JERSEY CITY LIST - Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson [Politics & Government]

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#36

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03

From DT JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 209

My recollection is that it was in the materials PATH made available during their centenary year, a few years back now. I don't have copies, but they would have.

I don't know if PATH (or H&M back in the day) was always Federally regulated as they are today. Perhaps that also limits the service today, compared to 1927. The Regs require minimum "headway" - gaps - between trains. Because of that requirement and a choke-point in the system just to the north of the Pavonia Newport station, the number of trains per hour during rush times is at the max. No more trains can "fit" in the time available. I do know that over-crowding has become a bigger and bigger problem on the JSQ-33rd line over the years. The recent rescheduling of 3 trains from the HOB line to the JSQ line confirmed for me that a major problem exists. They couldn't add any net new trains, instead they had to "shuffle" things around.

Posted on: 2015/10/10 15:36

JCSHEP

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#35

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/10/15 20:21
Last Login :
2019/10/21 3:42

From Hilltop

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 389

Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

JCSHEP wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

JCSHEP wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:

This is an issue whether or not the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnels close. With the over-development of DT, and other developments (Harrison, etc) along the PATH line out to Newark, it is not a question of if anymore, but when....

Don't worry we have a ways to go, we are only at 65% of what the system used to handle.

--PATH's busiest year - 1927 with 113 Million riders (H&M RR)

--Last year - 73 Million

Actually, I am very worried. Here's why: Yes agree the absolute numbers were larger back then, but that's not the full picture. Ridership patterns have changed significantly. During the twenties there was much more back and forth ridership between NYC and JC. For example, rush hour would be busy in both directions. There was a lot more over-night ridership for shift workers in industries that no longer exist. These days there's limited ?reverse commute? ridership during rush hour so trains return nowhere near full, there are many fewer night shift workers, and so on.

My experience trying to board the 33rd St trains at Pavonia/Newport during the morning rush hour, pretty much confirms to me that the system is over-capacity during those peak times when people need to get to work. It's not infrequent that I must wait for the next train to be able to get on. It's only going to get a lot worse when all the (over) development is completed.

Can you share where you got the 1927 ridership data for the H&M RR? I would love to see that.

You can find it here: http://www.panynj.gov/path/history.html

Ridership declined after 1927 - the year the Holland tunnel opened.

Looking for the data you cited about it being more spread out, overnight, both ways at rush-hour, etc...in 1927

Posted on: 2015/10/10 1:51

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#34

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03

From DT JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 209

Quote:

JCSHEP wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

JCSHEP wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:

This is an issue whether or not the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnels close. With the over-development of DT, and other developments (Harrison, etc) along the PATH line out to Newark, it is not a question of if anymore, but when....

Don't worry we have a ways to go, we are only at 65% of what the system used to handle.

--PATH's busiest year - 1927 with 113 Million riders (H&M RR)

--Last year - 73 Million

Actually, I am very worried. Here's why: Yes agree the absolute numbers were larger back then, but that's not the full picture. Ridership patterns have changed significantly. During the twenties there was much more back and forth ridership between NYC and JC. For example, rush hour would be busy in both directions. There was a lot more over-night ridership for shift workers in industries that no longer exist. These days there's limited ?reverse commute? ridership during rush hour so trains return nowhere near full, there are many fewer night shift workers, and so on.

My experience trying to board the 33rd St trains at Pavonia/Newport during the morning rush hour, pretty much confirms to me that the system is over-capacity during those peak times when people need to get to work. It's not infrequent that I must wait for the next train to be able to get on. It's only going to get a lot worse when all the (over) development is completed.

Can you share where you got the 1927 ridership data for the H&M RR? I would love to see that.

You can find it here: http://www.panynj.gov/path/history.html

Ridership declined after 1927 - the year the Holland tunnel opened.

Posted on: 2015/10/10 0:03

JCSHEP

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#33

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/10/15 20:21
Last Login :
2019/10/21 3:42

From Hilltop

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 389

Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

JCSHEP wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:

This is an issue whether or not the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnels close. With the over-development of DT, and other developments (Harrison, etc) along the PATH line out to Newark, it is not a question of if anymore, but when....

Don't worry we have a ways to go, we are only at 65% of what the system used to handle.

--PATH's busiest year - 1927 with 113 Million riders (H&M RR)

--Last year - 73 Million

Actually, I am very worried. Here's why: Yes agree the absolute numbers were larger back then, but that's not the full picture. Ridership patterns have changed significantly. During the twenties there was much more back and forth ridership between NYC and JC. For example, rush hour would be busy in both directions. There was a lot more over-night ridership for shift workers in industries that no longer exist. These days there's limited ?reverse commute? ridership during rush hour so trains return nowhere near full, there are many fewer night shift workers, and so on.

My experience trying to board the 33rd St trains at Pavonia/Newport during the morning rush hour, pretty much confirms to me that the system is over-capacity during those peak times when people need to get to work. It's not infrequent that I must wait for the next train to be able to get on. It's only going to get a lot worse when all the (over) development is completed.

Can you share where you got the 1927 ridership data for the H&M RR? I would love to see that.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 23:49

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#32

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
...
I'm not blind to the reality that the Port Authority is quite happy to rape commuters - and continually build huge money pits - instead of trying to improve on what we have got.

And it's not about giving space to NJ commuters. I'd rather see the entire NYC streetscape overhauled in the next 10-20 years than one single additional monument to the Port Authority's incompetence.

Unfortunately, reality doesn't care about what you would "rather see."

You mean the Port Authority doesn't give a rat's ass about what the public need - so long as the cash keeps coming in to build "stuff".

Posted on: 2015/10/9 15:28

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#31

Home away from home

Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02

From JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3071

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
...

How about we check in with Gov. Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio about using their West Side Highway as a parking lot for New Jersey bound buses? I can imagine the warm welcome that idea is going to receive. LOL.

Each weekday, on average, 225,000 people board buses at the PABT, about 78,000 of these ride NJT buses; 87,130 board NJT trains at Penn Station, 112,114 ride PATH into NYC. It's going to take a whole lot of buses.... and a whole lot of New York streets. Can't see it happening anytime soon.

Limited vision again. When buses become driverless, you won't need a parking lot - just sufficient space like a bus lane to drop off and pick up, plus some curbside shelter for passengers. And it wouldn't need to be West Side itself - there are plenty of side streets off it.

Let's say a fleet of 1000 buses could handle the PATH load of 100k+ per day. Parked end-to-end they'd come to under 10 miles. At any given time - there'd likely be no more than 1 mile of buses parked - and not all in the same location. There's more than enough roadside real estate for that.

Limited vision...? How about total blindness to realities of inter-state, -city politics? There is no chance that anyone in New York is going to turn over a mile, or even a block, of streets to New Jersey bound buses - driverless or no.

I'm not blind to the reality that the Port Authority is quite happy to rape commuters - and continually build huge money pits - instead of trying to improve on what we have got.

And it's not about giving space to NJ commuters. I'd rather see the entire NYC streetscape overhauled in the next 10-20 years than one single additional monument to the Port Authority's incompetence.

Unfortunately, reality doesn't care about what you would "rather see."

Posted on: 2015/10/9 14:48

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#30

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
...

How about we check in with Gov. Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio about using their West Side Highway as a parking lot for New Jersey bound buses? I can imagine the warm welcome that idea is going to receive. LOL.

Each weekday, on average, 225,000 people board buses at the PABT, about 78,000 of these ride NJT buses; 87,130 board NJT trains at Penn Station, 112,114 ride PATH into NYC. It's going to take a whole lot of buses.... and a whole lot of New York streets. Can't see it happening anytime soon.

Limited vision again. When buses become driverless, you won't need a parking lot - just sufficient space like a bus lane to drop off and pick up, plus some curbside shelter for passengers. And it wouldn't need to be West Side itself - there are plenty of side streets off it.

Let's say a fleet of 1000 buses could handle the PATH load of 100k+ per day. Parked end-to-end they'd come to under 10 miles. At any given time - there'd likely be no more than 1 mile of buses parked - and not all in the same location. There's more than enough roadside real estate for that.

Limited vision...? How about total blindness to realities of inter-state, -city politics? There is no chance that anyone in New York is going to turn over a mile, or even a block, of streets to New Jersey bound buses - driverless or no.

I'm not blind to the reality that the Port Authority is quite happy to rape commuters - and continually build huge money pits - instead of trying to improve on what we have got.

And it's not about giving space to NJ commuters. I'd rather see the entire NYC streetscape overhauled in the next 10-20 years than one single additional monument to the Port Authority's incompetence.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 13:33

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#29

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03

From DT JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 209

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
...

How about we check in with Gov. Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio about using their West Side Highway as a parking lot for New Jersey bound buses? I can imagine the warm welcome that idea is going to receive. LOL.

Each weekday, on average, 225,000 people board buses at the PABT, about 78,000 of these ride NJT buses; 87,130 board NJT trains at Penn Station, 112,114 ride PATH into NYC. It's going to take a whole lot of buses.... and a whole lot of New York streets. Can't see it happening anytime soon.

Limited vision again. When buses become driverless, you won't need a parking lot - just sufficient space like a bus lane to drop off and pick up, plus some curbside shelter for passengers. And it wouldn't need to be West Side itself - there are plenty of side streets off it.

Let's say a fleet of 1000 buses could handle the PATH load of 100k+ per day. Parked end-to-end they'd come to under 10 miles. At any given time - there'd likely be no more than 1 mile of buses parked - and not all in the same location. There's more than enough roadside real estate for that.

Limited vision...? How about total blindness to realities of inter-state, -city politics? There is no chance that anyone in New York is going to turn over a mile, or even a block, of streets to New Jersey bound buses - driverless or no.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 12:47

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#28

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
...

How about we check in with Gov. Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio about using their West Side Highway as a parking lot for New Jersey bound buses? I can imagine the warm welcome that idea is going to receive. LOL.

Each weekday, on average, 225,000 people board buses at the PABT, about 78,000 of these ride NJT buses; 87,130 board NJT trains at Penn Station, 112,114 ride PATH into NYC. It's going to take a whole lot of buses.... and a whole lot of New York streets. Can't see it happening anytime soon.

Limited vision again. When buses become driverless, you won't need a parking lot - just sufficient space like a bus lane to drop off and pick up, plus some curbside shelter for passengers. And it wouldn't need to be West Side itself - there are plenty of side streets off it.

Let's say a fleet of 1000 buses could handle the PATH load of 100k+ per day. Parked end-to-end they'd come to under 10 miles. At any given time - there'd likely be no more than 1 mile of buses parked - and not all in the same location. There's more than enough roadside real estate for that.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 12:38

Sommerman

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#27

Home away from home

Joined:
2014/12/21 14:43
Last Login :
2015/11/15 0:07

From Harsimus Cove

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 399

Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

JCSHEP wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:

This is an issue whether or not the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnels close. With the over-development of DT, and other developments (Harrison, etc) along the PATH line out to Newark, it is not a question of if anymore, but when....

Don't worry we have a ways to go, we are only at 65% of what the system used to handle.

--PATH's busiest year - 1927 with 113 Million riders (H&M RR)

--Last year - 73 Million

Actually, I am very worried. Here's why: Yes agree the absolute numbers were larger back then, but that's not the full picture. Ridership patterns have changed significantly. During the twenties there was much more back and forth ridership between NYC and JC. For example, rush hour would be busy in both directions. There was a lot more over-night ridership for shift workers in industries that no longer exist. These days there's limited ?reverse commute? ridership during rush hour so trains return nowhere near full, there are many fewer night shift workers, and so on.

My experience trying to board the 33rd St trains at Pavonia/Newport during the morning rush hour, pretty much confirms to me that the system is over-capacity during those peak times when people need to get to work. It's not infrequent that I must wait for the next train to be able to get on. It's only going to get a lot worse when all the (over) development is completed.

Not sure if this contributes much to crowding, but it seems that people take up more space. I never carried more than a briefcase to work (now retired!!!). It seems a lot of people carry large backpacks, shopping bags, etc. Even if you hold these between your legs, your stance is probably wider than need be to maintain stability. Also those papoose-like baby carriers and strollers were probably a rare sight when PATH reached its peak capacity.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 12:24

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#26

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03

From DT JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 209

Quote:

JCSHEP wrote:
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:

This is an issue whether or not the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnels close. With the over-development of DT, and other developments (Harrison, etc) along the PATH line out to Newark, it is not a question of if anymore, but when....

Don't worry we have a ways to go, we are only at 65% of what the system used to handle.

--PATH's busiest year - 1927 with 113 Million riders (H&M RR)

--Last year - 73 Million

Actually, I am very worried. Here's why: Yes agree the absolute numbers were larger back then, but that's not the full picture. Ridership patterns have changed significantly. During the twenties there was much more back and forth ridership between NYC and JC. For example, rush hour would be busy in both directions. There was a lot more over-night ridership for shift workers in industries that no longer exist. These days there's limited ?reverse commute? ridership during rush hour so trains return nowhere near full, there are many fewer night shift workers, and so on.

My experience trying to board the 33rd St trains at Pavonia/Newport during the morning rush hour, pretty much confirms to me that the system is over-capacity during those peak times when people need to get to work. It's not infrequent that I must wait for the next train to be able to get on. It's only going to get a lot worse when all the (over) development is completed.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 10:58

JCSHEP

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#25

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/10/15 20:21
Last Login :
2019/10/21 3:42

From Hilltop

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 389

Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:

This is an issue whether or not the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnels close. With the over-development of DT, and other developments (Harrison, etc) along the PATH line out to Newark, it is not a question of if anymore, but when....

Don't worry we have a ways to go, we are only at 65% of what the system used to handle.

--PATH's busiest year - 1927 with 113 Million riders (H&M RR)

--Last year - 73 Million

Posted on: 2015/10/9 3:05

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#24

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03

From DT JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 209

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Plus there's a new bus terminal being built at the WTC site.

There is?? That's news.

I believe it's for the use of tour buses. But why not make it work for us? Regular rush hour "tours" to WTC - just wear your Dockers, mom jeans, and cheap sneakers, we'll fit right in.

Even if that can't be used - why bother building another huge bus parking lot? There is plenty of existing real estate on the roads and sidewalks to make it work - it worked after 9-11. West Side Highway itself could be the new bus terminal.

How about we check in with Gov. Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio about using their West Side Highway as a parking lot for New Jersey bound buses? I can imagine the warm welcome that idea is going to receive. LOL.

Each weekday, on average, 225,000 people board buses at the PABT, about 78,000 of these ride NJT buses; 87,130 board NJT trains at Penn Station, 112,114 ride PATH into NYC. It's going to take a whole lot of buses.... and a whole lot of New York streets. Can't see it happening anytime soon.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 0:58

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#23

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

Quote:

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Plus there's a new bus terminal being built at the WTC site.

There is?? That's news.

I believe it's for the use of tour buses. But why not make it work for us? Regular rush hour "tours" to WTC - just wear your Dockers, mom jeans, and cheap sneakers, we'll fit right in.

Even if that can't be used - why bother building another huge bus parking lot? There is plenty of existing real estate on the roads and sidewalks to make it work - it worked after 9-11. West Side Highway itself could be the new bus terminal.

Posted on: 2015/10/9 0:39

Wishful_Thinking

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#22

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/10/15 17:32
Last Login :
2017/5/17 13:40

From Heights

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 797

Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Plus there's a new bus terminal being built at the WTC site.

There is?? That's news.

I believe it's for the use of tour buses. But why not make it work for us? Regular rush hour "tours" to WTC - just wear your Dockers, mom jeans, and cheap sneakers, we'll fit right in.

Posted on: 2015/10/8 23:16

Bike_Lane

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#21

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/11/10 4:48
Last Login :
2021/11/20 23:45

From gone

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 463

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Plus there's a new bus terminal being built at the WTC site.

There is?? That's news.

Posted on: 2015/10/7 21:56

La_Verdad

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#20

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/9/24 1:55
Last Login :
2019/6/18 15:56

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 244

Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:

By the way, fuel costs are roughly 18% of the Seattle ferry's costs ($79m out of $450m circa 2012).

... and the price of diesel fuel on the west coast has fallen more than 30% (2015 vs. 2012, according to EIA.)

Seattle's light rail system is rapidly expanding and has the advantage of being built out to serve current development and transit patterns, not based on what existed in the 19th century. Also, their bike infrastructure is about 400 years ahead of the NYC area. Not mass transit, but when you go to a city that has wonderful bike infrastructure (Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Vancouver, pretty much the rest of the entire developed world) you realize the burden bikes take off public transportation.

Posted on: 2015/10/7 16:04

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#19

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

After 9-11 they enforced minimum occupancy on cars entering the Lincoln and Holland tunnels during peak hours. I don't see this as much different. Perhaps that's too visionary for you.

Are you actually being serious or just trolling? You are trying to compare a temporary security measure introduced after 9/11 (that went away after 2 years) to a crackpot ban on all vehicles with drivers?

Yes, you are right. I think you are a little too "visionary" for me, lol.

The ban had little to do with security and more to do with the WTC Path station being closed. Buses were running through the tunnel from the likes of Grove Street to handle alternative commutes. As others pointed out - the world didn't end when the Path line to the WTC was closed.

The general point is that we can leverage existing infrastructure better in the planning process. And we should include the massive leaps in technology on the horizon into consideration.

Posted on: 2015/10/7 16:01

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#18

Home away from home

Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02

From JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3071

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

After 9-11 they enforced minimum occupancy on cars entering the Lincoln and Holland tunnels during peak hours. I don't see this as much different. Perhaps that's too visionary for you.

Are you actually being serious or just trolling? You are trying to compare a temporary security measure introduced after 9/11 (that went away after 2 years) to a crackpot ban on all vehicles with drivers?

Yes, you are right. I think you are a little too "visionary" for me, lol.

Posted on: 2015/10/7 15:38

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#17

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
A fleet of these operating in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels during commuting hours would solve the issue. Vehicles with drivers could be banned during given hours to speed the flow. I'd rather see this kind of solution than billions spent on another hole. The same fleet could replace our much beloved Jitneys locally.

http://www.citylab.com/tech/2015/10/c ... st-driverless-bus/408826/

Sure, let's just ban all "vehicles with drivers" from the Lincoln and Holland tunnels during commuting hours. What a practical and realistic idea!

10-20 years from now virtually all new cars will be driverless. Cabs, buses and trucks will have no drivers. After 9-11 they enforced minimum occupancy on cars entering the Lincoln and Holland tunnels during peak hours. I don't see this as much different. Perhaps that's too visionary for you.

Posted on: 2015/10/7 15:33

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#16

Home away from home

Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02

From JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3071

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
A fleet of these operating in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels during commuting hours would solve the issue. Vehicles with drivers could be banned during given hours to speed the flow. I'd rather see this kind of solution than billions spent on another hole. The same fleet could replace our much beloved Jitneys locally.

http://www.citylab.com/tech/2015/10/c ... st-driverless-bus/408826/

Sure, let's just ban all "vehicles with drivers" from the Lincoln and Holland tunnels during commuting hours. What a practical and realistic idea!

Posted on: 2015/10/7 14:37

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#15

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
A fleet of these operating in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels during commuting hours would solve the issue. Vehicles with drivers could be banned during given hours to speed the flow. I'd rather see this kind of solution than billions spent on another hole. The same fleet could replace our much beloved Jitneys locally.

http://www.citylab.com/tech/2015/10/c ... st-driverless-bus/408826/

Where would all these buses stop in Manhattan to allow people on and off? The Port Authority bus terminal is already way over capacity.

I don't see why they couldn't have some limited stops in Manhattan. Think there were similar accommodations after 9-11. Plus there's a new bus terminal being built at the WTC site. The roads would need improving - entrances and exits to tunnels, bus-only lanes. And the Port Authority may lose out on their cash addiction from tolls. But if we're looking at a 10-20 year time horizon - that's a better way to spend our money than yet another big hole.

Posted on: 2015/10/7 13:25

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#14

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03

From DT JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 209

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
A fleet of these operating in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels during commuting hours would solve the issue. Vehicles with drivers could be banned during given hours to speed the flow. I'd rather see this kind of solution than billions spent on another hole. The same fleet could replace our much beloved Jitneys locally.

http://www.citylab.com/tech/2015/10/c ... st-driverless-bus/408826/

Where would all these buses stop in Manhattan to allow people on and off? The Port Authority bus terminal is already way over capacity.

Posted on: 2015/10/7 13:11

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#13

Home away from home

Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3141

A fleet of these operating in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels during commuting hours would solve the issue. Vehicles with drivers could be banned during given hours to speed the flow. I'd rather see this kind of solution than billions spent on another hole. The same fleet could replace our much beloved Jitneys locally.

http://www.citylab.com/tech/2015/10/c ... st-driverless-bus/408826/

Posted on: 2015/10/7 10:34

Wishful_Thinking

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#12

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/10/15 17:32
Last Login :
2017/5/17 13:40

From Heights

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 797

There is only one solution - a coup to overthrow Christie and Cuomo, and ship them off to an inaccessible island (maybe it will do them more good than it did Napoleon http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/des ... ile-yourself-to-Elba.html)

Next, occupy and take over PATH, and run it for the citizens' benefit. Current PATH management can join Christie and Cuomo, those of us who rely on the PATH transportation network will come out so far ahead, the cost of a villa will be negligible...

Posted on: 2015/10/7 0:38

Dolomiti

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#11

Home away from home

Joined:
2012/8/6 22:56
Last Login :
2019/11/14 1:56

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1058

Quote:

brewster wrote:
You do know there's plans to add tolls on all the "free" E river crossings.

Yes, and Bloomberg planned to add congestion charges. It didn't happen.

Wake me when they actually add those tolls.

Quote:

I don't see anything inherently wrong with just subsidizing NYW.

I don't either. I'm simply pointing out that someone has to pay for and operate that service.

In the case of Hudson ferries, it might kill a private business and will be operated and paid for by everyone's favorite agency: Port Authority. Yay!

Quote:

It proves the point that great cities subsidize mass transit. Your data also proves NYW is overpriced if a 10 min ride here is the same price as an hour there.....

NYC and NJ also subsidize mass transit. They just aren't subsidizing the Hudson Ferries on a normal basis.

I'm certainly not objecting to public transportation. If the Amtrak/NJT tunnel closes early, there is no doubt that ferry service will be expanded, on the public dime.

I'm only pointing out that everything has a cost.

To wit: I'm certainly not an expert on the Puget Sound ferries, but I don't think it is "going broke" because of fuel costs. The problem is that, as with so many things in politics, people want the service and don't want to pay for it. A $150 million shortfall on a $450 million service is not bad by most public transportation standards; the problem is that Washington State doesn't really want to subsidize it, and doesn't want to dedicate funding to it. Hence the DOT apparently has to play a shell game to keep it going, and the system is aging and deteriorating.

By the way, fuel costs are roughly 18% of the Seattle ferry's costs ($79m out of $450m circa 2012).

Also by the way ;) within city limits, Seattle's public transportation system is kind of a mess. They have a bus system, a rapid bus system (which works well but is new and very limited), they have a very limited light rail system, they have a very short and pointless monorail imposed on them by a local billionaire.

While some of these systems work well, and there is an integrated fare card (ORCA), and the ferries are a great tourist attraction, I would not hold up Seattle as a paragon of public transportation. Not yet, anyway.

Comparing these two systems is not simple. NYW is a private for-profit entity; Seattle ferries are not. NYW fares are not subsidized; Seattle's are. Seattle carries double the traffic, including cars; it owns its ports (I think); it has economies of scale that NYW does not; while Seattle is not cheap, the costs of doing business are probably very different for those two systems. Lots of data about NYW is not available, as it's a private entity. Thus, I don't think we can simply compare fares and declare one system incredibly more efficient than another.

Posted on: 2015/10/6 12:04

Dolomiti

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

#10

Home away from home

Joined:
2012/8/6 22:56
Last Login :
2019/11/14 1:56

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1058

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
I never said the PATH tunnel would close....

I'm aware that you are aware of that.

The point (which, again, I do not necessarily agree with) is that it's still a shorter commute.

For example, let's say you live in South Orange, and it takes you 35 minutes on NJT to get to Penn Station. The NJT tunnel closes; it now takes you 30 minutes to get to Hoboken, and then you get on a crowded PATH train or a ferry, which takes another 15-20 minutes to get to midtown.

The PATH train will be crowded either way, but you'll chop time off your commute.

Quote:

Right from the article, it says that there were problems with NJ Transit's tunnel over the summer and PATH couldn't handle it.

True... but that was also an emergency, meaning no one had time to warn commuters, plan alternate routes, plan to carpool, add ferry service etc.

Don't get me wrong, if there is a sudden need to close the Amtrak/NJT tunnel before a replacement is open, it's going to be an utter mess.

At the same time, this is not entirely unprecedented, and JC/Hoboken have survived similar issues in the past. E.g. service to WTC was unavailable for years after 9/11, yet neither Hoboken nor JC turned into ghost towns overnight.

Posted on: 2015/10/6 11:11

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03

From DT JC

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 209

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
How would this increase demand to move to JC or Hoboken?

While I'm not sure I agree:

The tunnel that will close is NJ Transit's tunnel. Not the PATH tunnel.

Someone in the 'burbs would have to take NJT to Hoboken, then the PATH or Ferry to NYC. Moving to Hoboken / JC cuts out chunks of that commute.

I never said the PATH tunnel would close. The issue is the PATH will not be able to handle the sudden influx of new people that would overwhelm it. No one is going to move here to catch a ride on a train they won't be able to catch. Or if they do, they'll be quite upset once they realize what they got themselves into and will leave quickly.

And this isn't speculation, we know this because it's already happened (granted in limited doses). Right from the article, it says that there were problems with NJ Transit's tunnel over the summer and PATH couldn't handle it.

Here's what Fulop said:

Fulop says that during this summer?s tunnel problems, commuters switched from New Jersey Transit to the PATH trains in Jersey City, which quickly became packed. ?It was eye-opening for us,? he says. ?There?s no way we can handle that.?

He also believes that commuters facing a potential multi-seat ride into the city, instead of a straight shot by train, will rethink their entire decision to live in Jersey City or any of the surrounding areas.

?This would have a really, really negative impact to us,? he says. ?All the growth we?ve seen, I don?t think we have the capacity to carry the added ridership if you see a prolonged shift.?

And here is Zimmerman:

Mayor Zimmer of Hoboken seconds the PATH overload that occurred during the closure this summer: ?It was packed to a point of being a huge public safety concern,? she says.

So no, if the NJ Transit tunnel closes, JC, like other NJ locales, will be tremendously harmed. We all lose. More people will probably move to NY.

Making it such an egregious failure of political leadership (both at the state and federal level) for us to even be faced with this possibility.

+1

This is an issue whether or not the Amtrak/NJ Transit tunnels close. With the over-development of DT, and other developments (Harrison, etc) along the PATH line out to Newark, it is not a question of if anymore, but when.... At least Fulop and Zimmer agree there's a problem. I am not hopeful there are enough grown-ups in the room to work out a plan, or find the money, to fix it.

And while we're thinking about tunnels across the river, how long will the cast iron PATH tubes last, sitting in the silt at the bottom of the river. I am sure they have some expected life-span, and have been there a while now. What's the plan to deal with that eventuality?

Posted on: 2015/10/6 11:04

brewster

Re: Preparing for 'Transportation Armageddon' on the Hudson

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42

From Hamilton Park

Group:
Banned

Posts: 5775

Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
I find it interesting that Staten Island with less than 500k people gets a free ferry....

It also costs around $110 million a year, or almost $5 per person in one direction. Not exactly free.

There are no train tunnels to and from SI. The auto route goes through Brooklyn to get to lower Manhattan, and is Not Free. MTA charges SI residents for the Verrazano-Narrows -- anywhere from $3 for a carpooled car, to $6 for a SI resident with EZ pass, to $16 cash.

Keep in mind that if they charge for the SI Ferry, then it's the only borough with no free route of access whatsoever.

You do know there's plans to add tolls on all the "free" E river crossings. I put the free in quotes in case you point out nothing is really free, but as you know all I meant was "no fare charged".
Quote:

Quote:
....for Hudson County with over 600k ferries are considered a luxury good except in times of apocalypse like 9/11. No one expects our roads to make a profit, why do they expect public transport to?

Ferries across the Hudson are not public. They are privately owned and operated.

"Public Transport" is widely used synonymously with "mass transit", as opposed to individual vehicle.
Quote:

SI ferries also don't have shuttle buses in NYC. NY Waterway operates 5 bus routes during peak times.

They don't need shuttles, they terminate at a subway line, as opposed to 4/5 mile.
Quote:

Or, let's have it your way, and launch a free ferry. Aside from eradicating NYW (or at least heavily modifying its current structure), what government agency would run such a thing? Which agency already owns several docks along the waterfront? Who is everyone's favorite bi-state transportation agency? Who could it be? I can't think of any agency, can you? :D

I don't see anything inherently wrong with just subsidizing NYW.
Quote:

Quote:
I just looked at ferry prices in Seattle, a city with many ferries. I was startled, not just that a passenger fare to Bremerton costs $8.10, comparable to NY Waterway, but that a car only costs $14.25, same as the Holland tunnel. Something is wrong with this picture when a car 20 time the space and weight costs less than twice the person.

The Bremerton ferry takes 60 minutes. That's not quite comparable to Hudson or SI ferries.

The Puget Sound ferries are operated by the Washington State DOT, and are one of the largest ferry systems in the US (if not the world). In 2012, fares covered $294 million, but operating expenses were around $450 million. Voters deliberately put the kibosh on a vehicle tax. The ferry service doesn't have a dedicated funding source. Paying the shortfall has become a major political issue for Washington State. They couldn't find a director for several years. The fleet is aging. I believe the word "crisis" gets bandied about quite a bit, in connection to the Puget Sound ferries.

Great example ya got there. ;)

It proves the point that great cities subsidize mass transit. Your data also proves NYW is overpriced if a 10 min ride here is the same price as an hour there. Even at parity of subsidy it should be no more than twice their price per distance. The greatest cost of this service is fuel. No wonder they're going broke though if they burn fuel to shlep a 4000 lb car an hour for what we charge for a drive through a tunnel, and less than twice what they charge for a human.

Posted on: 2015/10/6 3:47