Discussion relating to the past and present operations of the NYC Subway, PATH, and Staten Island Railway (SIRT).

Moderator: GirlOnTheTrain

  • 425 posts
  • 1
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 29
  by FP10
 
Honestly, from a commuters perspective from NJ into Manhattan, a 7 extension is a lot more convenient than gateway, even if gateway theoretically enabled every NJ Transit consist to run into Penn Station. Penn is crowded, the subway trains that run into it are at capacity since its midtown, and its a cramped, long walk from the CR platforms to 7th or 8th ave.

With the 7, you can get off your train or bus at the relatively uncrowded Secaucus Junction, walk through well organized and less ratlikle station complex, and get on an empty crosstown train that will bring you to any line. And there's always the potential to extend it to the Meadowlands. If the bus terminal were beefed up close to Port Authority levels, it would also be a great transit node for those connections as well.

There is no reason the two projects need to be mutually exclusive. They both serve different demographics of travelers. Gateway is vital for Amtrak and NJT customers whos destination are train connections at Penn, or Midtown. The 7 extension is more useful to those travelling from right across the Hudson and NJT customers who are transferring to the subway and would enjoy an empty seat.

If it came to one or the other, Gateway is the clear winner. But both would compliment each other nicely and vastly improve the cross-hudson commuters life.

My question is, if the 7 were extended, would it include a stop or two in Jersey before Secaucus, or would it be too complicated to build below the palisades?
  by Greg Moore
 
Agreed. Just as Gateway wouldn't eliminate the need for the PATH trains.

(Keep in mind this is far from the first time subway extensions to NJ have been proposed.)
Last edited by Jeff Smith on Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Remove nesting quote from immediately preceding quote (indexing)
  by Thomas
 
But, HOW would the Seven to Secaucus really reduce crowding between Trenton and Secaucus and or Summit and Secaucus? (The answer is that it would not).

Gateway does a sterling job of enabling additional trains to come from far away suburbs to get--and meet--future capacity demands into Midtown, Manhattan. Seven to Secaucus is very good for Midtown to Bergen County--but Gateway is a much better use of taxpayers money!
Last edited by Jeff Smith on Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:20 pm, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Remove nesting quote from immediately preceding quote (indexing)
  by lirr42
 
You can add capacity at Secaucus and turn trains from Summit, Dover, Long Branch, Trenton, etc., since people will be transferring to the subway in large numbers. Adding surface capacity to Secauus is a lot cheaper and easier than adding two new tunnels under the river (the 7 to SEC isn't removing that cost, but lessening it and spreading it around more)
  by FRN9
 
FP10 wrote:Honestly, from a commuters perspective from NJ into Manhattan, a 7 extension is a lot more convenient than gateway, even if gateway theoretically enabled every NJ Transit consist to run into Penn Station. Penn is crowded, the subway trains that run into it are at capacity since its midtown, and its a cramped, long walk from the CR platforms to 7th or 8th ave.

With the 7, you can get off your train or bus at the relatively uncrowded Secaucus Junction, walk through well organized and less ratlikle station complex, and get on an empty crosstown train that will bring you to any line. And there's always the potential to extend it to the Meadowlands. If the bus terminal were beefed up close to Port Authority levels, it would also be a great transit node for those connections as well.

There is no reason the two projects need to be mutually exclusive. They both serve different demographics of travelers. Gateway is vital for Amtrak and NJT customers whos destination are train connections at Penn, or Midtown. The 7 extension is more useful to those travelling from right across the Hudson and NJT customers who are transferring to the subway and would enjoy an empty seat.

If it came to one or the other, Gateway is the clear winner. But both would compliment each other nicely and vastly improve the cross-hudson commuters life.

My question is, if the 7 were extended, would it include a stop or two in Jersey before Secaucus, or would it be too complicated to build below the palisades?
Here's one point that you neglected: If the bus terminal at Secaucus Junction could be built up enough, then the Port Authority could be temporarily taken out of service and replaced with a much taller building, with busses still in it, but with less capacity. The financial benefit from this development could possibly pay for much of the 7 train extension cost.
  by jlr3266
 
People are clamoring for a one-seat ride, and now they are going to jump at the option of getting off at Secaucus to ride a subway car?
  by Tommy Meehan
 
FRN9 wrote:Here's one point that you neglected: If the bus terminal at Secaucus Junction could be built up enough, then the Port Authority could be temporarily taken out of service and replaced with a much taller building, with busses still in it, but with less capacity. The financial benefit from this development could possibly pay for much of the 7 train extension cost.
I honestly don't see that happening. The PABT handles close to 200,000 riders per day and there would be no way to accommodate them if the terminal was shutdown even temporarily. Instead there are longstanding plans to sell the air rights over the terminal and there have been a couple of proposals. The latest one, which involved a 35-story building, fell through when the foreign investor pulled out.

jlr3266 wrote:People are clamoring for a one-seat ride, and now they are going to jump at the option of getting off at Secaucus to ride a subway car?
Most riders have to take transit when they get to Penn Station. But as was linked earlier, the studies estimate the major market for this would be NJ Transit bus riders not NJ Transit rail riders. Don't forget there is a very large commuting population within a ten mile radius of Secaucus and most use buses not trains.

However, Mayor Bloomberg is gone and as far as I know his successor has shown very little interest in this project. I don't see it going much further in the near future. That's too bad because I agree, this would probably be a valuable addition to the region's transit network.
  by Thomas
 
Do you really believe that Seven To Secaucus is actually more valuable and would be a better investment than Gateway?

The reason why I ask is because Gateway would enable more trains to come from high demand areas such as Princeton. But, in contrast, with Seven to Secaucus, this is more of Bergen County to/from East Midtown, Manhattan. If Gateway does not get built, then how do we meet future travel demands between Trenton and Manhattan?
Last edited by Jeff Smith on Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:22 pm, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Remove nesting quote from immediately preceding quote (indexing)
  by Adirondacker
 
FRN9 wrote: The financial benefit from this development could possibly pay for much of the 7 train extension cost.
And some decides to plop a 600 story office building on the land for free. Not to mention if you close down the Port Authority Bus Terminal the diverted passengers use up all the capacity you just built.
  by Thomas
 
Thus, what is the chance that 7 to NJ/Secaucus happens instead of Gateway?
  by mtuandrew
 
Thomas wrote:Thus, what is the chance that 7 to NJ/Secaucus happens instead of Gateway?
I think you answered your own question:
Thomas wrote:Do you really believe that Seven To Secaucus is actually more valuable and would be a better investment than Gateway?

The reason why I ask is because Gateway would enable more trains to come from high demand areas such as Princeton. But, in contrast, with Seven to Secaucus, this is more of Bergen County to/from East Midtown, Manhattan. If Gateway does not get built, then how do we meet future travel demands between Trenton and Manhattan?
It's unlikely that you'll get a more clear answer than you just gave yourself.
  by lirr42
 
If the (7) is built to Secaucus, not every train will have to go to New York, so extra trans-hudson capacity would not be needed. Instead of sending 12 trains from Trenton to New York, you can send 6 to New York and 6 to Secaucus. Then you have 6 free slots in the North River Tunnels for other trains.
  by FP10
 
Anyone have rough numbers on how many NJ commuters ultimate destination is the subway vs midtown? That would clarify things a bit.
  by Thomas
 
lirr42 wrote:If the (7) is built to Secaucus, not every train will have to go to New York, so extra trans-hudson capacity would not be needed. Instead of sending 12 trains from Trenton to New York, you can send 6 to New York and 6 to Secaucus. Then you have 6 free slots in the North River Tunnels for other trains.
I still doubt that SO MANY people will be willing to get of a NJ Transit train in Secaucus to transfer to the Seven Train to Midtown.

Gateway is better!!
  by MattW
 
What is your reasoning for this? I'm not saying it's not a valid conclusion (I do not have the data nor experience to state such) but I would like to know how you arrived at this conclusion.
Last edited by Jeff Smith on Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:23 pm, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Remove nesting quote from immediately preceding quote (indexing)
  • 1
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 29