Bergenline Ave Station Reportedly Nearing Completion

Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: Tadman, nick11a, ACeInTheHole, Kaback9

JLo
Posts: 1662
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:36 pm
Location: Rather Be Anywhere But Here

Bergenline Ave Station Reportedly Nearing Completion

Post by JLo » Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:37 am

According to the Ledger, the Bergenline Avenue station is nearly complete. $150 million for one station. Whew! That's half of MOM's projected cost (low end). I think HBLR is an excellent project, but I still question the need for such an expensive station. I guess time will tell if the investment is worth it.

Our own "wantsrail" gets his shot in on the fact that the line should be using the Edgewater Tunnel.

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/in ... 258631.xml
"One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor." George Carlin

Lackawanna484

Post by Lackawanna484 » Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:45 am

Nice article, thanks for posting.

There was a lot of discussion about whether the mid-tunnel station was necessary, but in the end it turned out to be a political decision. Whether it turns out to be a good decision remains to be seen.

Douglas John Bowen
Posts: 855
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 10:54 pm

NJ-ARP: Demographic factor also works.

Post by Douglas John Bowen » Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:55 am

So much is made on how use of the Weehawken Tunnel was a political decision -- and of course it was. But HBLRT's route through it also works in terms of population.

Are so many so insistent on saying HBLRT shouldn't serve a community holding (roughly) 50,000 people per square mile? Edgewater, no matter how inviting, can't offer that.

And, as it turns out, Edgewater hasn't been inviting HBLRT to its borders. It didn't in the mid-1980s, and it still isn't doing so.

NJ-ARP (ad nauseam) respectfully reiterates its belief that Union City will benefit from HBLRT, and vice versa. In fact, we'd note it's one of the few "established" ridersheds HBLRT critics all too often claim HBLRT has too few of. For once, HBLRT goes where the people are, the market already is -- and it gets slammed? Consistency, please...

Lackawanna484

Re: NJ-ARP: Demographic factor also works.

Post by Lackawanna484 » Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:32 am

Douglas John Bowen wrote:So much is made on how use of the Weehawken Tunnel was a political decision -- and of course it was. But HBLRT's route through it also works in terms of population.

Are so many so insistent on saying HBLRT shouldn't serve a community holding (roughly) 50,000 people per square mile? Edgewater, no matter how inviting, can't offer that.

And, as it turns out, Edgewater hasn't been inviting HBLRT to its borders. It didn't in the mid-1980s, and it still isn't doing so.

NJ-ARP (ad nauseam) respectfully reiterates its belief that Union City will benefit from HBLRT, and vice versa. In fact, we'd note it's one of the few "established" ridersheds HBLRT critics all too often claim HBLRT has too few of. For once, HBLRT goes where the people are, the market already is -- and it gets slammed? Consistency, please...
My comments referred only to the mid-tunnel station, not to the use of the tunnel itself, as a rereading of the post will confirm.

But, the decision is done, the work is almost done, so we'll have to see whether the one big, expensive station is better than two, much cheaper stations at either end of the tunnel.[/b]

JLo
Posts: 1662
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:36 pm
Location: Rather Be Anywhere But Here

Post by JLo » Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:37 am

My comments referred only to the mid-tunnel station, not to the use of the tunnel itself, as a rereading of the post will confirm.

But, the decision is done, the work is almost done, so we'll have to see whether the one big, expensive station is better than two, much cheaper stations at either end of the tunnel.
Ditto.
"One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor." George Carlin

Douglas John Bowen
Posts: 855
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 10:54 pm

NJ-ARP: Clarifications noted.

Post by Douglas John Bowen » Tue Oct 05, 2004 4:16 pm

NJ-ARP appreciates the clarifications made, and the distinction of concern between reuse of the tunnel and building a new station within it. However, as JLo himself noted earlier, antipathy toward the tunnel is a given; to wit:

"They should have never gone through the Weehawken Tunnel," said Al Cafiero, an aide to state Sen. Gerald Cardinale (R-Bergen). "It's too expensive. It's not worth it. They should have gone farther north."

That statement, if NJ-ARP reads it correctly, appears to encompass the entire local infrastructure, not just a station in the tunnel.

At the risk of appearing to nitpick, we might also note that the choice is (or would be) two stations at each end of the tunnel without a center/tunnel station, or two such stations with a central location.

We're not sure if anyone is in fact arguing that northern Union City could be served by something other than the current arrangement, although we suppose anything is possible. (The southernmost reaches are within walking distance of Ninth Street/Congress Street Station.)

That said, we'll add our "ditto also" to those who believe we now will watch, wait, and see what happens.

[/u]

Lackawanna484

Post by Lackawanna484 » Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:07 pm

I'll accept that clarification as well stated. Menendez wanted a tunnel station, he got one.

For me, the real question is how the tunnel station integrates with an overall transport program in the Union City area. I hope it works well, and brings a connection betwen bus and fast rail. There were better alternatives, they're over now.

The Edgewater honchos voted NO on transit a decade ago, and zoned projects which make future transit difficult. OK, time to move on. Making a good Waterway link is the next challenge.

AndyB
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:18 pm
Location: Union, NJ

Post by AndyB » Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:30 pm

Doug,

In one line you changed my mind.

[Are so many so insistent on saying HBLRT shouldn't serve a community holding (roughly) 50,000 people per square mile?]

I have, to this point, felt that this tunnel station was a waste of money. Money that I thought would be better spent in extending the line into Bergen County. To quote myself "the money being spent on that station could take the line to the New York State line".

Sir, you are right. This is the only station on the line built with a large potential ridership right there. It does not have to wait for communities to be developed around it. I now look forward opening day and seeing its potential develop.

AndyB

alewifebp
Posts: 1021
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 11:03 pm
Location: WORMland

Post by alewifebp » Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:31 pm

Not to beat a dead horse even further, but it was a boneheaded move for Edgewater to oppose it then, and especially now. But I digress...

I had not realized that the Bergenline Avenue station was going to cost so much, but it really is in a great location, particularly in an area that is constantly trying to get more people in to for shopping (with notoriously limited parking options). Going where the people are is certainly prudent, and anyone who has actually travelled through North Bergen and Union City in that area can certainly attest to population density.

I will say that this will be a success, but I do wonder what the ridership numbers will look like at Tonnelle.

As I've driven through the waterfront area, I've seen workers in the tunnel even later at night on weekends, so it would appear that the opening of the next segment is certainly fast-tracking (pun-intended) at this point. Do we think that we may see service by the end of the year?

Return to “New Jersey Transit NJT Rail and Light Rail LRT”