Jump to content

6 To Co Op City..


Juelz4309

Recommended Posts

The transfer idea is to lower the combined bus MNRR fare (eliminate the two fare zone, though there is UniTicket for some), not to lower the MNR fare itself (for reverse commuters the intermediate fares are okay for the most part)

 

 

I know and I still disagree. Either they can afford the premium fare or take the subway. When I use MetroNorth, I take the Hudson Rail link which is $2.25 and then it is $7.50 for MetroNorth. Usually it doesn't matter since I normally use an Express Bus Plus Metrocard which is unlimited but sometimes I use a Pay-Per-Ride, but either way I think the fare is fine as is. My only gripe is the lack of seats and having to stand for that price. Sometimes there are folks already standing by the time the train pulls into the Spuyten Duyvil Station. That's the real rip off. More monies should be allocated for an increase in service and not just during off peak either, but during peak hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


You guys are forgetting about the proposed Metro North stations on the Amtrak ROW that would solve the problems at Co Op City.

 

alternativesmap.gif

 

 

 

I mentioned that on page 2.....

 

But of course, this won't happen until ESA is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, the (MTA) can easily get a temporary station built in under a month and get Metro-North Service there if this were in China, but in the US, we got Enviornmental Impact, this study, that study, Community Meeting, CB Approval, ya-da, ya-da, ya and truth is, the (D) and (6) doesn't need any extension, a bus route would do good enough and the Metro-North can cover it too in an effort to expand transit options, the (D) would be as slow as the (6) if it went to Co-Op City area considering that it still needs to go on the Concourse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're talking about how it will be a long time before Metro North goes to Co-op City. What, like it won't take a long time to build the (6) or (D) to Co-op?. Keep in mind that we're talking about an agency that will take 8 years to build a 1.2-mile extension of the (7).

 

 

I don't think anyone's arguing that a (D) or (6) extension to Co-op wouldn't take as long as projected MNR service via the NYCRR to Penn. However, MNR access to Penn first requires completion of ESA (now due in 2019) plus some mofdifications to infrastructure and/or rolling stock, so it will be a while - whether we like it or not...

 

The thing is, the (MTA) can easily get a temporary station built in under a month and get Metro-North Service there if this were in China, but in the US, we got Enviornmental Impact, this study, that study, Community Meeting, CB Approval, ya-da, ya-da, ya and truth is, the (D) and (6) doesn't need any extension, a bus route would do good enough and the Metro-North can cover it too in an effort to expand transit options, the (D) would be as slow as the (6) if it went to Co-Op City area considering that it still needs to go on the Concourse.

 

 

Neither the (D) nor the (6) extension would be much slower considering the number of new stations is 4 for the former and one or two for the latter. Also, both the (D) and the (6) run express in The Bronx during rush hours (the latter middays and early evenings also), offering faster service to/from Manhattan.

 

Clearly, the realistic options are improving current bus service and the MNR to Penn via NYCRR (the image Roadcruiser1 posted is somewhat outdated; current plans also include a stop at Morris Park). However, these facts don't negate the benefits of either extension idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither the (D) nor the (6) extension would be much slower considering the number of new stations is 4 for the former and one or two for the latter. Also, both the (D) and the (6) run express in The Bronx during rush hours (the latter middays and early evenings also), offering faster service to/from Manhattan.

 

Clearly, the realistic options are improving current bus service and the MNR to Penn via NYCRR (the image Roadcruiser1 posted is somewhat outdated; current plans also include a stop at Morris Park). However, these facts don't negate the benefits of either extension idea.

 

 

1) Read the thread, it's been discussed already and it would definitely be slow in terms of construction and longer time for operation into Manhattan, ;-].

 

2) Already mentioned, and agreed upon, obviously it's the best bet, ;-]!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone's arguing that a (D) or (6) extension to Co-op wouldn't take as long as projected MNR service via the NYCRR to Penn. However, MNR access to Penn first requires completion of ESA (now due in 2019) plus some mofdifications to infrastructure and/or rolling stock, so it will be a while - whether we like it or not...

 

 

Wouldn't there be a similar process of environmental reports, committees, etc. that haven't even started with a (D) or (6) extension?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Read the thread, it's been discussed already and it would definitely be slow in terms of construction and longer time for operation into Manhattan, ;-].

 

2) Already mentioned, and agreed upon, obviously it's the best bet, ;-]!

 

 

Yeah, that's true...

 

Wouldn't there be a similar process of environmental reports, committees, etc. that haven't even started with a (D) or (6) extension?

 

 

Yes; either extension requires CB meetings, feasibility studies, EIS, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why a subway extension? The Amtrak ROW already exists. All you need to do is add the stations.

 

Who's gonna operate thru there. not Amtrak and Metro North can't b/c it would have to go to Penn Station

 

What about borrowing 2 tracks from the Unionport Yard, building a portal just north of the yard, and build a subway line underground going East towards Co-op City? Could that work?

 

But then again the making of this would disrupt the neighborhoods.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of this for a subway line... And if you think for a minute that this would somehow decrease the need for the BxM7 you're dreaming.

 

 

"Somehow" decrease the need????? It would definitely decrease it. It just wouldn't decrease it down to zero, but it would definitely decrease it.

 

It most certainly is related... What is the point of building a subway that will run into the millions if not BILLIONS if folks are still going to flock to the express bus, which by the way is FAR cheaper, since you're always harping on costs... Oh and you think that they'd be willing to give up their local buses for that subway... Don't think so... Apparently you didn't read what that politician said about how they were promised EXCELLENT transportation there... We have MetroNorth here in Riverdale and we would not for a minute give up ANY bus service, be it local or express.

 

 

Long-term, the subway is cheaper. Yeah, you spend millions of dollars up front and save millions down the road.

 

The other reason I say MetroNorth is because the MTA gives deals on weekends for intercity travel, so hopping on MetroNorth would be almost as cheap as riding the (6) train, but MUCH faster.

 

 

$3.75 isn't "almost as cheap" as the (6) train at $2.25. <_<

 

So you would consider Co-op City urban but Riverdale suburban, even though Co-op City is further from Manhattan than Riverdale?

 

 

Riverdale's population density is lower, so in that sense, it is more suburban than Co-Op City. The thing that irks me is that fact that his apartment building in Riverdale is suburban, but areas like this are urban just because they have a large minority population. I don't care if you think it's run-down or has a high crime rate, but if your apartment in Riverdale is definitely not more suburban than this:

 

080312133654.jpg?t=1344034729

 

073012131652.jpg?t=1344029417

 

073012132315.jpg?t=1344029353

 

You guys are forgetting about the proposed Metro North stations on the Amtrak ROW that would solve the problems at Co Op City.

 

 

We already discussed that.

 

We're talking about how it will be a long time before Metro North goes to Co-op City. What, like it won't take a long time to build the (6) or (D) to Co-op?. Keep in mind that we're talking about an agency that will take 8 years to build a 1.2-mile extension of the (7).

 

 

I think they started more recently than 8 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this talk about marshland is annoying me. Why can't they build a tunnel in it? Build it low enough to hit bedrock and let it sit there. It's not that hard to make a tunnel waterproof, they just have to do it right. Look at London's Tube! They have incredibly deep stations clearly below the water table and they've lasted 150 years.

 

I think an el would be a bad idea up in the North Bronx because of the density of the place, not to mention there not being many streets that could fit an el comfortably. I'd much rather stick a TBM in the ground under Gun Hill Rd and steer the concourse line to the Co-op CIty, just like I made in my fantasy map here:

 

http://justintokke.com/NYCS/Fantasy%20Subway%20Map%20Summer%202012.pdf

 

And for heaven's sake, extend the (6) there too. Between the Bruckner Expy and Huchinson River Pkwy there's more than enough green space to squeeze an El in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Who's gonna operate thru there. not Amtrak and Metro North can't b/c it would have to go to Penn Station.

 

 

 

Not only that, but Amtrak operates only a few times per day. Even at most with a few Amtrak lines using that station you still get very infrequent service. Not to mention the price will be higher than MNRR also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming NIMBYs approve of a (D) extension and that it can remain underground through Bronx Park (the depth of the current tunnels hasn't been explicitly stated), they could take out a portion of Bronx Park (between the highway and BPE) at Burke Av, to allow the (D) to come above ground. Have the line as a 2 track El, stops at WPR (2)<5>, Boston Rd, Gun Hill-Seymour (5) and Bartow/Baychester. Burke and Gun Hill are wide enough for an el to fit without disrupting traffic flow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Queens still had many farms operating well into the 1950s.

 

Btw that photo also explains why 74th-Broadway is a local stop and not an express stop; obviously the IND was not built yet and nobody during the 1910's really expected the exploding ridership levels that the 7 line experiences today.

 

Exactly!!

 

If they could have foreseen what was to come from 1960-onward to today, they would have first of all made the (7) a four-track line throughout Queens, including Queensboro Plaza (remember, that station used to be twice the size of what it is now) with the locals terminating at Queensboro Plaza OR continuing to Astoria (which at that time WAS IRT) and the express trains going to Times Square. 74th would almost certainly been built as a two-island platform express station OR with provisions to be converted to such if it had been needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, why isn't the (5) called for? The (5) goes right into Eastchester via the Dyre Avenue line. It could be extended from there right into Co-Op City. It could even go via the former NYW&B Kingsbridge Road station creating a new stop at the still intact station building: Kingsbridge Road-Rombouts Avenue. But even without making that turn the (5) could go straight into Co-Op City.

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.