Today’s Headlines

  • Cuomo: Port Authority to Spend $70 Million Studying Cross-Harbor Freight Rail (News, Post)
  • Bronx CB 4 Member Suggests Replacing Yankee Stadium Garages With Mixed-Income Housing (Post)
  • The Dream of Burying the Gowanus Is Alive in Brooklyn (Crain’s)
  • 2 Inches of Rain Turned NYC Roads Into Lagoons (NYT, Patch), Swamped Oculus and Penn Station (News)
  • Four Lines Affected By Yesterday’s Unexpected Subway Chaos (Gothamist)
  • Cyclists Constantly Have to Dodge Construction Vehicles and Cars Parked in Kent Ave Bike Lane (DNA)
  • SUV Driver Critically Injures 89-Year-Old Man in Howard Beach (Post, QNS)
  • Hit-and-Run Truck Driver Seriously Injures Cyclist in Bed-Stuy (Gothamist)
  • Driver Strikes, Hospitalizes Woman in Mill Basin (News12)
  • Bike Part Thieves + Crummy Sanitation Rules = Junk Bike Build-Up in Bay Ridge (Bklyn Paper)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Larry Littlefield

    So who is getting the $70 million to slap a new date on this?

  • HamTech87

    Anyone have photos of Grand Central Terminal during the rainstorm? It would be nice to compare GCT with Oculus and NYP, if only to serve as another warning not to knock down good, old stuff.

  • bolwerk

    I wouldn’t worry too much about the highways, since trucks need to use the street system anyway. At least Maspeth is near several highways. Right now most trucks are squeezing over the GWB. With the CHT they could travel radially across the five boroughs from a few different distribution points .

    The pissers: it may retard the prospects for Triborough RX. It also seems overly optimistic about increasing rail modal share?

  • Larry Littlefield

    “Gov. Cuomo called the Penn Station situation “intolerable and unconscionable.” “This was a station that needed repair for many, many years,” he added. “The repairs are deferred, the maintenance is deferred and now you have a nightmare on your hands.”

    Although he only became Governor in 2011, it really infuriates me when a member of his generation says something like this. How about something a little more truthful.

    “The situation at Penn Station is wonderful. We benefitted from lower taxes and higher spending on other things for decades, and now we are heading for Florida or the grave and leaving the generations to follow with the S__T they deserve.”

  • Larry Littlefield

    It doesn’t increase rail mode share. It shifts the transfer point from rail to truck for east of Hudson destinations to the other side of the Harbor.

    With some investment, if the interstates are tolled as the federal government goes broke, and if state stopped collecting property taxes on railroad rights of way, I’d expect rail modal share to increase.

    But that would also require much more investment in Upstate NY, double tracking some lines and adding additional tracks for inter-modal to pass by slower bulk freight.

  • Vooch

    it shifts $70 million to some cronies

    which might be the goal

  • bolwerk

    It increases the rail’s modal share of ton-miles by bringing many wholesale goods within a literal last mile of their distribution centers in places like Maspeth. The retail side was still always going to be truck.

  • HamTech87

    Doesn’t it also rule out Triboro RX?

  • bolwerk

    I’m not sure, but I mentioned the possibility above.

  • djx


  • Larry Littlefield

    The Environmental Impact Statement for the third track of the LIRR Mainline is complete.

    Can someone explain why a one-track expansion of an existing transit line within the same right of way requires the time, cost and litigation target of an EIS. While a two- to four-lane expansion of the Staten Island Expressway does not?

    It took a year. I’m looking around trying to figure out which consultant got the contract.

    That’s pretty damn disgraceful, and indicative of Generation Greed-era “environmentalism.”

  • reasonableexplanation

    Wait a minute, wasn’t the SIE 3 lanes each way, and they just added an HOV lane? Or was the 2-4 expansion done previously at some point?

  • Larry Littlefield

    They added two additional “auxiliary lanes” and, more connections to the service roads which are high speed roads with every few lights/intersections. It’s pretty much 5 each way all the way to Victory Boulevard.

    And I noted I don’t mind that so much. I mind all the extra “process” for bike lanes and transit improvements.

    No doubt they rolled some of the planning into the LIRR EIS that would have been required anyway, but still.

    I expect we’ll see more “auxiliary lanes” on the Van Wyck. So why couldn’t the LIRR project have been an “auxiliary track?”

  • ohnonononono

    To be fair, leaks in GCT are not unheard of… although they fall from drop-ceilinged areas on the side passageways, which are obviously not original.