Council proposal would let city residents ride LIRR, Metro North for $2.75

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I understand your perspective.  In my opinion the problem here is that were using 20th-century logic. That doesn't really apply anymore that Europe's Europe statement doesn't really apply as well the world is global New York has more common places like Paris or Tokyo that other cities in his own country. It's All one big global economy. For New York to attract more people and businesses to its economy it has to grow it's transit in this case has to repurpose what it  already has in place. Tom is absolutely correct definitely has to be thought out. My question is where's the data? Trains are crowded understood perspective and observational data what can we do with that? What's the operational limits of the trackage? Can we operate more train safely and without slowing the existing schedule. Is LIRR and MNCR at it's operational limits? What's the project ridership? It's too early in the game for us to be saying yay nah, or leaning towards in conclusion all I'm saying is lets to our due diligence then come to a conclusion. Also what's your solution being we can't extend subways or repurposed commuter rail the problem still remains and needs to be solved.

You keep asking for data, and I'm saying throw that out of the window for now because what's the point of studying data when there are not enough trains as it is (I mean physically cars built) to deal with more passengers?  Now track capacity is a separate issue, but both LIRR and MNRR have issues with a limitation of cars currently to meet service, and you don't build cars overnight and new cars certainly cost more than a measly $70 million that the city would pay.

[N6 Limited]

I think it's a good idea that works well in London, etc and evens out transit service demand. The MTA might actually save money, they wouldn't need as much bus service in eastern Queens or maybe as much subway service to the northern Bronx.

 

Let's not pretend that the LIRR and Metro North trains are full at all times that is not true. Just like the and are not full all day, I ride the QB line every day, I KNOW that there is capacity on the QB Line for more passengers. Don't base broad decisions on trains being full for an 1 hr block during the 24hr day.

 

This kind of similar to the "bridge shopping" done along the east river. People sit in traffic and clog the BQE and the streets of LIC to avoid paying a toll. People crowd the , Buses, etc when they could get on at certain LIRR/ Metro North stations and call it a day. 

 

Also this will make using transit within the city easier. We all know the trains don't run frequently enough for people to suddenly start using them in mass numbers. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I think it's a good idea that works well in London, etc and evens out transit service demand. The MTA might actually save money, they wouldn't need as much bus service in eastern Queens or maybe as much subway service to the northern Bronx.

 

Let's not pretend that the LIRR and Metro North trains are full at all times that is not true. Just like the and are not full all day, I ride the QB line every day, I KNOW that there is capacity on the QB Line for more passengers. Don't base broad decisions on trains being full for an 1 hr block during the 24hr day.

 

This kind of similar to the "bridge shopping" done along the east river. People sit in traffic and clog the BQE and the streets of LIC to avoid paying a toll. People crowd the , Buses, etc when they could get on at certain LIRR/ Metro North stations and call it a day. 

 

Also this will make using transit within the city easier. We all know the trains don't run frequently enough for people to suddenly start using them in mass numbers. 

Yeah well just because there is capacity on some trains doesn't mean they'll be able to handle all of those riders.  There is some capacity.  That doesn't mean there's enough to meet the potential demand, and that's the big elephant in the room.  You make the price too low and there won't be any capacity for anything because the trains will be mobbed at all hours.

[trainfan22]

Why couldn't you run a city shuttle so to speak. With service terminating at say a Yonkers or Valley Stream? Just expand the fleet with modified cars to accommodate more people for the city stops? This would be a fraction of the cost of actually building more trackage extending the subway This doesn't seem like it affect through service as much it's more like just sharing trackage in essence. VG8 might not like But it some stations within the city limits might have to share space with space on trains and lose some peak trains to LI or Westchester but the trains coming in from the suburbs could be generally unaffected if scheduled correctly. Hey like it or not Queens and Bronx are in the City! Once again what is the operation capacity and scheduling currently for train's? this could be worked in depending on headway.

From what I understand, GCT and NYP are at capacity, they can't run additional trains to those terminals so these new city riders would just have to ride on existing trains.

 

Maybe when ESA opens and Metro North goes to NYP, they can try something like that.

[Fresh Pond]

I don't support this, only because there isn't capacity on the MTA commuter railroad for this, maybe if the MN/LIRR cars had bench seating like subway cars do, then yea implement this. but with the current way the commuter cars are setup, nah...

 

 

As for Rats coming into the MN system if they lower the fare... 99 percent of the MN system is outdoors, most of the subway rats live in the underground stations.

There's rats all over. Underground, above ground, subway, LIRR, MNRR, everywhere.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

There's rats all over. Underground, above ground, subway, LIRR, MNRR, everywhere.

Please... I have yet to see a rat of any kind at the two Riverdale MNRR stations.  Both are rather clean overall.  

[RailRunRob]

You keep asking for data, and I'm saying throw that out of the window for now because what's the point of studying data when there are not enough trains as it is (I mean physically cars built) to deal with more passengers?  Now track capacity is a separate issue, but both LIRR and MNRR have issues with a limitation of cars currently to meet service, and you don't build cars overnight and new cars certainly cost more than a measly $70 million that the city would pay.

VG build more cars If track capacity allows. I don't understand new cars or new lines?.. Leaving it as is isn't going to be a option soon. Why wouldn't try to use what you have already? Transit moving forward has to be agile and fluid. What's your plan to cover these area's then?   270 million for 15 new train sets or  500 Million - 1.2 Billion per mile plus new trainsets?

what are we talking about.

From what I understand, GCT and NYP are at capacity, they can't run additional trains to those terminals so these new city riders would just have to ride on existing trains.

 

Maybe when ESA opens and Metro North goes to NYP, they can try something like that.

NYP probably. GCT should have room all those tracks..  nonetheless finally a legitimate point.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

VG build more cars If track capacity allows. I don't understand new cars or new lines?.. Leaving it as is isn't going to be a option soon. Why wouldn't try to use what you have already? Transit moving forward has to be agile and fluid. What's your plan to cover these area's then? 

 

NYP probably. GCT should have room all those tracks..  nonetheless finally a legitimate point.

Because there is already limited capacity as it is.  Apparently you don't use Metro-North, but I do, and most trains are already quite crowded.  Some off-peak trains have some capacity, but not that much to be able to handle the crowds that would be created.  Forget new lines... We're talking about more cars would be needed to handle the additional crowds, and as it stands, there aren't enough of them to handle those crowds, especially not for peak service.  

[RailRunRob]

Because there is already limited capacity as it is.  Apparently you don't use Metro-North, but I do, and most trains are already quite crowded.  Some off-peak trains have some capacity, but not that much to be able to handle the crowds that would be created.  Forget new lines... We're talking about more cars would be needed to handle the additional crowds, and as it stands, there aren't enough of them to handle those crowds, especially not for peak service.  

Okay you phase service in. Start service in 2020-2021 would take a time to workout some infrastructure anyways. 5-6 years is more then enough time to prepare. No one's saying it would start overnight. Example Overground and Crossrail again. Define limited capacity? Space on trains or GCT? Penn Station might be a legitimate ceiling for service but even in that case you still have connections options at,Woodside Jamaica and Atlantic terminal. If this isn't a option you still having stated your plan  to better serve the people in thses underserved areas.If we can plan to put a person on Mars in the next 10 years I know we can handle some basic transit problems down here on Earth in New York. Whats your Plan VG?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Okay you phase service in. Start service in 2020-2021 would take a time to workout some infrastructure anyways. 5-6 years is more then enough time to prepare. No one's saying it would start overnight. Example Overground and Crossrail again. Define limited capacity? Space on trains or GCT? Penn Station might be a legitimate ceiling for service but even in that case you still have connections options at,Woodside Jamaica and Atlantic terminal. If this isn't a option you still having stated your plan  to better serve the people in thses underserved areas.If we can plan to put a person on Mars in the 10 years I know we can handle some basic transit problems down here on Earth in New York. Whats your Plan VG?

5-6 years is different... 5-6 years allows a lot of issues to be addressed, provided enough funding is there.  I don't get the impression that the city wants to wait that long, especially since they're only talking $70 million.  That only addresses subsidizing the rides.  Does nothing to address additional cars needed to handle the crowds though, nor station improvements.

[RailRunRob]

I think it's a good idea that works well in London, etc and evens out transit service demand. The MTA might actually save money, they wouldn't need as much bus service in eastern Queens or maybe as much subway service to the northern Bronx.

 

Let's not pretend that the LIRR and Metro North trains are full at all times that is not true. Just like the and are not full all day, I ride the QB line every day, I KNOW that there is capacity on the QB Line for more passengers. Don't base broad decisions on trains being full for an 1 hr block during the 24hr day.

 

This kind of similar to the "bridge shopping" done along the east river. People sit in traffic and clog the BQE and the streets of LIC to avoid paying a toll. People crowd the , Buses, etc when they could get on at certain LIRR/ Metro North stations and call it a day. 

 

Also this will make using transit within the city easier. We all know the trains don't run frequently enough for people to suddenly start using them in mass numbers. 

Right isn't the city losing money on some of these bus lines in Queens? X63 Q5 ect? might be saving's over time if they could cut frequency of these lines.

[RailRunRob]

5-6 years is different... 5-6 years allows a lot of issues to be addressed, provided enough funding is there.  I don't get the impression that the city wants to wait that long, especially since they're only talking $70 million.  That only addresses subsidizing the rides.  Does nothing to address additional cars needed to handle the crowds though, nor station improvements.

Umm. Didn't know that. I was just referring to the overall integration idea. How many more riders do they anticipate to use commuter rail with the new price structure? I can see it mainly affecting South Eastern and Eastern Queens. Bayside, Bellrose, Rosedale these areas aren't too bad off. But would save a transfer at Jamaica or Flushing. So that might be a issue for LIRR. MN Hudson line might get a few riders at Marble Hill, University/ Morris Heights. For people going to the Eastside. Harlem line might get some crowing at Woodlawn, Fordham other then that where do you see the crowds?

[trainfan22]

There's rats all over. Underground, above ground, subway, LIRR, MNRR, everywhere.

 

I'm well aware that they are Rats in the City other than ones in the subway. TBH I never seen a Rat at an outdoor subway station, I'm talking about the open cut lines like Brighton, a mouse here and there? Yea but never a rat, point is there not nearly as common on outdoor lines as they are at Underground Subway stations, of curse they wouldn't be in El stations considering how they are designed.

VG build more cars If track capacity allows. I don't understand new cars or new lines?.. Leaving it as is isn't going to be a option soon. Why wouldn't try to use what you have already? Transit moving forward has to be agile and fluid. What's your plan to cover these area's then?   270 million for 15 new train sets or  500 Million - 1.2 Billion per mile plus new trainsets?

what are we talking about.

 

NYP probably. GCT should have room all those tracks..  nonetheless finally a legitimate point.

I remember a credible poster on another forum saying that GCT is at capacity, keep in mind they took out some of the MN tracks for ESA construction.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Umm. Didn't know that. I was just referring to the overall integration idea. How many more riders do they anticipate to use commuter rail with the new price structure? I can see it mainly affecting South Eastern and Eastern Queens. Bayside, Bellrose, Rosedale these areas aren't too bad off. But would save a transfer at Jamaica or Flushing. So that might be a issue for LIRR. MN Hudson line might get a few riders at Marble Hill, University/ Morris Heights. For people going to the Eastside. Harlem line might get some crowing at Woodlawn, Fordham other then that where do you see the crowds?

For starters, all of the people that get off at Marble Hill, a lot of them do so to avoid paying a premium to go to Grand Central and switch there for the train.  That right there would be a problem because when I get on those peak trains at the Spuyten Duyvil or Riverdale stations, they are already overcrowded, so you'd automatically need more trains to address the crowding on peak trains.  Then you'd have to look at off-peak trains as well, which while not as crowded, still are crowded enough and have times when they can be packed as well, especially the last train on weekends. It's not as if MNRR and the LIRR are doing terrible off-peak.  I ride the Hudson Line on weekends and sometimes getting a seat isn't as easy as it should be.  I don't think MNRR wants to expand the hours, but they'd be forced for sure to either add more trains, AND/OR expand the hours of operation.  This is wayyy more complex than just changing the structure fare and letting more folks get on.  

 

Hell when we got service increases in Riverdale, the first thing I complained about at the hearing in North Riverdale was how overcrowded some trains were and the need to add and expand service later, and that was circa 2012, so imagine adding all of these folks now with a lower fare, and that's just the Hudson Line.  The Harlem Line is a true beast with some off-peak trains literally having barely any standing room.  

[RailRunRob]

I'm well aware that they are Rats in the City other than ones in the subway. TBH I never seen a Rat at an outdoor subway station, I'm talking about the open cut lines like Brighton, a mouse here and there? Yea but never a rat, point is there not nearly as common on outdoor lines as they are at Underground Subway stations, of curse they wouldn't be in El stations considering how they are designed.

I remember a credible poster on another forum saying that GCT is at capacity, keep in mind they took out some of the MN tracks for ESA construction.

Terminal capacity would be a issue. Found this information on seems abit out of date but cool none the less.

 

GCT http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~morlok/morlokpage/GCTCapacity.pdf

 

For starters, all of the people that get off at Marble Hill, a lot of them do so to avoid paying a premium to go to Grand Central and switch there for the train.  That right there would be a problem because when I get on those peak trains at the Spuyten Duyvil or Riverdale stations, they are already overcrowded, so you'd automatically need more trains to address the crowding on peak trains.  Then you'd have to look at off-peak trains as well, which while not as crowded, still are crowded enough and have times when they can be packed as well, especially the last train on weekends. It's not as if MNRR and the LIRR are doing terrible off-peak.  I ride the Hudson Line on weekends and sometimes getting a seat isn't as easy as it should be.  I don't think MNRR wants to expand the hours, but they'd be forced for sure to either add more trains, AND/OR expand the hours of operation.  This is wayyy more complex than just changing the structure fare and letting more folks get on.  

 

Hell when we got service increases in Riverdale, the first thing I complained about at the hearing in North Riverdale was how overcrowded some trains were and the need to add and expand service later, and that was circa 2012, so imagine adding all of these folks now with a lower fare, and that's just the Hudson Line.  The Harlem Line is a true beast with some off-peak trains literally having barely any standing room.  

Yeah you might have a point. If they can't meet this level of service as is could be very complicated indeed. Just reading the article myself Seems like there trying to execute this without really thinking about it. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Terminal capacity would be a issue. Found this information on seems abit out of date but cool none the less.

 

GCT http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~morlok/morlokpage/GCTCapacity.pdf

 

Yeah you might have a point. If they can't meet this level of service as is could be very complicated indeed. Just reading the article myself Seems like there trying to execute this without really thinking about it. 

Well Prendergast is aware of the potential overcrowding problem and noted it.  The city is just looking for any "easy fix" and the powers that be are willing to throw away money at a complex problem.  They're also running ferry service around the city soon and doing so without really understanding the needs of various communities.  I've attended several ferry service meetings (which were purposely poorly advertised) and it's amazing how little they know about how to truly serve the areas getting the service, but they're spending millions of dollars on the project.  In short, yes it sounds like a wonderful idea on paper, but in reality it isn't so sweet as it looks.

[RailRunRob]

Well Prendergast is aware of the potential overcrowding problem and noted it.  The city is just looking for any "easy fix" and the powers that be are willing to throw away money at a complex problem.  They're also running ferry service around the city soon and doing so without really understanding the needs of various communities.  I've attended several ferry service meetings (which were purposely poorly advertised) and it's amazing how little they know about how to truly serve the areas getting the service, but they're spending millions of dollars on the project.  In short, yes it sounds like a wonderful idea on paper, but in reality it isn't so sweet as it looks.

What a waste. It's just one of those things where the City is going to pay for it twice taking shortcuts!! Gezz they do everything halfway if they'd just take there time and do it right in the first place!

[peacemak3r]

For someone that preaches that NYC is a pedestrian city and is complaining for lowering fares is mind boggling.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

For someone that preaches that NYC is a pedestrian city and is complaining for lowering fares is mind boggling.

I support lowering the fares.  I just don't support lowering them to the price of a subway ride.

[Fresh Pond]

I'm well aware that they are Rats in the City other than ones in the subway. TBH I never seen a Rat at an outdoor subway station, I'm talking about the open cut lines like Brighton, a mouse here and there? Yea but never a rat, point is there not nearly as common on outdoor lines as they are at Underground Subway stations, of curse they wouldn't be in El stations considering how they are designed.

Go along Sea Beach and the Dyre branch at night, they there...especially Sea Beach. You'll see them during the day sometimes.

[Around the Horn]

I support lowering the fares.  I just don't support lowering them to the price of a subway ride.

Same.I think anywhere between the CityTicket fare and the Express bus fare is acceptable ($4.25-$6.50 price range)

[RailRunRob]

Same.I think anywhere between the CityTicket fare and the Express bus fare is acceptable ($4.25-$6.50 price range)

Yeah I agree with a Transfer that's fair.. 

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

Here's my nuanced position on this. If this is an effort to make offer a more attractive rail alternative in case of subway delays than fine. If the hope is to actually relieve crowding on buses and subways then it's not happening. The thing is that the Metro North/LIRR stops are not proximate enough to most people's residences for them to truly take advantage of the service. If I decided to use Metro North to enter Manhattan, I would need to take a bus to get there. That would eat up any time savings over the subway, and on top of that it's not a one seat ride. You're not going to get many riders to shift their two seat bus/subway commute for what could be in most cases an equally slow two seat bus/commuter train commute. If the masses in areas like Queens and the Bronx are more receptive to cheaper, more frequent MNRR/LIRR service then you've just shifted crowding from subways onto local buses (some of which in the Bronx and Queens are quite crowded already). No matter how you slice it NYCT service will be crowded and that has to be addressed separately from a proposal like this. As I said before I do welcome a cheaper MNRR/LIRR fare (not as cheap as the subway fare but something like say $3.75) and more service within city limits but this is me speaking as a North Bronxite knowing that the northern portion of the borough is only served by the least reliable subway lines in the city at intervals in some cases that are quite infrequent. I would see myself using MNRR in such a case if there were delays on the or lines but other than that local buses and subways likely will reign supreme for inter city transit.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Go along Sea Beach and the Dyre branch at night, they there...especially Sea Beach. You'll see them during the day sometimes.

I used to use the Sea Beach line when I visited friends in Gravesend and Bensonhurst back in the old days, and while the stations were always decrepit, I never saw rats. I'm sure now that there are some around with all of the trash that I see along the grounds between certain stops. Lots of areas for loitering and graffiti alll along the line.

[RailRunRob]

Here's my nuanced position on this. If this is an effort to make offer a more attractive rail alternative in case of subway delays than fine. If the hope is to actually relieve crowding on buses and subways then it's not happening. The thing is that the Metro North/LIRR stops are not proximate enough to most people's residences for them to truly take advantage of the service. If I decided to use Metro North to enter Manhattan, I would need to take a bus to get there. That would eat up any time savings over the subway, and on top of that it's not a one seat ride. You're not going to get many riders to shift their two seat bus/subway commute for what could be in most cases an equally slow two seat bus/commuter train commute. If the masses in areas like Queens and the Bronx are more receptive to cheaper, more frequent MNRR/LIRR service then you've just shifted crowding from subways onto local buses (some of which in the Bronx and Queens are quite crowded already). No matter how you slice it NYCT service will be crowded and that has to be addressed separately from a proposal like this. As I said before I do welcome a cheaper MNRR/LIRR fare (not as cheap as the subway fare but something like say $3.75) and more service within city limits but this is me speaking as a North Bronxite knowing that the northern portion of the borough is only served by the least reliable subway lines in the city at intervals in some cases that are quite infrequent. I would see myself using MNRR in such a case if there were delays on the or lines but other than that local buses and subways likely will reign supreme for inter city transit.

Good points I agree.. NYCT issues do need addressed on it's own.. This is a great conversion overall it's time the regional transportation moved to some type of unification whether it be better transfers or a new regional fare card.. man NYC is lightyears behind.