersey are going to start complaining and blaming the  for the delay, now not only are we going to listen to New York bitch about the delays, but now were going to have to deal with another state complaining about the same thing and taking no responsibility for it. And as for the idea brought up on here about A Regional Transit system, Sure lets expand our system to Pennsylvania, and while were at it, lets just keep expanding to California, Canada, New Mexico, etc... Hey someone on here brought up the London Chunnel, connecting  Paris and London, why shouldn't we do the same? Why don't we have the  run into France? and once all this is done, slap the  with the bill, just because its our system and subway cars.

My point is New Jersey wont suffer and come crumbling to the ground if we don't expand the  to Hoboken. Our system systems the one crumbling. We actually need as much help and service it can get, this includes SAVING MONEY!! We also need to save those 20+ years to focus on our OWN system.  This expansion will only add the the underlying issue in the further.

I rest my case.

...as if NY doesn't have enough of a target on its back.

 

[Deucey]

30 minutes ago, Dannny said:

Then, whats going to be the second thing? FUNDING! Now theres the real dilemma, sure they can ask the Port Authority, and Jersey's government to pay for half the project, but whats going to happen when they say "It is your transit and subway system, its not our jurisdiction to pay for your extensions, upgrades, and modernization, even if it involves our state"?

Is that really the issue, or is it:

1) that the current transport authorities mismanage money so badly they can't be trusted to do better with more? 

2) that there's no politician-proof dedicated transit tax for the transport authorities? Or

3) That because transport in NY metro is bifurcated, that coherent strategy can't be created because state borders and parochialism factors in?

I say all of the above, and I still stick with my original position that NJ should pay if NJ wants more access to Manhattan; all NYS or NYC should do is facilitate the necessary zoning to make it happen.

But as I said earlier, if we actually had a bi-state transit authority instead of a bi-state shipping transport authority (because that's what PANYNJ is) that runs a train because a) NYC/NYS wouldn't bail H&M out, b) could've used the trackage for freight ops to its ports (but didn't and doesn't) and c) created an air rights revenue stream, and that authority had the ability to levy taxes necessary to integrate transport between both sides of the Hudson, then I'd be okay with cockamamie schemes to connect an overcrowded subway line with a soon-to-be overcrowded subway line on the other side of the river.

Until then, let NJ figure out how to get here.