Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Interesting proposal: Subway to Seacaucus

I'm really not sure what qualifications the writer of this website, Subway to Secaucus, has to comment on rail projects, but they probably are more than mine. But it does get me thinking about some things.

One thing I can't help but notice is the sheer amount of money being spent on a few rail projects, all ringing in at billions of dollars:
  1. ($8B?) Billions of dollars to double the capacity of the commuter rail under the Hudson River (see Access to the Region's Core), primarily an NJ Transit project
  2. ($3B-$12B?) Billions of dollars to build a grand west side rail station to replace the long-lost Pennsylvania Station out of the Farley Post Office building (see Moynihan Station), I suppose primarily funded by the State of New York
  3. ($6B?) Billions for East Side Access, designed to connect the Long Island Rail Road to the east side of Manhattan via a new station under Grand Central Terminal (the LIRR isn't exactly compatible with Metro-North Rail Road's infrastructure, and the organizations squabble anyway)—his is also funded primarily by the State of New York
  4. The Second Avenue Subway (SAS), funded by the city, state, and feds
  5. The 7 Train extension, funded pretty much exclusively by the city
These projects are all more or less under way. I imagine the SAS makes a lot of sense, given the sheer volume of passengers on the Lexington Avenue lines (4/5/6 Trains). It may be unfortunate that this will only be a 2-track rather than 4-track line, but that will be a burden later. Part of the reason there might be such political will to build the SAS is that another of the projects above, East Side Access, is going to put a lot more pressure on the limited east side transportation infrastructure.

East Side Access can be explained by two factors: one is it's favorable to a powerful political demographic, and the other is that more jobs in midtown Manhattan are on the east side anyway. The way things work now is the LIRR whisks people west of where they actually work, forcing them to take an uncomfortable crosstown trip back. East Side Access should cut a significant amount of time off commuters' trips.

More to the point, our public transportation infrastructure follows commuter patterns set in the early 20th century. New York is in a sense very lucky that these patterns remain intact in 2008, but there is more to how people in the region live and work. New York may be bigger than it was in 1908, but Manhattan is smaller population-wise. Further, the once sparsely populated region is now quite densely populated. Somebody in downtown Brooklyn is less than two miles from Jersey City, but will have a hell of a time making that trip. Staten Islanders have one of the longest commutes in the country. Getting seamlessly from Queens to The Bronx? Fergetaboutit.

I think reasonable people can make a good case for the merits of each of the projects listed above, but I'm guessing in the net additional number of people who will be moved by those five projects is under a million daily—certainly that's the case if we discount the SAS and the estimated 500,000 riders that will use it daily. At the opposite extreme, we have Moynihan Station, which will move zero people and may cost the state $3B.

It would definitely be nice to see more emphasis on moving people, rather than building fancy projects. Unclogging the Lex and Queens Boulevard trunk lines might be achieved by additional feeder services into Midtown, rather than new trunk lines. This could have the effect of improving Manhattan crosstown service as well. Why Moynihan Station? A four- or six-track fare-controlled or proof-of-payment system* could load many trains for through service without being too fancy. Any commuter and intercity rail yards necessary could be on Long Island or well outside the city. Naturally some Amtrak trains will need to hang around to allow passengers to load, but that shouldn't be a show-stopper. This idea of NJT, Amtrak, and LIRR services all terminating in one place is very demanding of land.

Finally, a definite flaw in our region's transportation model is inter-agency bickering. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority of New York is itself a rather loosely-organized umbrella organization of agencies that don't like to cooperate, perhaps owing partly to separate corporate legacies. The Long Island Rail Road was part of the Pennsylvania Railroad (and many other predecessors before that) while Metro-North is the commuter successor of the New York Central. Naturally, the PRR and NY Central were bitter rivals. On top of that, the MTA and NJ Transit work very little together, and the Port Authority isn't all that interested in funding public transportation.

* proof-of-payment systems are popular in many places because turnstiles don't need to be maintained and they're not too labor-intensive. Fare inspections are random, with fines issued to cover operating losses by cheating.

No comments: