It's not even a train line, it's a light rail which kills me. That, is a fair negative.

Oh, I mean how would they get a New Haven line to Queens? Tunnel? Would it be possible (besides the costs)?

It does work long term? Extra lanes doesn't do much, no, but more roadways/bridges have shown to reduce traffic, depending on where traffic really wants to go. Adding more lanes didn't do much because everyone's going that same way. Add another road, you'll have less people going that way. I've played Cities Skylines (which doesn't mean much), but adding more lanes does change a bit, but definitely not enough at all. For example, have one highway in a city for people to get in and out. You'll get traffic.

Adding a lane won't change anything because it will just allow more cars to fill in, but still traffic. Add another highway on the city's border going a bit of a different direction of that highway, but still having a similar route, more cars that are closer to that roadway, or people living near said roadway, are more likely to go on that route, reducing traffic on the other highway.

Say that you live on LI, now you have to drive all the way down through NYC, to get to Connecticut, instead of simply just going to Connecticut. Add an extra lane on the bridges, it won't change much, you're still going to add on to the rest of the cars on the road. Tunnel? Avoid those bridges, won't even need an extra lane, because you're one less car on the road.

Why? What happened to them? I do wish that they had a subway or some sort of train line that connected them to Brooklyn and/or Manhattan

How would they be able to do that?

Heavy rail tracks already exist on the IBX, do they not? Now you have to pay more to remove said tracks, or to build new infrastructure around it. So then what happens when there's more traffic on said roads, because of light rail taking up space? Explain the capacity light rails have, compared to a commuter train? Again, this isn't one city, this is two boroughs with a lot of people. Will light rail get them where they need to go in a timely manner? I was hoping we would get a subway line as well in the future, but I don't know if they would ever do that.

Of course not, but say that you expand I-95, the Throgs Neck and Whitestone will still have just more traffic, and the GWB? Well skip that, just the bridges and tunnels connecting from Manhattan to Queens/Brooklyn would definitely receive less traffic from Connecticut/Northern Westchester

Who said I was arguing? I'm just stating that it's not a rail line. How does one connect train rails, to a light rail? Say that we can hypothetically use the Hell Gate Bridge for trains, now how would we connect tracks over to a light rail? Bronx and Queens connection wouldn't even be possible now.

Sure it would be too expensive, but to close to existing Bronx-Queens bridges? Calverton is no where near the two only bridges, which gets a lot of traffic and takes up time for those trying to get into Queens easier. It would definitely have a big if an impact if cars can just get off I-95 before going into southern Westchester, besides taking up less time to travel since you'll have less traffic on the other two bridges now that the tunnel exists. Also won't have to go through all of that just to get to Queens, but instead just take the LIE to the other highways that would take you to the Verrazzano

Did Staten Island ever have a train line? What about North Jersey? I mean, they're putting in a light rail, which isn't a train line at all.

Well, I've heard of new roads/bridges being opened to lessen traffic on an existing road way or so, and so say that they did build a tunnel on LI. Would people really care to live there now if the tunnel is completed? They could've been wanted to live there, why now with a tunnel?

I see, well will ESA actually connect with the Bronx?

Yes, I do know. They're definitely not up there with commuter trains, and do you think that a light rail car has enough capacity to deal with an entire line, filled with people?'

Less traffic on I-95 mainly through the Cross Bronx expressway, on the Whitestone, the Throgs Neck Bridge, any bridge/tunnel going Manhattan to Queens/Brooklyn, I don't think it will make a big difference in population from a new tunnel, since everyone's mainly just passing through. It would save time for people from Northeastern states above us from having to go through the Bronx and Manhattan, to get to Queens/Brooklyn, just to get to NJ on the most left side. Do that, and traffic flow should be a bit if not a lot better for New Yorkers.

Density? Better traffic flow is what matters to me, and thats something NYC doesn't always have, for the most part. I would rather we try to build somewhere else instead of Oyster Bay.

The problem is, the IBX is literally useless now that they're using Light rail. It's going to be on surface level roads, with traffic that can get in the way. Besides that, there's a lot of people that will be taking this. That should distract and derail the MTA from working on a Light rail system that no one cares about. Why Light rail? We've already have the tracks. Just do a subway or commuter train line, that's fast and efficient. Light rails, aren't that fast, at all. How do we know if they'll ever give us a line from Bronx to Queens, if they' re not using trains?

I see, but that's not understandable for those who live in the Bronx and Manhattan that has to deal with said congestion now, and the bridges as well.

That sucks a ton of baloney bricks. Why in the world would people oppose it? Who cares about what they think? Have any of them thought of the loads of traffic that would probably decrease going through half of NYC just to get to NJ? If people could just go through from Connecticut, go through Long Island, go over the Verrazzano bridge, through Staten Island, it probably would save a lot of time then going through I-95, I-87, or Bronx River Parkway just to end up in the Bronx and cross the only two bridges from Bronx to Queens (which gets traffic at times), or go to Manhattan which has traffic, taking the FDR and going over the Manhattan or Brooklyn Bridge or the tunnels.

More people going through Long Island would probably mean a lot more less traffic for all the other roads/bridges in the city, I would at least hope.

Yes, but someone has told me. Kind of sucks though.

So more people could see, and mods removed the other post because it was unfortunately a screenshot

So the article speaks about how basically, we won't have a Bronx/Queens connection.

Besides already not fulfilling many promises, as of what used to be elevated train lines in Manhattan that were said to be put underground in the future, and never were, we won't get a train line from Queens to Bronx, not that it was ever promised.

I already have many questions. I thought the Penn Station access development was recent, not many years ago. I question why did it take so long? Why did it cost so much, if MTA wants to save money? Has MTA ever planned to rebuild old elevated train lines underground? Why is there no highway tunnel/bridge from Long Island to Connecticut or somewhere in Westchester?