Browsing this Thread:
4 Anonymous Users
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
If Healy was smart he could make a deal that would be good for our city. They could deck the tracks like they did on the west side of Manhattan (riverside park) and make a park. They could demand that it get built only if the light rail or other passenger rail run through the tunnel providing us with more service.
These tracks exist today to the proposed tunnel mouth and to my knowledge only cross one road by Caven Point. Any other grade crossings? The rest of the way west it is running through a cut and then an elevation already used by frieght and light rail.
Posted on: 2009/7/21 17:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-est ... rms-industrial-waterfront
Bloomberg Offers Support for Freight Tunnel; City Warms to Industrial Waterfront NY Observer By Eliot Brown July 21, 2009 | 8:40 a.m. It?s been four years since Mayor Bloomberg changed his stance on a proposed freight rail tunnel that would run from Brooklyn to New Jersey. At the time, speaking in an affected neighborhood in Queens, he reversed his prior statements and staked out a position of opposition to the project, which was estimated in 2005 to cost $7 billion. Now in an election year, again, he seems to have changed course. Speaking Monday at an event in Sunset Park on city investment in the industrial waterfront, Mr. Bloomberg offered some words of support to the proposed cross-harbor tunnel, calling it ?a good long-term solution.? Still, he was quick to couch his statements in conditionals, essentially endorsing the concept so long as the negative impacts aren?t too negative. ?I think we have to find a ways to make sure that it is economically sustainable and its impact on neighborhoods where you go in and out is something that we can manage,? Mr. Bloomberg said. The project has been relentlessly championed by Representative Jerry Nadler, the Manhattan West Side and southern Brooklyn Democrat who enjoys little more than talking endlessly about the need for better infrastructure and a working waterfront. Since at least the 1980s, he has been saying the growing city will choke on truck traffic without a new way to handle freight, but it has yet to advance past early planning stages. His passion for the project show in his choice of words to describe it. Speaking at the Sunset Park press conference Monday, he called it a ?monumental issue for our time,? and ?the lynchpin of our efforts to rationalize the way we move goods throughout our region.? It would need a huge injection of billions, likely from multiple sources?the federal government is one clear target of Mr. Nadler?s?and it is hardly an issue for elected officials to rally around. It is, after all, a freight rail tunnel, and there is some NIMBY opposition to a piece of the project in Queens. (In 2007, after he unveiled his PlaNYC sustainability program, Mr. Bloomberg expressed openness to the tunnel again, saying it was "not the world's worst idea.") THE TALK OF THE RAIL tunnel came as the mayor announced a series of initiatives along the Brooklyn waterfront?many of which were already in motion?to invigorate industrial portions of the shore. Called the ?Sunset Park Waterfront Vision Plan,? the mayor called for $165 million ($105 million of which would come from outside funds) for the creation and renovation of industrial space and other related initiatives. The announcement is indicative of a broader trend within the city?s economic development arm, which is seemingly warming to the concept of the industrial waterfront. Back in the early days of his administration, there was considerable tension between the concept of a working waterfront and the visions of then-Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff, who called for the city to reclaim its shoreline by favoring higher-value residential development and parkland. But in the past two or three years, there has been a noticeable shift in emphasis: much of the waterfront near Manhattan has already been rezoned for residential, and the economy clearly doesn?t allow for 30-story condo towers to rise by, say, Sunset Park or Bay Ridge. The city has called for the creation of more drydocks?contradicting an earlier action when officials allowed Ikea to dismantle a large drydock in Red Hook?and Monday unveiled a ?vision plan? for the Sunset Park industrial waterfront. The mayor, for his part, brushed off questions about a shift in emphasis, saying that he has pushed a need for both industrial and residential along the water. But Mr. Nadler, long a critic of the Bloomberg administration on these issues, was quick to laud the mayor on his shift on industrial issues Monday. ?After many years of spirited discussion on port-related matters,? he said, ?I am so pleased to say that we are now all in agreement on the general goals moving forward regarding port development and now have only differences on timing.? =============================== ALSO LISTEN TO THIS ON WNYC's LINK: Bloomberg Plans to Keep South Brooklyn's Waterfront Industrial by Matthew Schuerman WNYC NEW YORK, NY July 21, 2009 ?Mayor Bloomberg has unveiled a "vision" for the south Brooklyn waterfront, that calls for keeping the 2.5 mile coastline largely industrial, rather than converting it to residential use. WNYC's Matthew Schuerman has more. REPORTER: Bloomberg's spent a lot of his time in office advocating for residential development in places like Williamsburg, Greenpoint and Long Island City. But Sunset Park, Brooklyn, is a different story. The Mayor says he hasn't changed his policy, but different parts of the city lend themselves to different uses. BLOOMBERG: There's demand for residential, there's demand for retail, there's demand for commercial there's demand for industrial. REPORTER: Bloomberg says the city's spending $165 million in southwestern Brooklyn to repair shipping piers, modernize warehouses and improve a freight rail line that runs through the neighborhood. The money will also pay for a 22-acre waterfront park for residents who live further inland. For WNYC, I'm Matthew Schuerman. http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/137050
Posted on: 2009/7/21 15:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Prelude to a Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel?
Buried deep in NJDOT?s 423-page draft 2010 Capital Program is $30 million for the ?Cross-Harbor Freight Movement Project,? an enhancement of the Greenville Yard/Brooklyn railcar float system. This is the biggest chunk of rail freight funds in the program, which also includes $12.5 million in statewide rail freight funds and $750,000 for a freight information technology project. The existing railcar float system moves freight on barges from Greenville Yard in Jersey City to Brooklyn. What was once a thriving industry is now limited to a single entity, the New York New Jersey Rail, which moves about 80 railcars per day. But environmental documents for the proposed Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel suggest that expansion of the railcar float system would annually divert about 450,000 tons of cargo from the largest trucks to freight rail. Furthermore, some of these planned improvements could help ease the way for the cross-harbor tunnel, since Greenville Yard would be the tunnel?s western terminus. The Port Authority took over the tunnel?s environmental study in 2007 and ?re-launched? the project last year, adding momentum to a project which could cut trans-Hudson truck traffic by more than 10% and divert millions of tons of cargo to rail annually. Union County Freight Rail Projects Still Unfinished In green, blue, red. Some existing freight rail lines are in black. Existing freight rail lines are in black, with the already refurbished portion of the SIRR in green, the remaining section in blue, and the Rahway Valley Line in red. Not far away in Union County, however, some longstanding freight rail projects are languishing. According to the Independent Press, refurbishments of the Staten Island Railroad (in blue on the map at right) and Rahway Valley (in red) freight lines have been delayed because of budget cutbacks. Some of the improvements have been on the table since 1997, when the plan was to reconnect New York City to the national freight network by rehabilitating the entire 8 miles of the SI Railroad between Cranford and Staten Island (see MTR # 132). After that plan lagged, the Port Authority agreed to connect a short section of the SIRR (in green on the map) to Conrail?s Chemical Coast Line line instead. The SIRR opened two years ago and has been an early success, taking tens of thousands of trucks off the road per year. The slow progress may just be a matter of priorities. The rehab of the Union County portion of the SIRR is no longer necessary to connect NYC to the national freight network, though it would help county industry and is reportedly almost complete. Work on the Rahway Valley Line, however, is not. County officials are also lukewarm on the freight improvements, with the county manager telling the Press that ?this has been a state project from day one? the county?s interest [is] simply to protect local residents as much as possible.? http://blog.tstc.org/2009/05/11/prelu ... ss-harbor-freight-tunnel/
Posted on: 2009/5/12 1:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Few months of state clout over rail trash transfers
Friday, January 18, 2008 By RUDY LARINI NEWHOUSE NEWS SERVICE A measure included in this year's federal appropriations bill will allow states to regulate any new or expanded rail trash transfer facilities, which are now exempt from state or local control, for the next 81/2 months. Sen. Frank Lautenberg D-N.J., the measure's sponsor, admitted he could not muster sufficient congressional support for a permanent measure granting states such regulatory authority due to opposition from the Bush administration. Rail trash transfer stations process crushed construction debris, but not municipal garbage, for shipping by railroad to distant disposal sites. Proponents argue they are cheaper and safer than shipping the debris by truck and reduce truck traffic on roadways. Officials in the state Department of Environmental Protection, which has been fighting a legal battle to gain regulatory control over the rail transfer facilities, agreed yesterday that railroad cars are a preferred method of transporting the construction debris for disposal. "We do support the movement of trash by rail," said Wolfgang Skacel, an assistant DEP commissioner for compliance and enforcement. "Rail makes environmental sense." What the DEP has been seeking in court is the authority to enforce public health, safety and environmental standards, such as air quality and pollution control, at the facilities, which, as railroad operations, are exempt from state and local control under federal law. In a lawsuit brought by the state, a U.S. district court judge upheld that federal jurisdiction last February. The ruling set aside $2.5 million in fines that had been levied by the DEP for various violations, including a failure to control odor, dust and vermin, at rail trash transfer facilities operated by the New York, Susquehanna & Western Railroad. NYS&WR operates facilities in Hudson and Passaic counties, including one in Paterson that served as a backdrop for remarks Lautenberg made yesterday touting his temporary measure, which expires at the end of the federal fiscal year in September.
Posted on: 2008/1/18 15:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
My problem is with the trains running through the densely populated areas of Jersey City (Hudson County). Once the trains get out to new Jersey, they will run through less populated areas. Sure, they will wind up in Jersey anyway, but when running through densely-populated areas, let them run thru Staten Island. IIRC the difference in reducing the truck traffic between the Alignments is fairly minor. N I M B Y !!!!
Posted on: 2007/11/6 21:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
These are all good points in opposition, but consider there is nothing that can done to stop the trash from coming; that is, it will come either by truck or train and pass through the state on its way to landfills in Pennsylvania and Ohio and Oklahoma. A train can carry the same amount of material as hundreds of trucks.
In either alignment, the train eventually hits New Jersey anyway. If the Jersey City alignment is more likely to divert inbound freight traffic to the rails because of its proximity to the ports, then opposing it just because it runs through Jersey City makes no sense. Meanwhile, the Staten Island alignment puts the new line 20 miles south of the port and still runs through the state.
Posted on: 2007/11/6 14:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
injcsince81
I'm not sure where you get that Healy likely won't be Mayor -- I would bet that you are wrong -- but I too would love to hear Fulop's stand on this. Quote:
Posted on: 2007/11/6 13:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
It is unbelievably smug of Staten Island to want to get rid of trucks on Verrazano by building a trash tunnel to Greenville, while opposing the Staten Island Tunnel Alignment!
I am not worried about Healy - when the Tunnel decision will be made, he'll likely no longer be Mayor. Fulop may be Mayor. I'd like to know his stand on the Trashtunnel. Will he sell Jersey City and let trash trains run every 20 minutes through the city to build political capital in Trenton and DC?
Posted on: 2007/11/6 13:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/13 18:42 Last Login : 2022/2/28 7:31 From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
4192
 |
I hope Healy doesn't do a deal or a back flip on this issue.
I hope he still remembers the crap with the 'power-play' fireworks fiasco on the Hudson. He'll (Healy) get a +1 if doesn't change his stand on the issue.
Posted on: 2007/11/6 13:04
|
|||
|
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
And your point is? Do you want us to get NYC's trash shipped here? 
Posted on: 2007/11/6 11:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/13 18:42 Last Login : 2022/2/28 7:31 From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
4192
|
Quote:
Toxic waste could also be classified as 'TRASH'!
Posted on: 2007/11/6 11:43
|
|||
|
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Mayor's congestion plan spurs the question: What's in it for Staten Island?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Mayor's congestion plan spurs the question: What's in it for Staten Island?
by Staten Island Advance Tuesday November 06, 2007, 12:16 AM As 26 lined up on Staten Island last night to sound off on Mayor Michael Bloomberg's congestion pricing proposal, two things were clear: Those who oppose the proposal want a promise the Island would benefit from revenues generated by the additional toll, and those who favor it want the same. To date, no one can give that guarantee, except for a pledge of 33 more express buses on the Island before the fee would begin. "We represent Staten Island, the district, the borough that is the most under-served by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the Department of Transportation, transportation alternatives in general. We feel we have been made to bear the burden for far too long," said Sen. Diane Savino (D-North Shore/Brooklyn). "Regardless of what this commission comes up with, we're still going to have a traffic problem." Ms. Savino will have a formal say when the state Legislature votes on March 31, 2008, after a recommendation from a 17-member panel studying the mayor's plan. Of the 17 members, none of whom are from the Island, 14 were appointed by politicians in favor of congestion pricing. Most who testified last night at the College of Staten Island's Center for the Arts expressed skepticism that the mayor's plan -- intended to reduce gridlock, improve air quality and raise money for mass transit improvements -- would benefit the Island's public transportation system enough to justify the extra toll. The scheme calls for charging cars $8 and trucks $21 for entering and leaving Manhattan below 86th Street between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. on weekdays. The borough would see the smallest drop in traffic, .6 percent compared to 6.3 percent in Manhattan, according to figures from the mayor's office. Because the congestion fee would be offset by existing levies, many Manhattan-bound Islanders would not pay additional tolls. Those who use the free East River crossings and pay only $4.80 for the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge toll with the E-ZPass discount would face a $3.20 spike per round trip. Unlike other boroughs, where politicians are crying foul over the levy, for Island officials and residents, the contentious issue is another reminder of what they perceive as insufficient mass transit options and a history of neglect. While most testimonies heard by 11 members of the panel who attended last night's hearing echoed Ms. Savino's skepticism, several said congestion pricing is the Island's only hope for better mass transit options. Dan Icolari, a 30-year North Shore resident who belongs to the not-for-profit Transportation Alternatives group, argued that the plan is the Island's best hope of getting much-needed transportation improvements to deal with notorious gridlock in the borough that is arguably most car-dependent. "Over time, congestion pricing can help to bring Staten Island's use of mass transit more in line with that of the other boroughs," Icolari said. Meagan Devereaux, the chief of staff for Borough President James Molinaro, testified in favor of a cross-harbor tunnel, which advocates say would remove as many as 775 trucks a day from the Staten Island Expressway, and achieve a 14 percent reduction in Verrazano traffic. The link from Jersey City to Brooklyn got a boost last month when the Port Authority announced a plan to spend $100 million in federal funds to continue an environmental analysis of the project. --- Contributed by Sally Goldenberg and Maura Yates http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/ ... gestion_plan_spurs_t.html
Posted on: 2007/11/6 11:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
In Shift, Officials Will Weigh Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel
New York Times By PATRICK McGEEHAN October 17, 2007 Two years after turning its back on $100 million in federal funds for planning better ways to move freight, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has spun around and decided to accept the money. The money was earmarked by Congress more than two years ago for the study and planning of ways to improve the movement of freight to New York City from New Jersey. One proposed solution is a rail tunnel under the harbor between Jersey City and Brooklyn, which could cost as much as $7 billion. The commissioners of the Port Authority are scheduled to vote tomorrow to sponsor the project and spend the money to study the costs and potential effects on the environment and economy. ?It makes sense for us to look at the feasibility of the tunnel and its impacts on quality of life and other issues, and at the same time, take advantage of some significant federal funds that are available,? said Stephen Sigmund, a spokesman for the authority. The city?s Economic Development Corporation conducted a preliminary study on the feasibility of a cross-harbor tunnel a few years ago. But after Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg withdrew his support for the idea in 2005, city officials abandoned it. In 2005, Representative Jerrold L. Nadler, a Democrat from Manhattan who has been the tunnel?s most prominent champion, helped secure $100 million from Congress for the authority to take over the project. The agency expects to spend about $10 million of the federal money on the study itself. ?We want the Port Authority to take a hard look at it again, and we?re confident they will come to the same conclusion,? said Robert M. Gottheim, district director for Mr. Nadler. Brad Lander, director of the Pratt Center for Community Development in Brooklyn, a proponent of the freight tunnel, said the authority?s move would be ?a very important step forward.? He added that ?It doesn?t guarantee that it?s getting built.? But, he said, ?These are critical steps that you wouldn?t take unless you were really serious about building it.? Quote:
Posted on: 2007/10/19 16:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
NYC should take their trash through Staten Island -- NOT Jersey City!
?The Staten Island Alignment? ( CLICK ON MAP TO ENLARGE )  Just because this would affect a wealthier area in Staten Island is no reason to push it on the poorer Greenville area of Jersey City. It is NYC trash NOT Jersey City trash! ?The New Jersey Alignment? ( CLICK ON MAP TO ENLARGE )  AGAIN AN EXCERPT FROM STUDY: "Rail Freight Tunnel?This alternative would include construction of a rail freight tunnel under New York Harbor. Two tunnel routes were evaluated: (1) between the Staten Island Railroad in Staten Island, NY, and the Bay Ridge Branch in Brooklyn, NY, (the ?Staten Island alignment?) and (2) between Greenville Yard in Jersey City, NJ, and the Bay Ridge Branch in Brooklyn, NY (the ?New Jersey alignment?). In addition, two implementation scenarios are evaluated for each route: a single tunnel system (?Single Tunnel System?) and a double tunnel system (?Double Tunnel System?). The Single Tunnel System would be built so as not to preclude expansion to the Double Tunnel System..." "The Preferred Alternative: Rail Freight Tunnel The New Jersey alignment of the Tunnel Alternative would achieve greater benefits than the Staten Island alignment. The more direct routing to the western portal of the New Jersey alignment would result in more diversion of freight from truck to rail, which would subsequently yield greater user benefits and travel efficiencies than the Staten Island alignment. In addition, the New Jersey alignment has limited adverse environmental and neighborhood character impacts in comparison to the Staten Island alignment. The New Jersey alignment could be constructed as a Single Tunnel System or Double Tunnel System. The Double Tunnel System would produce greater benefits than the Single Tunnel System due to operational constraints in the Single Tunnel System, which reduce the diversion of intermodal traffic. While the Double Tunnel System would generate the most benefits in many respects, it would also result in additional adverse environmental impacts, more business displacements and would require additional capital expenditures. The New Jersey alignment of the Tunnel Alternative has been identified as the Preferred Alternative. The decision of whether a Single or Double Tunnel System should be recommended will be explored further during the period between the Draft EIS and the Final EIS. For the purposes of the DEIS, the benefits and impacts of all alternatives are analyzed and discussed." CLICK TO GO TO "THE CROSS HARBOR" TUNNEL WEBSITE
Posted on: 2007/10/19 15:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
They CAN send the garbage trains through Staten Island. It's called the "Staten Island Alignment" of the Tunnel. But they prefer to send them through Jersey City. Arseholes.
Posted on: 2007/10/19 14:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
 
|
I can attest to the STENCH from the garbage trains that are sometimes parked near the Journal Square Path train on the Conrail tracks. It is so bad sometimes it can make you gag. The residents of Jersey City deserve better than to have to put up with NYC's garbage too.
NYC's got a big problem with stacking millions of more residents who produce tons more of garbage. It's should not get dumped on Jersey City. Why NOT train it to upstate NY? What's that? NY real estate is "too valuable" for that???
Posted on: 2007/10/19 13:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
All of us here please write or phone our State Department of Environmental Commissioner Lisa P. Jackson and express our concern to this. This is where our environmental money needs to go to - not to over the top, expensive 20 million dollar 9/11 memorials at Liberty State Park. It needs to go to fight U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York and their brazen efforts to send their garbage to Jersey City.
Lisa P. Jackson, Commissioner 401 E. State St. 7th Floor, East Wing P.O. Box 402 Trenton, NJ 08625-0402 phone: 609-292-2885 Quote:
Posted on: 2007/10/19 12:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Yep, freight trains fit much better into Greenville and Bergen-Lafayette that into Staten Island.  I call BS on this - the New York City trash tunnel should run not to Jersey City but to Staten Island.
Posted on: 2007/10/18 19:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
 I agree Injcsince81 -- and you didn't even touch on the potential for a great increase in truck traffic! Here is an excerpt from the existing study: "The New Jersey alignment of the Tunnel Alternative would achieve greater benefits than the Staten Island alignment. The more direct routing to the western portal of the New Jersey alignment would result in more diversion of freight from truck to rail, which would subsequently yield greater user benefits and travel efficiencies than the Staten Island alignment. In addition, the New Jersey alignment has limited adverse environmental and neighborhood character impacts in comparison to the Staten Island alignment." Click this link to see full text: http://www.crossharborstudy.com/addressing.htm Other links: http://www.crossharborstudy.com/ http://www.crossharborstudy.com/informed.htm http://www.crossharborstudy.com/overview.htm Quote:
Posted on: 2007/10/18 17:15
Edited by GrovePath on 2007/10/18 17:53:09
Edited by GrovePath on 2007/10/18 17:54:42 |
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The diesel trains to and from this tunnel will run through Jersey City's most densely populated neighborhoods every 30 minutes.
Just follow Google map it to see which tracks terminate in Greenville Yards - by the Tropicana plant. NYC wants JC to take one for the team, be polluted by diesel trains, potential garbage and hazardous cargo. This must be opposed. There is an alternative alignment for that Trans-Hudson Freight Tunnel - via Staten Island. It is about 10% more expensive than the Greenville Yards alignment. It will also go through some posh Staten Island neighborhoods, which I am sure will be thrilled about it. I suppose it is easier to shove it down the throat of JC lowest income residents. But you know what - keep it a New York affair, Nadler and PANYNJ, because it is all about NYC, anyway. Send the damn trains through Staten Island!
Posted on: 2007/10/18 16:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Why not expand the light rail to go to NYC? That would surely reduce a lot of traffic since it would make everyones lives a hell of a lot easier! I would love to not have to go to Journal Square to go to NYC.
Posted on: 2007/10/18 15:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I think they should build a tunnel but also find a way to integrate passenger service into such a scheme.
For example, if the PA was truly forward thinking - they could build a tunnel that would provide express passenger train service from newark and jfk airports into lower manhattan.
Posted on: 2007/10/18 14:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
NYC & the Port Authority want trash/freight rail tunnel to Greenville -- Healy opposes it.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
To study impact of rail tunnel to Brooklyn
Thursday, October 18, 2007 The long discussed freight rail tunnel between Jersey City and Brooklyn is expected to receive a boost today, as the Port Authority's board of commissioners is set to vote to carry out an environmental impact statement on the proposal, officials said yesterday. A pet project of U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, an environmental impact study on the concept stalled in 2005 when New York City officials failed to pursue it, said Port Authority of New York and New Jersey spokesman Stephen Sigmund. The Port Authority has access to $100 million in federal grant money for cross-harbor related projects, of which roughly $10 million would be spent on the study, Sigmund said. The proposed 51/2-mile tunnel would connect points in Conrail's Greenville Yards in Jersey City with points along the Long Island Rail Road's Bay Ridge Branch at 65th Street in Brooklyn, crossing the middle of the Upper Harbor. Studies performed by the Cross-Harbor Rail Tunnel, a New York-based group, estimated that the tunnel, when fully operational, would reduce traffic in the metro area between 5 and 10 percent. The environmental impact statement - which has no timetable for completion - would examine the effect the proposed tunnel would have on the environment and the affected communities, Sigmund said. Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy has said in the past he opposes the proposal. KEN THORBOURNE
Posted on: 2007/10/18 9:17
|
|||
|
||||