"East Side Access"

lirr42 wrote:Aside from all of that, I do think Mr. Thomas poses an interesting question here. We hear everyone on Long Island bellyache about how long it takes to get from the West Side over to the East Side (how it takes as long as 40 minutes etc., etc., etc.). NJTransit commuters likely suffer form the same ordeal--it's not like the NJTransit concourse at Penn Station is somehow magically half the distance to the East Side. And, I do not believe NJTransit commuters know some magic way to get from one side of town to the other and they're keeping all of us goofs from Long Island in the dark about it.

If the added travel time from NYP to the east side is an issue that would compel the MTA to spend all this money and time remedying it, wouldn't one think it might also be something bugging NJTransit commuters, who for all intents and purposes, have to undergo the same thing? Are NJT commuters just more patient than us Long Islanders?

The root of Mr. Thomas' question is actually pretty important--if we have the time and money now to spend, would it be prudent to spend it on something that might work to remedy this issue, if only slightly? The Gateway Project tunnels will add capacity to New York Penn, but it will not bring people closer to the East Side if that is their intended destination (in fact, it will likely bring people marginally further away). Would it be wise to spend our money instead on something like the (7) Extension to Secaucus? This such project might have the possibility to both achieve additional capacity under the Hudson River as well as make getting across town easier.

In order to have a reasonable discussion on this matter we need facts (and backing up one's claims with facts is something we've gotten out of the habit of doing on these forums lately--but I digress). Would the comparatively lower speed of the (7) train from SEC still be faster than taking the (E) over to the East Side and transferring/walking to our destination? How would travel times compare? Are there other ideas that also might be worthy of our discussion (i.e. "alternative G")?

These are all questions that are worthy of our discussion, in my opinion. Fact-less speculation and ad hominem attacks and calls to lock a thread that has potential to be a good discussion just because the original poster has wandered off topic on occasion isn't very reasonable.

1. In my opinion, Seven Extension to Secausus is very good for Bergen County, New Jersey, to the East Side of Manhattan. But this proposal does not enable a large increase in passengers between Trenton, New Jersey, and Manhattan, and Washington, D.C, to Manhattan, either. Plus, I doubt New Jersey commuters will really want to board a subway in Secaucus to endure a 18--20 minute ride to Grand Central Station. The Seven Extension to Secaucus might allow for a large increase in NJ Transit passengers within New Jersey; but, if it substantially increases crowding between Trenton and Secaucus or even Summit and Secaucus, then it may not be the best idea for improving trans-hudson capacity.

2. But, I really believe that the key to enhancing trans-hudson capacity is actually (besides funding) property acquisition!! After all, "acquiring a whole city block" for the proposed Block 780 Station is going to be really tough. If Amtrak/NJ Transit is actually lucky enough that they can do a lot of underpinning on Block 780--instead of tearing down each and every building on Block 780--then I believe that the Gateway Project will and should get built! But, if the only solution is to acquire all of Block 780, then I believe that Seven Extension to Secaucus will get built, instead. (However, I do not believe that the Port Authority wants this; it will compete with PATH Service between Hoboken and Midtown, Manhattan).

runningwithscalpels wrote:*curtsies* Why thank you

The day you *curtsy* lol I'll pay to see that!

Let's all relax; I looked at the OP and it seems like a valid question.

I didn't read the whole thread so if I'm parroting someone let me know. I think this hearkens back to the days of the original ARC Rx? project where NJT would come into Manhattan, make a loop, and go back out. I'd have to go back and do some research on it. I'm sure it's cost-prohibitive, but to all of you who love your Senators, where are the big bucks to get things like this done? $700b or something in stimulus would have built this, the LIRR ESA, the subway to the moon, er, Secaucus, the 2nd Av subway, rebuilding the Put, real train service to JFK and LGA, etc.

Whatever your thoughts on earmarks, spending, and Chuckie, et al, at least Al D'Amato bought home the bacon.

Since many NJ politicians pushed the ARC tunnel(which would have benefited NYC far more than NJ), I wonder if they were trying to bring NY the bacon . Imagine how better off NJ would be if our politicians tried to attract corporations to its cities instead of exporting jobs to neighboring states. Forbes coming to Jersey City and Panasonic moving to Newark is a start. No doubt Manhattan will be a business center for the foreseeable future but that doesn't mean NJ needs more of its workforce to commute out of state.

morris&essex4ever wrote:Since many NJ politicians pushed the ARC tunnel(which would have benefited NYC far more than NJ), I wonder if they were trying to bring NY the bacon . Imagine how better off NJ would be if our politicians tried to attract corporations to its cities instead of exporting jobs to neighboring states. Forbes coming to Jersey City and Panasonic moving to Newark is a start. No doubt Manhattan will be a business center for the foreseeable future but that doesn't mean NJ needs more of its workforce to commute out of state.

Mr. 4ever, by my count, this is the seventh time you have conveyed this same sentiment in this three-page thread alone. We get it: you think NJ should be trying to keep jobs in NJ. Like it or not, most of the jobs are in Manhattan, and therefore it is NJTransit's responsibility to efficiently move people to where they want to go, thus our focus on accessing the east side.

Does anybody, by any chance, know if any projections have been made about how long the running time would be for (7) trains to get from NJ to Manhattan? With few intermediate stops, I cannot imagine it being all that much slower. It's not like trains are going at 100 mph through the North River Tunnels.

ChooChooChuck (Jeff Smith) wrote:

runningwithscalpels wrote:*curtsies* Why thank you

The day you *curtsy* lol I'll pay to see that!

Seconded! Hahahaha.

Not that it will get built in my lifetime, but now NJT trains usually are scheduled for 10 minutes from NYP to SEC. The 7 train will go to the Javits Center, which is at 11th ave. It would seem that trains from there to SEC could do it in maybe 7 minutes (less distance plus no NYP congestion), plus whatever time from Javits to Grand Central. I'd say less than 15 minutes.

LIRR42 it is not NJTransit's job, or purpose in life, to get as many people to NY as possible. It is a state owned and operated agency and answers to the citizens of the State of New Jersey. For every $100,000 job that NJT transports to New York they are also transporting NYS income tax to Albany. Do you know what New jersey gets in exchange? New Jersey gets to subsidize NJTransit and give that worker a credit against NJ Income Taxes for all the money sent to Albany. So, how much cash does New Jersey get in return? Sales Tax from restaurants? Not much, the employee eats lunch in NY and probably coaxes their spouse to join them in the City for dinner and a show from time to time - don't forget the NJT subsidy on that ride too. Sales Tax on the suit and tie and fancy shoes to wear to that good job in the city? Nope we don't charge sales tax on that. Higher property taxes because that's the only way to get money out of those jobs? Yep, we get that. By the way, I've got one of those jobs in the city that pays me better than a similar job in NJ could. Do I feel a little guilty about it? Sure, but I've got to look out for my family. Morris&Essex is right on the money - quite literally. Every dime that was taken away from ARC should have been spent on bringing jobs to Newark, Hoboken, Jersey City and even Trenton and Camden as the same tax dynamic is at work in the south as well. NJTransit is not the Pennsylvania Railroad. it's goal is not to maximize passengers/revenue. It's goal is to serve the State of New Jersey.

JoeG wrote:Not that it will get built in my lifetime, but now NJT trains usually are scheduled for 10 minutes from NYP to SEC. The 7 train will go to the Javits Center, which is at 11th ave. It would seem that trains from there to SEC could do it in maybe 7 minutes (less distance plus no NYP congestion), plus whatever time from Javits to Grand Central. I'd say less than 15 minutes.

http://www.nycedc.com/sites/default/fil ... l_2013.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Cumulative running time from the Javits Center to SEC on the Seven Subway would be 8:33 seconds.

From SEC to the Javits Center, the Cumulative Running time would be 8:09 minutes.

It's 15--16 minutes between Grand Central/Secaucus.

andegold wrote:LIRR42 it is not NJTransit's job, or purpose in life, to get as many people to NY as possible. It is a state owned and operated agency and answers to the citizens of the State of New Jersey. For every $100,000 job that NJT transports to New York they are also transporting NYS income tax to Albany. Do you know what New jersey gets in exchange? New Jersey gets to subsidize NJTransit and give that worker a credit against NJ Income Taxes for all the money sent to Albany. So, how much cash does New Jersey get in return? Sales Tax from restaurants? Not much, the employee eats lunch in NY and probably coaxes their spouse to join them in the City for dinner and a show from time to time - don't forget the NJT subsidy on that ride too. Sales Tax on the suit and tie and fancy shoes to wear to that good job in the city? Nope we don't charge sales tax on that. Higher property taxes because that's the only way to get money out of those jobs? Yep, we get that. By the way, I've got one of those jobs in the city that pays me better than a similar job in NJ could. Do I feel a little guilty about it? Sure, but I've got to look out for my family. Morris&Essex is right on the money - quite literally. Every dime that was taken away from ARC should have been spent on bringing jobs to Newark, Hoboken, Jersey City and even Trenton and Camden as the same tax dynamic is at work in the south as well. NJTransit is not the Pennsylvania Railroad. it's goal is not to maximize passengers/revenue. It's goal is to serve the State of New Jersey.

Using your logic perhaps we should tear down the GW bridge and blow up the Lincoln and Holland tunnels. Assuming New Jersey gets no benefit from projects that make it easier for residents to get to jobs in NY is just silly. The Kearny connection only benefitted people going to midtown Manhattan. What was Jersey's benefit? Higher property values all along the Morris and Essex Lines. If NJ makes it harder for people to get to jobs in NY, those people aren't going to choose to take jobs that don't exist in NJ, they are going to move to NY.

The original purpose of the ARC project was to get people from NJ to east midtown and NY, the feds and the Port Authority were all involved -- that was the right way to go. Once the MTA and Amtrak dropped out it became a Jersey only project which Christie may have been right to kill. Whatever replaces it, be it Gateway or the 7 train or something else, needs to have all sides participate.

At the risk of turning this very political and getting it locked: The GW bridge was built and is still maintained and operated by a Bi-State Agency that benefits both states and supports itself. The Port Authority is paid for by user fees and not general tax funds. The Port Authority has a mandate to facilitate traffice in a specified radius of a specific point. It's assets, other than PATH which was a political deal in and of itself, generally serve both states. Without the GW bridge and without EWR the ports of Newark and Elizabeth would be virtually dead and the port of Brooklyn would be booming. The GW and EWR serve freight and industry, which provide jobs and income taxes to the State of New Jersey. NJTransit moves people and it moves them overwhelmingly in a pattern that sucks taxes out of the state at great cost to the general tax fund. The previous post mentioned The MTA and Amtrak "dropping out" of ARC. When was the MTA ever on board? Never. When was Amtrak ever on board with ARC (as it existed to Macy's basement)? Never. Unless the Port Authority was going to pay for it all (not finance it, but actually pay for it) the entire cost was ultimately going to come out of the pockets of the citizens of NJ either in the form of fares or general tax subsidies while the overwhelming benefit would go to New York. It was a bad deal for NJ.

And so long as we're on the subject of ARC (sort of) where are all of you who screamed against Christie killing ARC over the budget? have any of you been following the real East Side Access thread? That budget and time line are both jokes of the greatest magnitude. Guess who would have been building ARC? Many if not most of the same contactors. Have you seen the cost estimates for a 2 mile extension of PATH along an existing right of way from NWK Penn to EWR? It has apparently just more than doubled from $600 million to 1.5 billion. Does anyone really think that ARC would have been done anywhere close to on time or on budget?

andegold wrote:And so long as we're on the subject of ARC (sort of) where are all of you who screamed against Christie killing ARC over the budget? have any of you been following the real East Side Access thread? That budget and time line are both jokes of the greatest magnitude. Guess who would have been building ARC? Many if not most of the same contactors. Have you seen the cost estimates for a 2 mile extension of PATH along an existing right of way from NWK Penn to EWR? It has apparently just more than doubled from $600 million to 1.5 billion. Does anyone really think that ARC would have been done anywhere close to on time or on budget?

But these types of infrastructure projects support long-term economic growth. Without these types of projects, how do you think that we will meet ridership demands 20 years from now?!

andegold wrote:At the risk of turning this very political and getting it locked: The GW bridge was built and is still maintained and operated by a Bi-State Agency that benefits both states and supports itself. The Port Authority is paid for by user fees and not general tax funds. The Port Authority has a mandate to facilitate traffice in a specified radius of a specific point. It's assets, other than PATH which was a political deal in and of itself, generally serve both states. Without the GW bridge and without EWR the ports of Newark and Elizabeth would be virtually dead and the port of Brooklyn would be booming. The GW and EWR serve freight and industry, which provide jobs and income taxes to the State of New Jersey. NJTransit moves people and it moves them overwhelmingly in a pattern that sucks taxes out of the state at great cost to the general tax fund. The previous post mentioned The MTA and Amtrak "dropping out" of ARC. When was the MTA ever on board? Never. When was Amtrak ever on board with ARC (as it existed to Macy's basement)? Never. Unless the Port Authority was going to pay for it all (not finance it, but actually pay for it) the entire cost was ultimately going to come out of the pockets of the citizens of NJ either in the form of fares or general tax subsidies while the overwhelming benefit would go to New York. It was a bad deal for NJ.

At the beginning ARC involved the MTA, NJT, Amtrak and the Port Authority. When the MTA and Amtrak dropped out NJT and the Port Authority continued with a modified project until Christie killed it. So fine, let's not have NJT bother getting people into NY. In fact let's stop all service into NY and see how well that works out. The point of the original post was getting people from NJ to the east side of Manhattan not whether to require all NJ residents to work in NJ.

Thomas wrote: But these types of infrastructure projects support long-term economic growth. Without these types of projects, how do you think that we will meet ridership demands 20 years from now?!

That's your problem Thomas (and the rest who think this way). You're treating the symptom instead of the root cause of the problem. The problem we have isn't ridership trends. The problem we have is a lack of good jobs in New Jersey. If we want to solve the ridership trend we just need to provide beter jobs in New Jersey. Not only would that be cheaper to accomplish in the long run but it would be longer lasting as well. It would also do something that none of these other projects could ever do: reverse the trend and even create an opposite trend of bringing New Yorkers into New Jersey for better jobs which would be even better for the economy of New Jersey and by creating a truly bi-directional railroad instead of a one-way commuter railroad reduce the need for subsidies and allow for expansion to be paid for by user fees and to actually serve the needs of the region rather than just the needs of New York City.