Christie kiled the ARC tunnel

[George Harris]

So we shouldn't have thru service , every other Major Regional Rail system in the world does and NYC doesn't?

Not true, and not even close.

 

[TVRM610]

You don't think the opening post was cut back far more than is necessary to avoid copyright complications? Not every infraction requires a sledge hammer to correct.

The OP quoted the ENTIRE article. That is against copyright rules and the rules of this forum.

And you deleted the ENTIRE article sans links, completely neutering the opening post. Sometimes it's better to use a scalpel instead of machete.

I'd like to agree with this... Its seems ridiculous to delete the article without providing a link or something. Seems like someone is power hungry?

 

[Nexis4Jersey]

So we shouldn't have thru service , every other Major Regional Rail system in the world does and NYC doesn't?

Not true, and not even close.

Majority of systems do.......except a few.....I mean't cities with huge Regional rail systems.....

 

[sechs]

Chicago and Los Angeles come to mind. LAUS is a stub-end station. Although it has a through track, CUS is also a stub-end station; I believe that all of the other downtown stations are end-of-the-line.

 

[jis]

All I can say is it is easy to draw lines on maps. And just drawing a bunch of lines on a map does not make it a plan

So we shouldn't have thru service , every other Major Regional Rail system in the world does and NYC doesn't? Thats absurd and stupid to think like that , we need more Rail lines through Manhattan the system needs to be freeded up some more.

Before you shoot off please read my message carefully one more time. I stated no position regarding the lines drawn on the map. All that I said is just drawing lines on a map does not costitute a plan. Minimally at least some idea of how much it will cost and where the money will come from is a necessary element of a plan.

On the matter of through running, some through running makes sense. But a position that claims that everything must be through run is equally as absurd and dogmatic as no through running. Secondly, every city is unique in it's pattern of traffic flows. Just because through running works on a particular route in one city does say much at all about whether such will work in another city. So "every city has it" ( even though itself an untrue statement) is not a valid argument to justify such all by iself for a city that does not.

 

[Ryan]

Chicago and Los Angeles come to mind. LAUS is a stub-end station. Although it has a through track, CUS is also a stub-end station; I believe that all of the other downtown stations are end-of-the-line.

Even though may Amtrak trains run through WAS, neither MARC nor VRE provide through service.

So, systems that don't provide run through service:

MARC

VRE

Metrolink

Metra

Systems that do:

???

 

[Eric S]

So, systems that don't provide run through service:

MARC

VRE

Metrolink

Metra

Systems that do:

???

Systems that do: SEPTA. Beyond that, though, I'm at a loss to think of one in the USA or Canada.

 

[AlanB]

So, systems that don't provide run through service:

MARC

VRE

Metrolink

Metra

Systems that do:

???

Systems that do: SEPTA. Beyond that, though, I'm at a loss to think of one in the USA or Canada.

Actually one has to be careful about saying that MARC doesn't provide run through service. It is correct to make that claim in DC, but in Baltimore MARC does indeed provide run through service.

Also, while I'm uncertain if it's possible to actually buy a "run through" ticket, technically Seattle's Sounder does run through.

 

[jis]

Actually one has to be careful about saying that MARC doesn't provide run through service. It is correct to make that claim in DC, but in Baltimore MARC does indeed provide run through service.

Also, while I'm uncertain if it's possible to actually buy a "run through" ticket, technically Seattle's Sounder does run through.

I think the situation in US is partly because there is an attitude that local railroad is for commuters who travel into the city to work and out again to get back home.

In other countries, irrespective of whether there is run through or not, the general attitude is that local trains are suburban trains that enable people to go from one place to another, generally around the city and is not primarily focused on getting to a job in the city center (though many do use it for that too).

That attitude produces timetables that look very different in nature even when there is no run through, and wherever possible opportunities for run through are exploited much more readily, instead of having endless arguments about whether there will be enough riders riding through, which is what we spend all our energy in, in this country.

 

[Trogdor]

Also, while I'm uncertain if it's possible to actually buy a "run through" ticket, technically Seattle's Sounder does run through.

Sounder has two routes which happen to approach Seattle from different directions, but there's only one trip (southbound in the AM, northbound in the PM) where it would even be possible for a passenger to ride from south of Seattle to north of there. I don't know if the equipment even runs through, but I doubt it.

So, if that's a definition of run-through, then you add plenty more systems in the US. Metrolink, you can go "through" LA, Metra can take you "through" Chicago. Heck, if you count different carriers (and why should buying tickets on two different carriers count any different from two tickets on one carrier), you can go "through" New York on commuter rail. Each of those systems mentioned offer many more through-riding opportunities than Sounder does.

Similar to your MARC example, CalTrain does run some trips "through" San Jose.

 

[jis]

Usually in these discussions on run through, the term is used to refer to single seat ride across a main terminal. For example, many SEPTA trains in Philly run through center city. In Paris all RER lines except E run through the center city (Gare du Nord for B, D, Gare de Lyon for A, D, Gare Austerlitz for C), in Tokyo the Sobu - Yokosuka line from say Narita to Kurihama via Tokyo Central, Shinagawa and Yokohama). In addition of course there are oodles of terminating service too in each of those cases.

Strictly speaking then Newark is an example where everything (almost) runs through. Only trains that don't are the RVL trains. Whereas New York Penn, none of the commuter service runs through, only Amtrak does.

 

[jim hudson]

Help needed from you Urban road warriors since it's been awhile since I was in the NE/CHI/LAon a regular basis! IIRC the GO Train system in Toronto is run through and wouldnt the Metro in STL, where we just returned from the Gathering and rode end to end, be considered run through? :unsure: Jim

 

[Eric S]

Help needed from you Urban road warriors since it's been awhile since I was in the NE/CHI/LAon a regular basis! IIRC the GO Train system in Toronto is run through and wouldnt the Metro in STL, where we just returned from the Gathering and rode end to end, be considered run through?

Jim

I suppose GO Transit's 2 Lakefront lines in Toronto could be considered (and may be operated?) as one run-through line. However, the other GO Transit lines are not.

And MetroLink in St. Louis is a light rail line/system, whereas I believe the original question dealt with commuter/regional rail systems.

 

[MattW]

TRE At the Fort Worth station is a run through, if I recall correctly, there's one stop west of FTW, the T&P Station, but I can't remember if that's a stop for every trip or not or if that even counts.

Railrunner also offers service from Belen straight through to Santa Fe.

 

[Nexis4Jersey]

The Sounder

Rail Runner

Front Runner

Septa

Go Transit

Trinity Railway Express

Metrolink

Caltrain

So why not NYC? There are alot of Reverse commuters going into Jersey form LI or CT or visa versa.....

 

[jis]

So why not NYC? There are alot of Reverse commuters going into Jersey form LI or CT or visa versa.....

Any citation for what the numbers are?

Also, as a first step, if the numbers justify, through running can be instituted on existing infrastructure without worrying about expensive infrastructure expansion.

Currently the problem faced in the New York area is insufficient operating funds. There is no point in building more infrastructure if we have no plan on how to fund operations. Indeed, I think it is unlikely that any significant new service in the New York area will get added through or otherwise until a stable source of funding for operations is identified and put into place. No one either in NJ or NY has been addressing this specific issue, and have been just winging year to year for now.

 

[AlanB]

So why not NYC? There are alot of Reverse commuters going into Jersey form LI or CT or visa versa.....

Any citation for what the numbers are?

Also, as a first step, if the numbers justify, through running can be instituted on existing infrastructure without worrying about expensive infrastructure expansion.

Currently the problem faced in the New York area is insufficient operating funds. There is no point in building more infrastructure if we have no plan on how to fund operations. Indeed, I think it is unlikely that any significant new service in the New York area will get added through or otherwise until a stable source of funding for operations is identified and put into place. No one either in NJ or NY has been addressing this specific issue, and have been just winging year to year for now.

In NY it's actually even worse. The state hasn't increased the level of funding for the MTA is over 10 years now IIRC. What hasn't increased in price in 10 years? :unsure: How they expect the same amount of money to do the same job is beyond me.

 

[Trogdor]

The Sounder

Rail Runner

Front Runner

Septa

Go Transit

Trinity Railway Express

Metrolink

Caltrain

So why not NYC? There are alot of Reverse commuters going into Jersey form LI or CT or visa versa.....

What are you talking about, here? As mentioned, Metrolink and Sounder do *not* offer through service through their main cities. Metrolink offers connecting service (which you can also do in NYC). Sounder offers one connection opportunity per day.

CalTrain only offers service through San Jose (and it is certainly not "reverse commute" service, as the trains to Gilroy are peak direction, peak period only), because the main "destination" on the route is San Francisco. That is no different than NJT offering service through Newark because the main destination for its service is New York. I thought that was made fairly clear in previous posts. You seem to be intentionally choosing to ignore facts inconvenient to your argument.

Further, I think it's a huge stretch to say that TRE really counts in this case because even though it does operate "through" the main downtown station in Forth Worth, it travels less than a mile to its next (and final) stop (which, IIRC, serves mainly as a Park & Ride lot). In my opinion, that hardly counts as a significant through-riding opportunity. Passengers who have jobs any distance west of downtown Forth Worth are no better served by the T&P stop than they are the main intermodal stop.

So, that cuts your list of systems with true "through-running" service in half. Granted, passengers in New York still have to make the transfer (and change operators in New York), but NY is one of the few places where doing so is not that much of an inconvenience (depending on where your origin and destination are) given the amount of service provided.

Personally, I'd much rather have the NYC level of service (even with a Penn Station transfer) than to deal with the transit "service" offered in places like Fort Worth, Salt Lake City, etc.

 

[Eric S]

The Sounder

Rail Runner

Front Runner

Septa

Go Transit

Trinity Railway Express

Metrolink

Caltrain

Of those, SEPTA, GO Transit (only on one line), RailRunner, and Front Runner (not yet, but planned) are the only ones that offer through-routed service through the major downtown/central city upon which their service is focused. And only SEPTA and GO Transit are really sizable commuter/regional rail systems somewhat comparable to New York area systems.

Of the large commuter/regional rail systems/networks in the US & Canada, only SEPTA offers anything like what you are suggesting, so New York is hardly unique in not having through-routed service.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

First, in the odd event that somebody thought I might be this Nexis dude, I'm not.

20 years of planning(even if its bad planning), and fat boy sends it down the drain.

maybe he does not realize he is screwing middle class, it takes jobs to pay taxes.

It takes transportation to get to these jobs.

If project cost is 8.7 now no matter how you slice it it will be 10.8 when restarted after fat boy is gone.

Of course he realizes who he's screwing. Fat boy is a rich, stupid, jerkish, fool who thinks it is more important to support his campaign contributors than to support the people that voted him in to office. Fortunately, though it will take 4 years, what the voters giveth, the voters can taketh away.

That being said, though I am sad that rational thought never played through, we're better off killing this misbegotten silliness then building it. Killing it increases the impetus for construction of a through-traffic tunnel connecting to either Grand Central or Penn Station allowing Amtrak to use it and allowing for later expansion. Building this tunnel as planned with 34th street would have left us stuck with it, and without money for Amtrak, FRA, or somebody else with sense, to supplement the current tunnels.

I'm not glad its gone. I have mixed feelings.

The Sounder

Rail Runner

Front Runner

Septa

Go Transit

Trinity Railway Express

Metrolink

Caltrain

So why not NYC? There are alot of Reverse commuters going into Jersey form LI or CT or visa versa.....

First of all, I don't know many reverse commuters. I am heavily involved in this state's rail advocacy group, and we generally don't talk about reverse commuters, even. People moving through NJ, yes, but not reverse commuters.

That being said, why not NY? Do you enjoy ignoring the obvious? In the New York Metro Area, we have not one, not two, but three major agencies handling commuter mass transit- NY's Metropolitan Transportation Authority, NJ's New Jersey Transit, and the joint Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

Beyond that, MTA consists of two almost independently operated commuter railroads, and two rapid transit railroads (NYC Subway, SIRR). We're not even talking bus services, here.

So in total, we have four independent state organizations (NJT, PATH, MNCR, LIRR) that operate rail service across borders of four states (NY, NJ, PA, CT) plus a pair of rapid mass transit systems (SIRR, NY Subway). Six organizations, all with their own fiefdoms, egos, budgets, capital expenditures, and planning departments. And in the middle of all this, owner of a good portion of the infrastructure, Amtrak.

And you... want them to work together? Smoothly? Sharing equipment? Personnel? Stations? Are you CRAZY?!?!

 

[amtrakwolverine]

Some more news on this

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — Gov. Chris Christie said he'll consider restarting a stalled New Jersey-New York rail tunnel if someone else helps pick up the tab. Otherwise, he said, he's comfortable walking away from the $9 billion project.

http://portal.wowway.net/news/read.php?id=18210973&ps=1011&srce=news_class&action=1&lang=en&_LT=UNLC_USNWU00L1_UNEWS

 

[jis]

Translation, if the feds (or NY or Warren Buffett) promise to cover all cost overruns that NJ can come up with then we will build the tunnel otherwise we will blame the feds (and anyone else that we can think of) for our (NJ's) inability to find the necessary local funds to build the tunnel.

 

[TVRM610]

That being said, though I am sad that rational thought never played through, we're better off killing this misbegotten silliness then building it. Killing it increases the impetus for construction of a through-traffic tunnel connecting to either Grand Central or Penn Station allowing Amtrak to use it and allowing for later expansion. Building this tunnel as planned with 34th street would have left us stuck with it, and without money for Amtrak, FRA, or somebody else with sense, to supplement the current tunnels.

I'm not glad its gone. I have mixed feelings.

I completely agree GML. This project was so flawed in its design I'm personally glad it's gotten killed. It really never made any sense to me. While Christie killed it for the wrong reasons in my book, I'm still hoping the project is completely dead and they can go back to the drawing board and come up with some less pricey solutions.

 

[jis]

I completely agree GML. This project was so flawed in its design I'm personally glad it's gotten killed. It really never made any sense to me. While Christie killed it for the wrong reasons in my book, I'm still hoping the project is completely dead and they can go back to the drawing board and come up with some less pricey solutions.

I doubt that the overall price of anything that solves the capacity problems and meets the original goals of ARC as spelled out in the original scoping document will be any less. But I do believe that alternate plans more aligned with at least what was Alternative S and a somewhat pricier Alternative G would certainly give more bang for the buck, i.e. better ROI. Also there may be a better way to stage the construction over a period of time thus keeping the price per year within manageable levels.

 

[DET63]

ARC Tunnel project cancellation a matter of dollars and cents: NJ governor

ARC Tunnel: Christie on Wednesday permanently scrapped a $9 billion-plus rail tunnel connecting his state and New York City, a decision that cements his reputation as a cost-cutter and comes at the expense of commuters who endure frequent delays.
TRENTON, N.J.

Gov. Chris Christie says it was all about dollars and cents, but his critics say it was all about politics.

 

Christie on Wednesday permanently scrapped a $9 billion-plus rail tunnel connecting his state and New York City, a decision that cements his reputation as a cost-cutter and comes at the expense of commuters who endure frequent delays.

 

He said he was sticking by a decision made earlier this month to kill the nation's biggest public works project because of runaway costs. He rejected a variety of financial proposals offered by the federal government to salvage the tunnel under the Hudson River, saying none fully relieved New Jersey of responsibility for overruns.