Comments on: Are NJ Funding Woes Threatening Access to the Region's Core?

By: Can NJ Turnpike Tolls Fund Transit? Check the Fine Print. « Mobilizing the Region

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:49:38 +0000

[...] a $1.5 billion local match ready when construction rolls around (see MTR, April ‘08: “Are NJ Funding Woes Threatening ARC?“). Finding all of the money has proved difficult in NJ – not a state known for either fiscal [...]

By: Streetsblog » Time for Legislators to Commit to Better NJ-NYC Transit Access

Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:18:45 +0000

[...] capacity and reduce car traffic into New York, is now entering a critical phase. In April, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign reported that local funds must be in place by October in order for the feds to release their matching grant, [...]

By: Support Access to the Region’s Core - From TSTC’S Website! « Mobilizing the Region

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 19:05:42 +0000

[...] Access to the Region’s Core advocacy page here. For background, read MTR – “Are NJ Funding Woes Threatening Access to the Region’s Core?“, April [...]

By: Ralph Braskett

Ralph Braskett — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:07:08 +0000

As Clark Morris suggests, shove this project into a complete redesign and restudy ALL options. Take into consideration the bus riders into PABT, almost 3 times more numerous than NJT Rail riders, especially since all New Jersey taxpayers pay the bill.
One cheap option extends 50% of the service on the #7 Flushing line subway, being extended to the far West Side by Mayor Bloomberg. This option would run from a connection to the #7 extension on the far west side in a subway tunnel under the Hudson river & Palisades, then onto an “L” parallel
to the NJ Turnpike to Secaucus Transfer with
a stop at Lincoln Harbor for transfers from/to HBLRT & Bergen buses. Transfer station at Secaucus would be built for both
Bus & Rail riders, giving riders to the East Side direct access and an empty #7 train
every 3/4 min.
For details go to www. subwaytosecaucus.com.

By: Clark Morris

Clark Morris — Thu, 01 May 2008 16:32:47 +0000

Given the current plans for the tunnel and the related Portal Bridge project, the best thing that could happen is for them to be shelved until a complete redesign can be done. The plans do NOT bring about an integrated system, do NOT support growth in New Jersey, and seem to be a way to minimize benefit.

I could support a plan that linked the tunnels to just the current Penn Station and added a joint LIRR/NJT east side station. I could support a plan that had the tunnel connect to a Grand Central Terminal area station with through running with either Metro-North or the LIRR east side access (probably impossible due to East River tunnel dimensions). The first would include connecting tracks 1 – 4 to the East River tunnel lines and have through running with the LIRR so that NO commuter trains terminate in Penn Station. The second plan would modify the proposed “annex” station to just a two track three platform station and assumes that an MU fleet shared with Metro-North (or the LIRR) would be used to provide a 24 – 27 train per hour per direction service similar to the Munich S-Bahn. It would build on the expressions of interest in through running by the head of the MTA.

The proposed connections to the Bergen county lines offer little advantage time wise over the current transfer facilities at Secaucus Junction. They also are used as a justification for building a three track fixed bridge plus 2 track lift bridge replacement for the Portal Bridge rather than a 4 track fixed bridge. The expansion to the current Secaucus Junction station also should be reevaluated.

Then there are the little details such as perpetuating 25 cycle power on new extensions rather than having a policy of slow upgrading to 60 cycle.

In the current times of high construction inflation coupled with an economic slowdown, a pause may time the project to take advantage of slowdowns in the construction industry. It also would give time to coordinate equipment procurement so that cross Manhattan service can be a reality.