Jump to content

Commuter Rail Can Be a Bang for Your Buck, Unless You Live in the Bronx


bobtehpanda

Recommended Posts

The only "european" city you can really compare New York to is London...

I would have to agree.  I think perhaps a few places in Germany could come close as well.  I've been to Frankfurt in Germany briefly, as that is a financial hub that rivals places like London and New York, but even that would be a tough sell.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Well I've talked about this at length over the years. I don't believe that we need to sink all of our resources into rail improvements.  The current administration is doing something that has been talked about for years, and that is utilizing our waterways to move people by introducing ferry service to areas that have limited transportation options where rail service may not make as much sense.   There are some areas that would be changed significantly with rail service, and I think we need to preserve the character of our communities and not ram subways down everyone's throats with the one size fits all thinking.  An area like Throggs Neck or Country Club for example perhaps could be better served with ferry service, something that some local leaders have called for.  Where it makes sense to implement rail service sure, if costs can be kept within reason.  I think that a lot of the future depends heavily on what sort of new payment system the (MTA) decides to implement.  I believe in a system in which buses compliment rail service, and so we have to look at getting people on buses again in areas where they've stopped using them.  I think that's the first thing we need to address... Have the system organized where different services compliment one another.

I don't disagree with you. Ferries are a great way to serve the area's on the waterfront and you're correct in saying the Bus network needs to better tie in as well. I guess my views really focus on particular areas where transit coverage isn't really there at all. LIRR Bay Ridge corridor Southeast Queens ect.. The Hudson Line comes to mind as well or at least section that parallels the Harlem River. Understanding and taking into account terminal constraints at Grand Central. There might be other options if Metro-North can't handle the load. Who's the say the MTA can't create another umbrella to handle The SIR and RX there might be room to reconfigure the ROW to accommodate two more tracks? FRA cars with more urban type seating could be tied into the RX. Heck, you might be able to parallel a subway extension on the ROW (3) to 231st Anyone? So when I say repurpose I mean the corridor itself. I know the Hudson Valley region seeing growth as well. But there might option to allow both coexist without cutting service or taking anything away from current commuters. I see where you're coming from as well. I'm just saying better utilization of what we have not at an explosion of new construction. We at least owe it to the future generations to keep an open mind and explore all options.

The only "european" city you can really compare New York to is London...

I agree as well. London really is the City I'm referring to when I say I've seen it done. Which is why sometimes it makes this conversation very frustrating I've seen it and used it.. try that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree with you. Ferries are a great way to serve the area's on the waterfront and you're correct in saying the Bus network needs to better tie in as well. I guess my views really focus on particular areas where transit coverage isn't really there at all. LIRR Bay Ridge corridor Southeast Queens ect.. The Hudson Line comes to mind as well or at least section that parallels the Harlem River. Understanding and taking into account terminal constraints at Grand Central. There might be other options if Metro-North can't handle the load. Who's the say the MTA can't create another umbrella to handle The SIR and RX there might be room to reconfigure the ROW to accommodate two more tracks? FRA cars with more urban type seating could be tied into the RX. Heck, you might be able to parallel a subway extension on the ROW (3) to 231st Anyone? So when I say repurpose I mean the corridor itself. I know the Hudson Valley region seeing growth as well. But there might option to allow both coexist without cutting service or taking anything away from current commuters. I see where you're coming from as well. I'm just saying better utilization of what we have not at an explosion of new construction. We at least owe it to the future generations to keep an open mind and explore all options.

In order for Metro-North to accommodate additional passengers in terms of what you're envisioning, there would need to be monies for (new) additional cars, along with finding room to run more trains (expanding frequencies).  As it stands, the situation on the Hudson Line is a bit complicated.  They are trying to get rid of older cars, and retrofit the newer ones.  Truckie (a conductor with MNRR) has noted that they are stretched thin when it comes to the amount of cars available to make service.  While new cars are coming soon, I'm not sure how many (if any) has been allocated to expand service.  Aside from that the Hudson Line has seen tremendous growth (even with the higher fares).  Part of it stems from growth of the population within the region, but deteriorating bus service too.  The express buses are really taking a hit from the congestion which is pushing more people onto Metro-North.  For example, in Riverdale, I see fewer people riding the Hudson Rail Link at times, and more people just walking to the station to afford the higher fares ($8.75 peak one way). I myself can walk to either station (Spuyten Duyvil or Riverdale) and do so from time to time when the weather is nice to get exercise or because I missed the shuttle and can still make it by taking shortcuts walking.  If you lower the fares too much given the current circumstances, I think MNRR would not be able to handle the crowds and it would result in complete chaos.  I ride the Hudson Line regularly (daily during some weeks when traffic is bad) and you already have people standing on some trains as it is.  The Harlem is definitely overcrowded as well, so there would definitely have to be some changes made before implementing any sort of system that opens up service to "new markets" or provides MNRR service at a cheaper price.  I would think that the same is true of the LIRR, which is probably in poorer shape in terms of on-time performance and the ability to move its current riders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order for Metro-North to accommodate additional passengers in terms of what you're envisioning, there would need to be monies for (new) additional cars, along with finding room to run more trains (expanding frequencies).  As it stands, the situation on the Hudson Line is a bit complicated.  They are trying to get rid of older cars, and retrofit the newer ones.  Truckie (a conductor with MNRR) has noted that they are stretched thin when it comes to the amount of cars available to make service.  While new cars are coming soon, I'm not sure how many (if any) has been allocated to expand service.  Aside from that the Hudson Line has seen tremendous growth (even with the higher fares).  Part of it stems from growth of the population within the region, but deteriorating bus service too.  The express buses are really taking a hit from the congestion which is pushing more people onto Metro-North.  For example, in Riverdale, I see fewer people riding the Hudson Rail Link at times, and more people just walking to the station to afford the higher fares ($8.75 peak one way). I myself can walk to either station (Spuyten Duyvil or Riverdale) and do so from time to time when the weather is nice to get exercise or because I missed the shuttle and can still make it by taking shortcuts walking.  If you lower the fares too much given the current circumstances, I think MNRR would not be able to handle the crowds and it would result in complete chaos.  I ride the Hudson Line regularly (daily during some weeks when traffic is bad) and you already have people standing on some trains as it is.  The Harlem is definitely overcrowded as well, so there would definitely have to be some changes made before implementing any sort of system that opens up service to "new markets" or provides MNRR service at a cheaper price.  I would think that the same is true of the LIRR, which is probably in poorer shape in terms of on-time performance and the ability to move its current riders.

You have a point I don't know what the projected ridership added would be from areas like Univerity and Morris heights.  But projected ridership from Westchester, Dutches, and Putnam may limit that possibility.  The point I was trying to make was is im not asking the Metro North to accommodate anything I'm asking the ROW to accommodate two extra tracks for other service options. Just an idea but once again the MTA could look to create another umbrella tie the Northern Rockaway line and RX and SIR into a more FRA based operation you might be able to tie this section kinda like the old Putnam or once again parallel subway service like the (3) a heck of a lot cheaper than building subways id take it. And all for the most part by reconfiguring or optimizing the existing Rail. Metro-North and LIRR untouched.  

 

Example below

 

rqLVlRM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have a point I don't know what the projected ridership added would be from areas like Univerity and Morris heights.  But projected ridership from Westchester, Dutches, and Putnam may limit that possibility.  The point I was trying to make was is im not asking the Metro North to accommodate anything I'm asking the ROW to accommodate two extra tracks for other service options. Just an idea but once again the MTA could look to create another umbrella tie the Northern Rockaway line and RX and SIR into a more FRA based operation you might be able to tie this section kinda like the old Putnam or once again parallel subway service like the (3) a heck of a lot cheaper than building subways id take it. And all for the most part by reconfiguring or optimizing the existing Rail. Metro-North and LIRR untouched.  

 

Example below

 

rqLVlRM.png

From the diagram you've posted, it looks like you would have a subway line running up the Hudson Line.  I see all sorts of issues with this and people fighting this (myself included).  One of the things that is great about living in Riverdale (especially west of the Parkway and near the Hudson River) is the peace and tranquility you get.  Having a subway roaring through every 10 minutes (at a minimum) in addition to the MNRR trains that come through would be a mess.  At the last Metro-North meeting we had in North Riverdale when the (MTA) increased the frequencies off-peak, several residents complained about the amount of shuttle buses coming through the area, and the need for more eco-friendly vehicles. I echoed a similar sentiment when I spoke, but applauded the service frequencies nonetheless since in my view it meant fewer cars polluting the environment. Given how narrow some of the roads are in Spuyten Duyvil, Central Riverdale, Fieldston and parts of North Riverdale congestion would be horrendous.  I could see Palisade Avenue now.  There's already traffic problems in the area as it is because of the schools west of the Parkway.  Additionally, the Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale stations have limited parking.  I just don't think the logistics would work given the infrastructure.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the diagram you've posted, it looks like you would have a subway line running up the Hudson Line.  I see all sorts of issues with this and people fighting this (myself included).  One of the things that is great about living in Riverdale (especially west of the Parkway and near the Hudson River) is the peace and tranquility you get.  Having a subway roaring through every 10 minutes (at a minimum) in addition to the MNRR trains that come through would be a mess.  At the last Metro-North meeting we had in North Riverdale when the (MTA) increased the frequencies off-peak, several residents complained about the amount of shuttle buses coming through the area, and the need for more eco-friendly vehicles. I echoed a similar sentiment when I spoke, but applauded the service frequencies nonetheless since in my view it meant fewer cars polluting the environment. Given how narrow some of the roads are Spuyten Duyvil, Central Riverdale, Fieldston and parts of North Riverdale congestion would be horrendous.  I could see Palisade Avenue now.  There's already traffic problems in the area as it is because of the schools west of the Parkway.  Additionally, the Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale stations have limited parking.  I just don't think the logistics would work given the infrastructure.  

It would break off just east of Marble Hill using the old Putnam ROW to about 234 st street. I guess Riverdale, in that case, would be Kingsbridge technically speaking. The only part of that would share with the Hudson is on the Harlem river stretch.  Couldn't see it working with the bottleneck at Spuyten Duyvil anyway.

HfjM98e.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would break off just east of Marble Hill using the old Putnam ROW to about 234 st street. I guess Riverdale, in that case, would be Kingsbridge technically speaking. The only part of that would share with the Hudson is on the Harlem river stretch.  Couldn't see it working with the bottleneck at Spuyten Duyvil anyway.

HfjM98e.jpg

That might not be so bad... So then where would the stop be at for Marble Hill and where would it terminate?

 

P.S. And yes, it would be Kingsbridge if it's along Broadway up until 242nd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That might not be so bad... So then where would the stop be at for Marble Hill and where would it terminate?

 

P.S. And yes, it would be Kingsbridge if it's along Broadway up until 242nd.

 

Marble Hill Station below with the terminal at or about 234th street.

 

aWqrAdG.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks more like a London Overground type thing, RailRun. I could see the SIR, the inner sections of the MNR and LIRR, and the possible Triboro RX, combined into another "tier" of service in between the subway and the commuter rail, providing a subway-like service with FRA compliant rolling stock.

 

Making another London comparison, it has three tiers of rail service: Tube (Underground), Overground, private operators (commuter rail).

In this scenario you would have: subway, Cityrail, MNR and LIRR(commuter rail)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks more like a London Overground type thing, RailRun. I could see the SIR, the inner sections of the MNR and LIRR, and the possible Triboro RX, combined into another "tier" of service in between the subway and the commuter rail, providing a subway-like service with FRA compliant rolling stock.

 

 

 

Indeed you're on point that's what it is Overground inspired. The City gain a awful lot from alittle investment and optimization. Here's the full map below the Altantic Branch could be apart of this system as well. 

 
QVRE0mT.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order for Metro-North to accommodate additional passengers in terms of what you're envisioning, there would need to be monies for (new) additional cars, along with finding room to run more trains (expanding frequencies).  As it stands, the situation on the Hudson Line is a bit complicated.  They are trying to get rid of older cars, and retrofit the newer ones.  Truckie (a conductor with MNRR) has noted that they are stretched thin when it comes to the amount of cars available to make service.  While new cars are coming soon, I'm not sure how many (if any) has been allocated to expand service.  Aside from that the Hudson Line has seen tremendous growth (even with the higher fares).  Part of it stems from growth of the population within the region, but deteriorating bus service too.  The express buses are really taking a hit from the congestion which is pushing more people onto Metro-North.  For example, in Riverdale, I see fewer people riding the Hudson Rail Link at times, and more people just walking to the station to afford the higher fares ($8.75 peak one way). I myself can walk to either station (Spuyten Duyvil or Riverdale) and do so from time to time when the weather is nice to get exercise or because I missed the shuttle and can still make it by taking shortcuts walking.  If you lower the fares too much given the current circumstances, I think MNRR would not be able to handle the crowds and it would result in complete chaos.  I ride the Hudson Line regularly (daily during some weeks when traffic is bad) and you already have people standing on some trains as it is.  The Harlem is definitely overcrowded as well, so there would definitely have to be some changes made before implementing any sort of system that opens up service to "new markets" or provides MNRR service at a cheaper price.  I would think that the same is true of the LIRR, which is probably in poorer shape in terms of on-time performance and the ability to move its current riders.

 

The LIRR is seeing East Side access, which provides more terminal capacity in Manhattan. It frees some slots up at Penn Station, which can then be used for MNRR service on the Hudson Line and/or New Haven Line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not talking lowering the prices to attract subway levels of ridership, but there's definitely some capacity to send extra trains and riders into the CBD.

Well that's a no brainer. You came along later in this discussion. We were talking about using existing infrastructure for subway service. We already talked about the fares, better connectivity and capacity....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's a no brainer. You came along later in this discussion. We were talking about using existing infrastructure for subway service. We already talked about the fares, better connectivity and capacity....

 

Buying new cars and expanding frequency (like you mentioned in the post that I quoted) would imply that this still relates purely to the commuter rail service. Doing something like what he described with extending the (3) up the local tracks would have nothing to do with Metro-North acquiring new rolling stock.

 

In any case, that's the point: If some of those Hudson Line trains could be routed to Penn Station, you can put the remaining trains on the express track between Marble Hill & 125th, and have the (3) use the local tracks.

 

If we're just talking about making the fares a little more reasonable (like the express bus fares) then once again, they they have the extra capacity saved by running trains to Penn that they can use to fit in a few more short-turns from The Bronx or possibly one of the Yonkers stations like Greystone to GCT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buying new cars and expanding frequency (like you mentioned in the post that I quoted) would imply that this still relates purely to the commuter rail service. Doing something like what he described with extending the (3) up the local tracks would have nothing to do with Metro-North acquiring new rolling stock.

 

In any case, that's the point: If some of those Hudson Line trains could be routed to Penn Station, you can put the remaining trains on the express track between Marble Hill & 125th, and have the (3) use the local tracks.

 

If we're just talking about making the fares a little more reasonable (like the express bus fares) then once again, they they have the extra capacity saved by running trains to Penn that they can use to fit in a few more short-turns from The Bronx or possibly one of the Yonkers stations like Greystone to GCT. 

Yeah again that was earlier in the discussion and quite frankly we had already finished the discussion before you quoted me. I'm not sure why you need to clarify anything. All discussed and clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.