Today’s Headlines

  • With Work Slowly Moving Ahead at Amtrak’s Moynihan Station, Schumer Calls for More Funds (NYT)
  • Teachout: Then-Candidate Cuomo Did Nothing to Stop Christie From Cancelling ARC Tunnel (News)
  • News Backs Christie on ARC “Monstrosity,” Says Teachout “Has No Idea What She’s Talking About”
  • $4.9 Million Expansion in Bus Service Takes Effect in Five Boros Sunday (NewsDNA)
  • Driver Critically Injures Cyclist on Ocean Pkwy — Bklyn Daily Has Info on Helmet But Not Driver
  • TLC Releases Safety Honor Roll; Top Cabbie’s Own Son Was Hit by Driver Two Years Ago (WSJ, News)
  • Squadron and Riders Alliance Push MTA to Keep Free “Walking Transfer” From G to J/M (News)
  • Who Needs Regulation of the Taxi (App) Industry When This Is How Startups Behave? (Verge)
  • Combining Transportation and Housing Costs Is Good, But Not the Whole Story (CNU)
  • Cops In Bike Lanes: Glaring Hypocrisy Edition (Village Voice, NY1)
  • NYC Press Corps Doggedly Follows Up on Injuries Caused by Parks Dept. Driver (DNA, News)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Ian Turner

    I guess we found out what it takes to make a cab driver drive safely…

  • Bolwerk

    The NYDN acts like the Neanderthals on 4chan. Teachout “indicts” Cuomo? It was almost an aside. Teachout is right; Cuomo should have said something as a candidate in support of the tunnel, and she’s probably right that Christie should never have been allowed to use PA funds on the Pulaski Skyway.

  • Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then. The paper is essentially right; ARC was a good idea run down to terrible during the course of a decade. New Jersey rail advocates helped to get the project scuttled, and we don’t apologize for that, *even as* Gov. Christie did the predictable and went spending on roads.

    That doesn’t make Ms. Teachout “wrong,” per se; whether one believes in the (dubious) merits of ARC or not, one can reasonably ask why Gov. Cuomo was absent from any involvement.

  • Bolwerk

    My take is the tunnel makes lots of sense, but the station it was to serve does not. The tunnel should have gone to Penn. And if Christie fought for this, he would have saved billions while getting a useful project done.

  • Essentially concur. In fact, that was in the original plan, downgraded, and then degraded, by New Jersey Transit and its executive director at the time.

  • qrt145

    Isn’t Penn operating at something like 300% capacity now? 🙂

  • Bolwerk

    I don’t even know that it has a capacity problem. It has an operating problem.

    It certainly has plenty of capacity if the commuter railroads could play nice and run some trains through to each other’s territories. Even without more tunnels, I bet ~30 TPH could be squeezed through the existing tunnels if they did that.

  • qrt145

    Of course I made the number up. What I’ve read, and what fits my experience, is that maybe the tunnels are fine, but the station itself has trouble dealing with the number of people who go through it. The least one can say is that it is a most unpleasant train station…

  • HamTech87

    re: CNU piece. I don’t think the H + T article was criticizing the concept, just the way the Housing portion was arrived at.

  • Bolwerk

    Hmm, yeah, it’s a total dump. However, it probably would have less trouble dealing with the people if it moved commuters in and out more quickly. Conceptually, it may not deal with many more people than significantly smaller Union Square if you count transfers.

    For that matter, would it kill Amtrak to let people down to the platform 15m before a train arrives? Just about every other station on Earth allows that.

  • Jonathan

    The CNU writer is saying that because he doesn’t know anyone paying less than market rent, the figure is wrong. Not very persuasive.

  • lop

    15 minutes before a train arrives? For a decent chunk of the day another train is going to use the platform in that time.

  • Bolwerk

    10 then? 5? Just about anything is better than queuing up until the last possible second.

    (Doesn’t Amtrak have a few dedicated platforms anyway?)

  • lop

    Tracks 1-4 are NJTransit only, 5-12 are amtrak+NJTransit, 13-16 NJTransit+LIRR+Amtrak, 17-21 LIRR only.

    But the platforms generally serve two tracks. So even if no train pulls in in front of your amtrak train you might have an LIRR or NJTransit train served by the same platform, so 15 minutes before the train arrives on the platform might be tough. Something less than that would probably be doable though. Except I think part of the issue for them is they want to clear the platform of all people before letting anyone down to the train because of inane security concerns. If they let people down before the platform is clear then someone could get on the train after hoping off the LIRR or NJTransit train across the platform.

  • Bolwerk

    I dunno, you really think it matters that much? I mean, urban transit tolerates people waiting on the platforms for their respective trains, and presumably it can be much more crowded than Amtrak or even a commuter train.

    You’re right, it’s probably is inane security concerns. Do any other stations, besides Union (D.C.) and Penn, even in the USA have these waiting requirements?

  • lop

    Not sure. Don’t use Amtrak much. Those are the only two I hear people complain about though.

    If you have a thousand people getting off suburban rail do you want people milling about the platforms or heading down the stairs instead ofof waiting somewhere else ? There might be a legitimate issue there. Maybe you can add staircases to help.

  • Bolwerk

    Maybe, but that’s unlikely. What is Amtrak’s typical capacity? ~60 seats/car? Maybe six cars?

  • lop

    I had meant LIRR/NJTransit, Amtrak might have closer to 200 per train. Pedestrian circulation is a real problem at Penn. Maybe this is the best way for them to do it even without a security issue.

    On page 22 it lists platform clearance times. Some are pretty high. They could use some more staircases.

  • Bolwerk

    It’s crappy, but I’d think the platforms are wider and the train frequency per platform is significantly lower than busiest prewar BRT/IRT stations. So even that is probably at best a flawed excuse, if indeed it is the reason.