<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Making a 42nd Street Tramway a Reality for New York</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:58:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adirondacker12800</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-11207</link>
		<dc:creator>Adirondacker12800</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-11207</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;When will NJT extend to Grand Central – 2100?&lt;/em&gt;

I dunno, before the Second Ave Subway goes all the way downtown on Second Ave? :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>When will NJT extend to Grand Central – 2100?</em></p>
<p>I dunno, before the Second Ave Subway goes all the way downtown on Second Ave? :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-11194</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:36:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-11194</guid>
		<description>When will NJT extend to Grand Central - 2100?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When will NJT extend to Grand Central &#8211; 2100?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adirondacker12800</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-11190</link>
		<dc:creator>Adirondacker12800</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:02:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-11190</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;The M42 and M34 aren’t high-ridership routes&lt;/em&gt;

During the day it&#039;s frequently faster to walk than it is to take the bus. Do you think that might have a bit to do with the low ridership numbers? The M42 has ridership numbers similar to the streetcar system in New Orleans. The M34 has ridership numbers similar to the light rail in Cleveland. Midtown  Manhattan is a bit denser than either New Orleans or Cleveland, D&#039;ya think with an exclusive right of way it might a attract a few more riders than the current bus line that is as fast as walking? Even if what is on the exclusive right of way is a bus? 

&lt;em&gt;However, two-seat rides are almost as workable, and for the most important trip to convert to a one-seat ride, Penn-GCT,&lt;/em&gt;

Why is a two seat ride for people who aren&#039;t going between Grand Central and Penn Station  acceptable but people who already have a one seat ride between Penn Station and Grand Central, on the M4 bus, more worthy? 

There&#039;s more to life than getting suburban commuters crosstown - one seat ride from Grand Central to Penn Station isn&#039;t needed by most subway riders. You have noticed that the streetcar is part of larger plan to pedestrianize 42nd and 34th? Giving more space to pedestrians crowded on the sidewalks is one of the major goals.  

If someone desperately wants a one seat ride between Grand Central and Penn Station there&#039;s the M4 bus. Some of them won&#039;t need it once East Side Access opens, taking a train destined for Grand Central is better than a transfer, one seat of otherwise, after taking the train to Penn Station.  Changing from the train destined for Penn Station to one destined for Grand Central at Jamaica or Woodside is better than transferring to  a one seat ride at  Penn Station for Grand Central or vice versa.  When Metro North starts service to Penn Station on the Hudson and New Haven lines into Penn Station a one seat ride from Grand Central to Penn Station won&#039;t even be on suburbanites minds. Suburbanites are quite good at looking at schedules and getting on the right train. Or when NJ Transit extends to Grand Central there will be even less need for it  ... the only ones left out will be people on the Harlem Line. In the mean time they all have alternatives, the subway, the M4 bus, walking or even taking a cab ....though on a weekday taking a cab might be slower than walking.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>The M42 and M34 aren’t high-ridership routes</em></p>
<p>During the day it&#8217;s frequently faster to walk than it is to take the bus. Do you think that might have a bit to do with the low ridership numbers? The M42 has ridership numbers similar to the streetcar system in New Orleans. The M34 has ridership numbers similar to the light rail in Cleveland. Midtown  Manhattan is a bit denser than either New Orleans or Cleveland, D&#8217;ya think with an exclusive right of way it might a attract a few more riders than the current bus line that is as fast as walking? Even if what is on the exclusive right of way is a bus? </p>
<p><em>However, two-seat rides are almost as workable, and for the most important trip to convert to a one-seat ride, Penn-GCT,</em></p>
<p>Why is a two seat ride for people who aren&#8217;t going between Grand Central and Penn Station  acceptable but people who already have a one seat ride between Penn Station and Grand Central, on the M4 bus, more worthy? </p>
<p>There&#8217;s more to life than getting suburban commuters crosstown &#8211; one seat ride from Grand Central to Penn Station isn&#8217;t needed by most subway riders. You have noticed that the streetcar is part of larger plan to pedestrianize 42nd and 34th? Giving more space to pedestrians crowded on the sidewalks is one of the major goals.  </p>
<p>If someone desperately wants a one seat ride between Grand Central and Penn Station there&#8217;s the M4 bus. Some of them won&#8217;t need it once East Side Access opens, taking a train destined for Grand Central is better than a transfer, one seat of otherwise, after taking the train to Penn Station.  Changing from the train destined for Penn Station to one destined for Grand Central at Jamaica or Woodside is better than transferring to  a one seat ride at  Penn Station for Grand Central or vice versa.  When Metro North starts service to Penn Station on the Hudson and New Haven lines into Penn Station a one seat ride from Grand Central to Penn Station won&#8217;t even be on suburbanites minds. Suburbanites are quite good at looking at schedules and getting on the right train. Or when NJ Transit extends to Grand Central there will be even less need for it  &#8230; the only ones left out will be people on the Harlem Line. In the mean time they all have alternatives, the subway, the M4 bus, walking or even taking a cab &#8230;.though on a weekday taking a cab might be slower than walking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-11176</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:27:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-11176</guid>
		<description>Yes, it allows one-seat rides on those trips. However, two-seat rides are almost as workable, and for the most important trip to convert to a one-seat ride, Penn-GCT, those trams aren&#039;t going to be faster than walking. Those other trips are secondary - even for trips that are currently one-seat by crosstown bus, there just aren&#039;t enough passengers. The M42 and M34 aren&#039;t high-ridership routes, especially not when compared to the M86, M14, M15, the various buses using the 5th/Madison corridor, and the various buses using the 125th Street corridor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, it allows one-seat rides on those trips. However, two-seat rides are almost as workable, and for the most important trip to convert to a one-seat ride, Penn-GCT, those trams aren&#8217;t going to be faster than walking. Those other trips are secondary &#8211; even for trips that are currently one-seat by crosstown bus, there just aren&#8217;t enough passengers. The M42 and M34 aren&#8217;t high-ridership routes, especially not when compared to the M86, M14, M15, the various buses using the 5th/Madison corridor, and the various buses using the 125th Street corridor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adirondacker12800</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-11173</link>
		<dc:creator>Adirondacker12800</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:13:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-11173</guid>
		<description>Alon look at this way, instead of terminating and turning around at the river they are running through..... By running through the end of the line at the river It facilitates a lot of trips that aren&#039;t possible by subway or bus - UN to Penn Station or NYU Medical center to Times Square or Independence Plaza to Macy&#039;s or...Makes some of the NY Waterways buses unnecessary.   Even thought the loop is less than ideal for some trips, trains that are going faster than automobile traffic  ( and buses ) will be faster and easier than alternatives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alon look at this way, instead of terminating and turning around at the river they are running through&#8230;.. By running through the end of the line at the river It facilitates a lot of trips that aren&#8217;t possible by subway or bus &#8211; UN to Penn Station or NYU Medical center to Times Square or Independence Plaza to Macy&#8217;s or&#8230;Makes some of the NY Waterways buses unnecessary.   Even thought the loop is less than ideal for some trips, trains that are going faster than automobile traffic  ( and buses ) will be faster and easier than alternatives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-11026</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-11026</guid>
		<description>The Vision42 plan calls for a continuous loop, as far as I can tell, so it is relevant.

The most successful loops are those that function as circulators, connecting many radial lines. Freeway beltways allow cars to bypass congested downtown traffic; subway loops (e.g. Yamanote, Koltsevaya) allow riders to bypass congested central transfer stations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Vision42 plan calls for a continuous loop, as far as I can tell, so it is relevant.</p>
<p>The most successful loops are those that function as circulators, connecting many radial lines. Freeway beltways allow cars to bypass congested downtown traffic; subway loops (e.g. Yamanote, Koltsevaya) allow riders to bypass congested central transfer stations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John W</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-10979</link>
		<dc:creator>John W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:07:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-10979</guid>
		<description>In any event, the point about loops is a bit of a red herring. The article on humantransit that Alon linked to talks about the problems of loops that travel in a single direction (which would be a disaster here). The failings of that model don&#039;t apply to a two-track loop, where you can travel in either direction rather than having to go the long way round. If the loop wasn&#039;t closed (say, with turnarounds at the convention centre), then the problem of delays magnifying (as with London&#039;s Circle Line) wouldn&#039;t be an issue either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In any event, the point about loops is a bit of a red herring. The article on humantransit that Alon linked to talks about the problems of loops that travel in a single direction (which would be a disaster here). The failings of that model don&#8217;t apply to a two-track loop, where you can travel in either direction rather than having to go the long way round. If the loop wasn&#8217;t closed (say, with turnarounds at the convention centre), then the problem of delays magnifying (as with London&#8217;s Circle Line) wouldn&#8217;t be an issue either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AlexB</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-10962</link>
		<dc:creator>AlexB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-10962</guid>
		<description>Just because people don&#039;t travel in loops doesn&#039;t mean that the idea is bad for a transportation model.  When people refer to loops, I don&#039;t think they usually mean it literally.  The point is not that anyone will travel the entire thing, but that points are linked along the route.  In NY terms, a &quot;loop&quot; provides a well connected uptown/downtown and crosstown service.  Some of this country&#039;s most used sections of highways are urban loop routes that connect outlying areas of cities to each other.  Interstate 278 in NJ is a good example of this. The Van Wyck and GCP in Queens provides a similar function. 

Even though the routes don&#039;t run as loops, there are loops created by the linear routes of the NYC subway that effectively provide a part of this function; for example, the box created by the N/R/W, 7 and 4/5.  

Just because a 34th St and 42nd St loop can be described as a loop, doesn&#039;t mean the tram would run continuously.  Each route would run separately (I assume) and connect at the Hudson and East River ferry terminals, not unlike the bus routes operated by New York Waterways.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just because people don&#8217;t travel in loops doesn&#8217;t mean that the idea is bad for a transportation model.  When people refer to loops, I don&#8217;t think they usually mean it literally.  The point is not that anyone will travel the entire thing, but that points are linked along the route.  In NY terms, a &#8220;loop&#8221; provides a well connected uptown/downtown and crosstown service.  Some of this country&#8217;s most used sections of highways are urban loop routes that connect outlying areas of cities to each other.  Interstate 278 in NJ is a good example of this. The Van Wyck and GCP in Queens provides a similar function. </p>
<p>Even though the routes don&#8217;t run as loops, there are loops created by the linear routes of the NYC subway that effectively provide a part of this function; for example, the box created by the N/R/W, 7 and 4/5.  </p>
<p>Just because a 34th St and 42nd St loop can be described as a loop, doesn&#8217;t mean the tram would run continuously.  Each route would run separately (I assume) and connect at the Hudson and East River ferry terminals, not unlike the bus routes operated by New York Waterways.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jon</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-10930</link>
		<dc:creator>jon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:22:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-10930</guid>
		<description>I know everything costs more in NYC but wow, 200 mill a mile for surface?!?!?

doesnt 34th make more sense for LRT than 42nd which already has the 7 and the shuttle plus the u/c 7 extension? 34th is right by penn station and which means a crosstown line would be useful on 34th. i dont understand this fixation with this 30 year old idea for a crosstown LRT line specifically on 42nd.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know everything costs more in NYC but wow, 200 mill a mile for surface?!?!?</p>
<p>doesnt 34th make more sense for LRT than 42nd which already has the 7 and the shuttle plus the u/c 7 extension? 34th is right by penn station and which means a crosstown line would be useful on 34th. i dont understand this fixation with this 30 year old idea for a crosstown LRT line specifically on 42nd.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/14/making-a-42nd-street-tramway-a-reality-for-new-york/#comment-10919</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:21:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4282#comment-10919</guid>
		<description>Woody: no, even the residential sections of Midtown don&#039;t have big asthma problems - the figures are given in cases per 1,000 residents. The most polluted parts of the city are, as far as I&#039;ve read, East Harlem and Long Island City, in that order.

The reason SBS has a bad reputation isn&#039;t that it&#039;s in the Bronx; it&#039;s that it&#039;s not real BRT, and doesn&#039;t function well as a subway connector. I haven&#039;t seen anyone start to argue that it&#039;s only for poor people after the Bronx line opened - on the contrary, plans for 1st/125th/2nd SBS are still on track. Nor have I seen any good argument that disinvesting in a poor neighborhood now will improve it later; on the contrary, restricting rail projects to rich areas is what gets transit agencies slapped with civil rights lawsuits every time they try to expand the rail system.

If you want a demonstration project, go to Jersey City. I know a lot of New Yorkers have a mental block on Jersey, and the HBLR was more expensive than it had to be, but it&#039;s at least well-patronized. It feeds rapid transit stations, it was built to minimize new construction, and it uses modern vehicles without on-board payment. In short, it&#039;s everything you&#039;d want from light rail. A second demonstration project for three times the cost of the first would if anything cool down support for more streetcars.

If you want is to connect 34th and 42nd for stabling reasons, then there&#039;s no need to do it on 1st or 12th, much less both. Park, which would allow direct Penn-GCT service, is much more natural.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Woody: no, even the residential sections of Midtown don&#8217;t have big asthma problems &#8211; the figures are given in cases per 1,000 residents. The most polluted parts of the city are, as far as I&#8217;ve read, East Harlem and Long Island City, in that order.</p>
<p>The reason SBS has a bad reputation isn&#8217;t that it&#8217;s in the Bronx; it&#8217;s that it&#8217;s not real BRT, and doesn&#8217;t function well as a subway connector. I haven&#8217;t seen anyone start to argue that it&#8217;s only for poor people after the Bronx line opened &#8211; on the contrary, plans for 1st/125th/2nd SBS are still on track. Nor have I seen any good argument that disinvesting in a poor neighborhood now will improve it later; on the contrary, restricting rail projects to rich areas is what gets transit agencies slapped with civil rights lawsuits every time they try to expand the rail system.</p>
<p>If you want a demonstration project, go to Jersey City. I know a lot of New Yorkers have a mental block on Jersey, and the HBLR was more expensive than it had to be, but it&#8217;s at least well-patronized. It feeds rapid transit stations, it was built to minimize new construction, and it uses modern vehicles without on-board payment. In short, it&#8217;s everything you&#8217;d want from light rail. A second demonstration project for three times the cost of the first would if anything cool down support for more streetcars.</p>
<p>If you want is to connect 34th and 42nd for stabling reasons, then there&#8217;s no need to do it on 1st or 12th, much less both. Park, which would allow direct Penn-GCT service, is much more natural.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

