Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
144 user(s) are online (124 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 144

more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (JCGuys)




Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


The only thing the Port Authority knows how to do well is raise fares, so, right or wrong, my demand pricing suggestion is the most likely thing to happen. :D

The problem is the Port Authority will just raise fares for all times if given the opportunity, not just during peak periods, with the extra funds being pissed away.

Posted on: 2019/1/9 3:57
 Top 


Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


The Bayonne Bridge is being raised to 215 feet to allow for taller ships to pass. The article states this fantasy proposal to be a 200ft, so it should accommodate most tall ships. Since it's pure fantasy, I'm sure they could just increase it to 215ft or taller if warranted.

Quote:

hero69 wrote:
would this pedestrian bridge be high enough for big ships to pass underQuote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ConstantReader wrote:
1) During rush hour, run fewer trains on the 33rd-Hoboken schedule and make up the difference with more 33rd-JSQ trains. The Hoboken trains on the 33rd St. line are significantly less crowded than their JSQ equivalents.

As I understand it, the problem is traffic and signalling in tunnels, not a shortage of rolling stock.

Dolomiti, are you just trying to tweak me with the bridge comment knowing it drives me nuts? Of all the stupid ideas, it's the stupidest. Even if it was doable (it's not) there's probably no lower return on transportation investment than allowing the relatively few people who live downtown and work in Lower Manhattan AND are inclined to walk or bike to do so.


And, inclined to walk ~30 minutes just to cross that hypothetical bridge.

And yet, thousands of people do exactly that, every day, with the Manhattan and Brooklyn Bridges.


Quote:
There are no pedestrian bridges in the world with that kind of length for very good reason.

Try again.

Big Dam Bridge is 1.28km; Bob Kerrey Bridge is 940m; Nescio is 740m. Those are all relatively new bridges.

It's not common, but that alone does not prove it's a bad idea. E.g. almost no transit systems in the US use open gangway cars; does that, in and of itself, prove that it's a bad idea?


The width of the Hudson is twice that of the East River where all three bridges (Williamsburg, Manhattan, and Brooklyn) are located. You are comparing apples to oranges.

A bridge from DTJC to Lower Manhattan would be over 1.25 to 1.5 miles, at a minimum. None of the examples you mention are nowhere near that. Try again.

Very few people commute via the Brooklyn. It is estimated that 4,000 people cross it every day. Take away the sizable amount of visitors/tourists, and the number that is actually commuting to/from work is very small. About 2.5K cyclists cross it every day. Even under the best/rosiest of estimates, you have 5,000 commuters crossing the Brooklyn bridge every day. That's about 5 - 7 PATH trains, or 30 minutes of added rush hour service.

If you want to see a more efficient method to add capacity, at least suggest cable cars/gondolas. That could be a much more effective solution than the idiocy that is a pedestrian bridge over the Hudson.


Let's say this thing was somehow built at a billion dollars* or less. It will probably have no impact to reduce PATH overcrowding. It may even attract more people to PATH as a shitload of tourists will use the system to get off at exchange place or WTC to then walk/bike/rollerskate over the Hudson to Manhattan... The billion dollars or whatever is actually spent on the 1.5 mile pedestrian bridge could probably serve more people by doing transit investments.

Resized Image
Resized Image

*Let's be real. This is New Jersey and the real cost will probably be $5 billion plus.

Quote:

Resized Image

The proposal is a 5,000-foot-long, 200-foot-high bridge that would allow pedestrians and cyclists to avoid the circuitous, increasingly crowded, and frequently frustrating PATH trains. The conceptual two-level span features paths for walking and biking, sweeping views, greenery and seating. The design also includes cafes, retail spaces, solar panels, artwork and free WiFi. The idea is to originate at the abandoned Pennsylvania Railway Embankment in downtown Jersey City, gradually increase in height, and terminate at a higher elevation in Manhattan, with elevators, stairs and ramps to reach the ground.

From NextCity: https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/desig ... w-jersey-to-new-york-city

Posted on: 2019/1/9 3:53
 Top 


Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ConstantReader wrote:
1) During rush hour, run fewer trains on the 33rd-Hoboken schedule and make up the difference with more 33rd-JSQ trains. The Hoboken trains on the 33rd St. line are significantly less crowded than their JSQ equivalents.

As I understand it, the problem is traffic and signalling in tunnels, not a shortage of rolling stock.

Dolomiti, are you just trying to tweak me with the bridge comment knowing it drives me nuts? Of all the stupid ideas, it's the stupidest. Even if it was doable (it's not) there's probably no lower return on transportation investment than allowing the relatively few people who live downtown and work in Lower Manhattan AND are inclined to walk or bike to do so.


And, inclined to walk ~30 minutes just to cross that hypothetical bridge.

And yet, thousands of people do exactly that, every day, with the Manhattan and Brooklyn Bridges.


Quote:
There are no pedestrian bridges in the world with that kind of length for very good reason.

Try again.

Big Dam Bridge is 1.28km; Bob Kerrey Bridge is 940m; Nescio is 740m. Those are all relatively new bridges.

It's not common, but that alone does not prove it's a bad idea. E.g. almost no transit systems in the US use open gangway cars; does that, in and of itself, prove that it's a bad idea?


The width of the Hudson is twice that of the East River where all three bridges (Williamsburg, Manhattan, and Brooklyn) are located. You are comparing apples to oranges.

A bridge from DTJC to Lower Manhattan would be over 1.25 to 1.5 miles, at a minimum. None of the examples you mention are nowhere near that. Try again.

Very few people commute via the Brooklyn. It is estimated that 4,000 people cross it every day. Take away the sizable amount of visitors/tourists, and the number that is actually commuting to/from work is very small. About 2.5K cyclists cross it every day. Even under the best/rosiest of estimates, you have 5,000 commuters crossing the Brooklyn bridge every day. That's about 5 - 7 PATH trains, or 30 minutes of added rush hour service.

If you want to see a more efficient method to add capacity, at least suggest cable cars/gondolas. That could be a much more effective solution than the idiocy that is a pedestrian bridge over the Hudson.


Let's say this thing was somehow built at a billion dollars* or less. It will probably have no impact to reduce PATH overcrowding. It may even attract more people to PATH as a shitload of tourists will use the system to get off at exchange place or WTC to then walk/bike/rollerskate over the Hudson to Manhattan... The billion dollars or whatever is actually spent on the 1.5 mile pedestrian bridge could probably serve more people by doing transit investments.

Resized Image
Resized Image

*Let's be real. This is New Jersey and the real cost will probably be $5 billion plus.

Quote:

Resized Image

The proposal is a 5,000-foot-long, 200-foot-high bridge that would allow pedestrians and cyclists to avoid the circuitous, increasingly crowded, and frequently frustrating PATH trains. The conceptual two-level span features paths for walking and biking, sweeping views, greenery and seating. The design also includes cafes, retail spaces, solar panels, artwork and free WiFi. The idea is to originate at the abandoned Pennsylvania Railway Embankment in downtown Jersey City, gradually increase in height, and terminate at a higher elevation in Manhattan, with elevators, stairs and ramps to reach the ground.

From NextCity: https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/desig ... w-jersey-to-new-york-city

Posted on: 2019/1/9 1:08
 Top 


Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
So far I've heard lots of defense of the status quo and no solutions being offered. I propose a solution. It gets shot down. Nothing proposed in it's place. It's this 'it is what it is' mentality why we can't have nice things.

The system is at a breaking point.

Alrighty then

First, we should also note that the PATH train is nowhere near a "breaking point." (Again, let us know when PA hires subway pushers.) One of the reasons the PATH has a big deficit is because PA is already spending money to expand capacity, with new switches and (eventually) 10-car trains.


How many more daily riders is needed until we hit that breaking point? We're already at 300,000 a day. Would another 10, 20, 30,000+ get us there? Whatever that number is, it's coming soon due to development at Newark, Harrison and Jersey City.

Quote:

Another option occasionally mentioned here is using open gangway cars. I don't know if regulations allow that, but it would provide numerous benefits, including expanded capacity and better distribution of passengers on partially crowded trains.

I love this idea and other metro systems have demonstrated that it works well. The problem is the Port Authority would need to place an order for the open gangway cars to replace the current rolling stock. Since this isn't even on the radar for now, it's probably not happening within our lifetimes (or maybe it will for yours if you're really, really young). I hope I'm wrong about this point because it's a fantastic idea.


Quote:

However, even the most brilliant ideas to expand capacity on the existing lines probably can't outrun population growth. (I would discuss induced demand, but I think developers will keep building in JC, Harrison and Newark no matter what.)


Agreed!

Quote:
Eventually, the region will require a major expansion of infrastructure. I for one am a fan of building a pedestrian/bicycle bridge across the Hudson....

While I appreciate your input to brainstorm better ideas for transhudson crossings, it's rich to call out my demand pricing suggestion for peak hours while proposing something that will cost billions and has an extremely minimal chance of being built. If it ever is built by some miracle of God, I would love to walk/bike across it though!!

Posted on: 2019/1/9 1:06
 Top 


Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
I pretty much universally support demand pricing for cars, but the whole point in the metro area is to get people NOT to use their cars. So punishing them for using PATH seems self-destructive. Even if the effort is to get people to shift schedules, it's still discouraging people from using transit.


The car isn't a viable choice. Driving into Manhattan is crazy, reserved for the likes of Yvonne. There is no (cheap) parking and the tunnels are near gridlocked. Transit is the only way to go and that will become even more obvious in 10 or 20 years. The thousands of apartments under construction in Journal Square, Harrison and Newark will be the breaking point for both PATH and the tunnels.


I think you are getting the value/cost analysis all wrong. Obviously, lots of people choose to drive, as evidenced by the very gridlock you reference. I personally know a bunch of people who choose to drive into the city, instead of dealing with mass transit. If you do it right, it can be the same, or less, to drive, particularly if you do so with another person (or two) and split the costs. Heck, I myself often choose driving over mass transit, but there are factors that favor my doing so (I can commute on a motorcycle, which means I am able to find free on street parking, and I am also able to adjust my commuting times to avoid the usual crush from 7:00 to 9:00) but other people (like couples who both work in the city) can choose to drive and break even, without the hassle of the packed trains and things like inclement weather.


Roads are a nightmare during inclement weather. If you're coming from and going to the immediate areas serviced by PATH, I don't see how driving is an alternative unless someone just wants to waste money and enjoys traffic.

Door to door Journal Square to my office at WTC area was 35 minutes and $2.75. Driving would push 45 minutes on a good day along with cost of cost parking + tolls + gas + maintenance + depreciation + expected value probability some ahole got into an accident with me. People who drive fail to account for the true economic costs of driving.

I can see uber/lyft being an alternative, depending on where you're heading in NYC if 2 or 3 people use it. No need to worry about parking so it's really just the fare and tolls split 2 or 3 ways. But if you're heading from Journal Square to WTC area - there is no cost reasonable substitute to PATH. Your situation with the motorcycle, allowing you to pay less for gas, less for tolls, traveling the roads at less busy times, and being able to find free parking is an extremely unique case.

Posted on: 2019/1/9 0:56
 Top 


Re: JC Council to Vote on Canceling Two Abatement Deals for Non Compliance
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:
At this point, the City has granted ZERO market rate tax abatements (anywhere in the city) for nearly two years! So our plan is working and we should all be proud.


Is this a true statement? If one unit is 'affordable' in a 500 unit building, does the building cease to be "market rate" and thus eligible for an abatement?

Posted on: 2019/1/9 0:31
 Top 


Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


So far I've heard lots of defense of the status quo and no solutions being offered. I propose a solution. It gets shot down. Nothing proposed in it's place. It's this 'it is what it is' mentality why we can't have nice things.

The system is at a breaking point.

Posted on: 2019/1/7 16:31
 Top 


Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
I pretty much universally support demand pricing for cars, but the whole point in the metro area is to get people NOT to use their cars. So punishing them for using PATH seems self-destructive. Even if the effort is to get people to shift schedules, it's still discouraging people from using transit.


The car isn't a viable choice. Driving into Manhattan is crazy, reserved for the likes of Yvonne. There is no (cheap) parking and the tunnels are near gridlocked. Transit is the only way to go and that will become even more obvious in 10 or 20 years. The thousands of apartments under construction in Journal Square, Harrison and Newark will be the breaking point for both PATH and the tunnels.

Posted on: 2019/1/7 16:26
 Top 


Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Enjoy the status-quo.

Posted on: 2019/1/6 1:25
 Top 


Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...
Home away from home
Home away from home


Before you laugh, there are six stations in NYC. Integration with NYC Transit would be a godsend.

Although MTA has it's problems, they look like a well-run Swiss organization compared to the Port Authority or NJ Transit.

My other ideal is much more radical... PATH should add a dollar or more surcharge for swipes during peak periods to reduce overcrowding. Maybe just from 8-9am and 5-6pm, with the extra revenue being used for service improvements... like direct to JSQ from 33rd during late nights and weekends. Let's face it, the overcrowding situation is at crisis levels. A fare increase is the only way to reduce overcrowding until PTC/CBTC and 10-car trains arrive. The problem is I have no confidence in the Port Authority as they will waste any extra revenue derived from PATH. The finances are already a blackhole.

I expect to be annihilated for suggesting a fare increase, but I would be interested to hear at least one another alternative to reduce overcrowding in the short term. I'll wait.

Posted on: 2019/1/5 17:42
 Top 


Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
PANYNJ sold the retail space to Westfield for $1.415 billion in 2013. PANYNJ does get extra payments if/when the mall revenue exceeds a certain threshold (I don?t know what that threshold is).

It may seem foolish for PANYNJ to sell it off, but given how many empty stores there still are, it may have been wise to let it go.


Definitely wise. I bet sales per sqft is shit compared to ultra high maintenance costs of the white marble.

Posted on: 2019/1/3 20:17
 Top 


Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)
Home away from home
Home away from home


The other thing all these articles miss is that the PATH spurs economic development. The $400 million a year subsidy is easily made up when you look at the economic impact to the state. Billions a year in new residential and commercial construction and high-income earners.

When there was talk of axing weekend and late night services, the developers were the most vocal in calls to the governor - both democrat and republican.

Posted on: 2019/1/3 3:41
 Top 


Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Shit article. Didn't delve deeper to discover mismanagement at PATH.

The $4 billion Occulus wasn't necessary and includes the cost of the mall. It has no benefit the commuters. The temporary PATH station was much more functional.

Posted on: 2019/1/3 3:04
 Top 


Re: rental pricing of 40+ jersey city luxury rental buildings
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

zmeyka wrote:
I toured a few apartments at Journal Squared last year and thought the units were on the small side for the price. Views and sunlight were great and I thought the building had potential. But online reviews seem to indicate a lot of problems with construction quality & management so I decided not to rent there.

Last year, they supposedly had only a handful of studios and 1 bedrooms available to show me. According to their website now, they have at least about a dozen 1 bedrooms available starting at around $2.2k, which is cheaper than I remember being quoted and quite a bit cheaper than similar buildings downtown. But they could be playing games by showing "net effective" prices online.


They building phase 2 at 75 floors next door, so I;m sure cousin Kushner is making money.

Posted on: 2018/12/24 23:51
 Top 


Re: Okay, so who here thinks the Katyn monument needs to go?
Home away from home
Home away from home


I'm definitely in the pro development camp but... I'm happy the Katyn monument is staying where it is.

Some developer is thinking that the monument interferes with their yuppified vision for the area. That's too damn bad. Welcome to Jersey City.

Posted on: 2018/12/23 4:20
 Top 


Re: rental pricing of 40+ jersey city luxury rental buildings
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

majiazaishi wrote:
https://www.jiemengjourney.com/jersey-city-luxury-rental/

* To order by multiple columns -- hold down SHIFT key & click on a column (added the clicked column as a secondary, tertiary etc ordering column).

* Enter multiple search terms in the "search" textbox, i.e. "Columbus 2b2b".

Resized Image


I just don't know how people afford those prices. The cheapest studio in Journal Square is $2050!

Posted on: 2018/12/2 15:13
 Top 


Re: Four JC Cops Indicted on Numerous Charges
Home away from home
Home away from home


wow

Posted on: 2018/11/29 2:16
 Top 


Re: Four JC Cops Indicted on Numerous Charges
Home away from home
Home away from home


wow

Posted on: 2018/11/29 2:16
 Top 


Re: Legal settlement: millions for JC, new home for PATH substation
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

K-Lo2 wrote:
Quote:
Maybe a fare increase will lead to less overcrowding...


That's sarcasm, right?


Yes. But it's also a fact. I don't care anymore.

Posted on: 2018/11/28 20:09
 Top 


Re: Legal settlement: millions for JC, new home for PATH substation
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

mastablasta wrote:
I'm sure the Port Authority won't be paying a dime to Jersey City. The riders of the PATH system will be footing the bill. I'm sure there's a fare increase to pay for this already in the works.


PATH is very affordable. Maybe a fare increase will lead to less overcrowding...

Posted on: 2018/11/28 19:35
 Top 


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


What a mess.

Posted on: 2018/11/28 1:10
 Top 


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
Is it any wonder why Amazon is bypassing New Jersey?
aren't taxes much higher in nyc than in jc or nj?


Give NJ some more time. We'll end up tops. And Amazon knows it.

Posted on: 2018/11/13 21:15
 Top 


Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Exactly right newbie!!

I doubt narco is a daily commuter because it's a horrible station for commuters. It looks nice if just visiting, but I can honestly say the temporary PATH station was much more functional. Someone with a disability should sue the Port Authoirty for ADA compliance. How many elevators and distance does it take to get from the train to the street, especially if bound to a wheelchair.

Posted on: 2018/11/9 13:41
 Top 


Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

mscottc wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

Not only should fares rise, but they should add a peak-hour premium to whatever is needed to reduce overcrowding and to encourage folks to go a half hour earlier or later. Unpopular opinion, but PATH is a fraction of the costs associated with driving.



Hell NO.... PATH is only 1/3 of my three zone commute. I first have to get to PATH, then PATH into the City, and then the NYC Subway to uptown Manhattan. I'm not the only one with a 3 zone commute. We don't need more highways clogging the the two tunnels and the GW Bridge into NYC. We need more public subsidies for mass transit to help alleviate traffic conditions all over the tri-state commuting area.


New Jersey is broke and taxes are already sky high. Were are we going to find additional subsidies? I hate it that no one is realistic when it comes to public finance. And to be honest, fares could triple on all three of your segments and I bet it will still be cheaper than driving when considering cost of tolls and parking in NYC. Plus it's going to be physically impossible to add any more cars to the tunnels, so I don't see that as a viable alternative either.

Quote:

And last, but water under the proverbial bridge, we should not have wasted billions on WTC PATH station. We PATH riders pay a premium for that debacle every day.


Agreed 1000% with you here - The Oculus was a terrible business decision $4 billion wasted for a shiity mall with poor egress. The port authority should have just sold the air rights for the site to the highest bidder and use the funds for trans-Hudson rail improvements. I wish NYC would bring the 7 line into New Jersey with a stop in Hudson County.

Posted on: 2018/11/8 9:45
 Top 


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
That particular abatement was negotiated years ago based on the market value. As the market increase, they actually paid more than conventional taxes. It really depends on the specific terms of the tax abatements. I can assure you, developers are not using those terms any longer. They prefer to use, "donation to affordable housing," to keep their tax rate low.


I'll take this as a admission that older abatements did contribute revenue to the city.

Posted on: 2018/11/4 19:13
 Top 


Re: Woman, 2-year-old boy shot inside JC apt
Home away from home
Home away from home


Who are the animals that did this. Anything short of life in prison for these scum would be a travesty.

Posted on: 2018/10/28 22:44
 Top 


Re: Menendez ahead by a wee bit!
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
I was in Quebec some time ago. At night I put on the local stations and finally found an English language news station. The conversation had to do with the Midwest in the US. Some politician who is also the son a famous politician (I believe Hubert Humphrey) got into some hot water. The Quebec newscast said this is unusual, the corrupt state is New Jersey in the US. I wished I had a recording of that statement. Anyone who votes for Menendez is proving those Canadians news men right.


Yvonne, of course they are right! How much more proof does one need? I almost always vote Democrat, but not in this case. I don't care who the Republican challenger is, they got my vote this time around. It's this type of BS, running Menendez instead of replacing him, that really pisses me off about the Democratic party. This crap has got to end.

Posted on: 2018/10/25 20:15
 Top 


Re: Blueberry picking around JC
Home away from home
Home away from home


I was going to post about the joys of picking chromium-filled blueberries within JC, but I'm happy to see this is for actual farms outside the city limits. Sounds fun!


Posted on: 2018/7/26 13:36
 Top 


Re: Lottery open for affordable units in Jersey City apartment building
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I think he misspoke or didn?t understand the question.


I considered that too, but I actually think he fully meant what was quoted. Supposedly, locally, the median income for a family of 4 is 94K. No way they could afford a 6K/mo rent but, then again, I fundamentally disagree that just because someone wants to live somewhere, they are entitled to do so.

I think people like Mr. Walsh actually do a disservice to the affordable housing concept by trying to expand its availability to what many would consider to be upper middle class residents.


Well, I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea. Right now, a lot of people associate affordable housing with low income Section 8.

Rents are high for everyone right now. If affordable housing can mean someone making a decent income can benefit, that may be a way to generate a larger community buy-in when these developments are proposed.

I would love for the market to get away from luxury developments and build more housing for the middle class. Unfortunately, the way our current zoning works, it's costly to go through the approval process and limits supply to a point where only luxury units makes the most economic sense. For example, if Jersey City could ever get around from changing the R1 zoning to allow 3 or 4 unit buildings, those units will be much more affordable than the luxury stuff being built on the waterfront.




Posted on: 2018/7/25 12:21
 Top 


Re: 2017 Reval ~ Property Inspections
Home away from home
Home away from home


On the topic of Fulop, I'm kinda pissed off One Journal Square remains a vacant plot of land collecting weed and garbage.


Posted on: 2018/7/22 17:30
 Top 



TopTop
« 1 2 3 4 (5) 6 7 8 ... 33 »






Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017