Im Making An (1) Train Schedule

[Union Tpke]

This is a rather good plan, and I would be willing to abandon Harlem-148th. A new 145th Street station that would be 10 cars long would be built. The northern end would be around 147th or 148th Street. The new tunnel under the Harlem would allow 3 service to get onto the Jerome Avenue Line, DOUBLING the TPH on the line.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I was talking about when they were under construction. Do you really think that the MTA would shut down all service on the line to rebuilt the tunnel, and the deep stations at 157th, 168th, 181st and 191st? Do you realize how much it would cost? It would cost billions and billions. This would only save minimum time. It would be a much better investment to have open gangway trains and the construction of necessary subway lines.

I'm aware of it, but that doesn't mean that the work may not be needed.  Something will have to be done if overcrowding continues.

Edited March 21, 2017 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Union Tpke]

I'm aware of it, but that doesn't mean that the work may not be needed.  Something will have to be done if overcrowding continues.

 

So you would waste billions on that? Overcrowding on the is not worse than crowding on the .

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So you would waste billions on that? Overcrowding on the is not worse than crowding on the .

It isn't now, but we're talking about down the road, and particularly for areas that only have the as an option or the .  This would be great for Riverdale, Upper Manhattan, and the Bronx.

Edited March 21, 2017 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Union Tpke]

It isn't now, but we're talking about down the road, and particularly for areas that only have the as an option or the .  This would be great for Riverdale, Upper Manhattan, and the Bronx.

 

181st Street is on the NRHP so your plan won't even get past the planning process unless you have the third track run in a new tunnel under the existing line.

[RailRunRob]

Are you insane? You would rather abandon Harlem-148th just to built that flyover?

That's a fairly new station anyways. It came from the yard tracks back to the yard it would return.  I still don't understand why they couldn't Save the 9th ave line Bronx segment what a waste. A extension isn't a bad idea was going to happen anyways back in day!

Edited March 22, 2017 by RailRunRob

[RailRunRob]

It's 2017.  Those tracks were built how many years ago? I think that the technology that we have should've improved enough for them to add a third track.  People risk their lives constructing new things every day.  Hell, I went on a construction site years ago where we had to hoist a piano on the side of a building with an extremely busy street below.  Do you think that stopped us from continuing with the project? No.  We met with the board members and I did my job as the manager to ensure that the contractors obtained the insurance necessary to complete that portion of the project.  I'm sure that whatever precautions needed would be taken to mitigate the risk of injury or death, but the reality is people can be killed or injured for the simplest things.  You have no idea how many guys in my old office were injured on the job.  Life goes on.  

 

 

 

 

This would definitely be a deep boring project its alot for one line.. plus the disruption rock dirt removal.   Could give other area 's subway access 1st for sure.  Utica ave, Southeastern Queens, Bold indeed my friend!

 

 

[Fresh Pond]

 

 

This is a rather good plan, and I would be willing to abandon Harlem-148th. A new 145th Street station that would be 10 cars long would be built. The northern end would be around 147th or 148th Street. The new tunnel under the Harlem would allow 3 service to get onto the Jerome Avenue Line, DOUBLING the TPH on the line.

That tunnel would have one steep ass grade, that area is more or less at sea level

[bobtehpanda]

Is there even demand for such a service? Anyone looking for the East Side can catch the or at 161, and the and are not as congested as some of the other lines.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Is there even demand for such a service? Anyone looking for the East Side can catch the or at 161, and the and are not as congested as some of the other lines.

The and have their own problems. For the headways that they have during the rush, you would think that the lines aren't bad, but they are. Overcrowding has become a systemwide problem.

181st Street is on the NRHP so your plan won't even get past the planning process unless you have the third track run in a new tunnel under the existing line.

Not the end of the world. Obviously a study would have to be done first to see how feasible it would be and what sort of positive and negative impacts would occur.

[RailRunRob]

That tunnel would have one steep ass grade, that area is more or less at sea level

It could be done you have 1,100 feet from 145th to the shoreline you could get 45-50 feet @ 4-4.5 % grade. Steep but not unheard of. The station extension would have to be on the southern end towards 144th-143rd the junction is at 142nd correct?

 

Is there even demand for such a service? Anyone looking for the East Side can catch the or at 161, and the and are not as congested as some of the other lines.

If that's the case then it can serve the extreme Western Bronx. High Bridge and University Heights could use the service. Just have the straddle the Hudson Line to Fordham or Marble Hill. There's seem to be enough room to support 2 extra tracks. (Check Putnam line below)

 

Edited March 22, 2017 by RailRunRob

[Lawrence St]

They in the entire 100 years of operating have never had (excluding the on Sea Beach and on the Rockaways) a subway line running DIRECTLY parallel to a railroad.

[RailRunRob]

They in the entire 100 years of operating have never had (excluding the on Sea Beach and on the Rockaways) a subway line running DIRECTLY parallel to a railroad.

 Your point? No live person in history has been to Mars either but there still trying and pushing to do it.

Edited March 22, 2017 by RailRunRob

[RR503]

They in the entire 100 years of operating have never had (excluding the on Sea Beach and on the Rockaways) a subway line running DIRECTLY parallel to a railroad.

So? It's legal and done all over the country.. I actually quite like the idea...

[MysteriousBtrain]

They in the entire 100 years of operating have never had (excluding the on Sea Beach and on the Rockaways) a subway line running DIRECTLY parallel to a railroad.

Path does it in Jersey. It is most noticeable at its Harrison Station. And it was proposed numerous times to run right-of-way on the QBL bypass.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It could be done you have 1,100 feet from 145th to the shoreline you could get 45-50 feet @ 4-4.5 % grade. Steep but not unheard of. The station extension would have to be on the southern end towards 144th-143rd the junction is at 142nd correct?

 

If that's the case then it can serve the extreme Western Bronx. High Bridge and University Heights could use the service. Just have the straddle the Hudson Line to Fordham or Marble Hill. There's seem to be enough room to support 2 extra tracks. (Check Putnam line below)

 

Back with that Hudson Line idea again huh... I don't like it.  Subways run on their own thing and the railroads on their own thing.   We don't need to screw up Metro-North just to provide subway service.  That's one thing that the City and the doesn't understand, and why congestion is worsening in this city.  It isn't about packing everyone onto the subway.  People (I should say we millennials don't want to because we're the main ones driving the direction of transportation these days) don't just want to get their destination.  They also want to do so in some relative level of comfort.  My girlfriend was telling me about some sort of taxi share program last night that can get you to Canal Street from say Midtown for something like $5.50. In addition to expanding our transportation system (not just the subways), we have to make them more attractive (some people may think otherwise), but commuters are voting with their feet.  

 

The other thing is the stations on the Hudson Line aren't all that accessible.  How would you address that? Shuttle buses?  The only one that is tolerable is the Yankees-East 153rd street. The others require a hike up step streets or the like (University Heights is somewhat accessible being right by Fordham Rd but there's a really steep hill there too).

[RailRunRob]

And you know what to tie it all back in. A extension via the Hudson/Old Putnam Line could help to balance out the on the Bronx side. As noted with more people moving into Kingsbridge and Riverdale as well open up a whole other option for riders. Besides the yard reconfigure and tunneling under the Harlem River which is a cakewalk in comparison to the East River crossings. This wouldn't be too hard to implement.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

And you know what to tie it all back in. A extension via the Hudson/Old Putnam Line could help to balance out the on the Bronx side. As noted with more people moving into Kingsbridge and Riverdale as well open up a whole other option for riders. Besides the yard reconfigure and tunneling under the Harlem River which is a cakewalk in comparison to the East River crossings. This wouldn't be too hard to implement.

That doesn't make it ok. You would get serious push back from the people living along Palisade Avenue. Quite a few of them showed up to the Metro-North hearing in North Riverdale that I attended to complain that the extra service would mean more shuttle buses running through Riverdale, meaning more vibrations and noise which they didn't care for.  The areas west of the Parkway in particular are very quiet.  As someone who lives near the Parkway, I can tell you that I value having that peace and quiet and anything that would jeopardize that, I would fight tooth and nail.  Those views that those folks get of the Hudson aren't cheap and having a subway running would change things considerably. Not only more noise, but more traffic, congestion and people.  Riverdale has very narrow streets in some areas and I'm not sure if we can absorb any more of congestion.  Hell I'm west of Riverdale Avenue, and even I can hear some of those Metro-North trains.  I don't want to hear a subway every 5 - 10 minutes.  

Edited March 22, 2017 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Lawrence St]

No you guys misunderstood my point;

 

I meant it's not feasible to run a subway service right next to a railroad. Weren't there like 4 track connections between the subway system and the LIRR/MNRR (i.e between the and LIRR?)

[RailRunRob]

Back with that Hudson Line idea again huh... I don't like it.  Subways run on their own thing and the railroads on their own thing.   We don't need to screw up Metro-North just to provide subway service.  That's one thing that the City and the doesn't understand, and why congestion is worsening in this city.  It isn't about packing everyone onto the subway.  People (I should say we millennials don't want to because we're the main ones driving the direction of transportation these days) don't just want to get their destination.  They also want to do so in some relative level of comfort.  My girlfriend was telling me about some sort of taxi share program last night that can get you to Canal Street from say Midtown for something like $5.50. In addition to expanding our transportation system (not just the subways), we have to make them more attractive (some people may think otherwise), but commuters are voting with their feet.  

 

The other thing is the stations on the Hudson Line aren't all that accessible.  How would you address that? Shuttle buses?  The only one that is tolerable is the Yankees-East 153rd street. The others require a hike up step streets or the like (University Heights is somewhat accessible being right by Fordham Rd but there's a really steep hill there too).

Kinda the same idea from before just now with Subway and not Rail This wouldn't affect Metro-North service one-bit parallel trackage but separate rights of way. Correct the area is hilly You also have hilly typography along the and . These stations would all overlap Metro-North stations HighBridge-167 may be the hardest. All the other stops are pretty well connected. Examples for your viewing pleasure 

 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

No you guys misunderstood my point;

 

I meant it's not feasible to run a subway service right next to a railroad. Weren't there like 4 track connections between the subway system and the LIRR/MNRR (i.e between the and LIRR?)

Not only that but Metro-North has its own problems.  There are times when they have trains running on fewer tracks because of track issues and so having to share those tracks with subways would mean more delays, more congestion and increase the likelihood of Metro-North riders being ripped off paying high fares for crap service.  My commute is hard enough as it is.  If I wanted to take the subway, I would go over to the train on Broadway.  

Kinda the same idea from before just now with Subway and not Rail This wouldn't affect Metro-North service one-bit parallel trackage but separate rights of way. Correct the area is hilly You also have hilly typography along the and . These stations would all overlap Metro-North stations HighBridge-167 may be the hardest. All the other stops are pretty well connected. Examples for your viewing pleasure 

 

Well my question is where exactly is this space at along the Hudson Line that you claim exists for more tracks? I don't see it. The line runs almost right up against the Hudson River most of the time, and even below Marble Hill it's tight.  Are you going to reclaim some of the river?  You have the Deegan on the other side for portions of the line as well.

[RailRunRob]

That doesn't make it ok. You would get serious push back from the people living along Palisade Avenue. Quite a few of them showed up to the Metro-North hearing in North Riverdale that I attended to complain that the extra service would mean more shuttle buses running through Riverdale, meaning more vibrations and noise which they didn't care for.  The areas west of the Parkway in particular are very quiet.  As someone who lives near the Parkway, I can tell you that I value having that peace and quiet and anything that would jeopardize that, I would fight tooth and nail.  Those views that those folks get of the Hudson aren't cheap and having a subway running would change things considerably. Not only more noise, but more traffic, congestion and people.  Riverdale has very narrow streets in some areas and I'm not sure if we can absorb any more of congestion.  Hell I'm west of Riverdale Avenue, and even I can hear some of those Metro-North trains.  I don't want to hear a subway every 5 - 10 minutes.  

No, you miss understood the would spilt before the Marble Hill Metro-North station it wouldn't technically touch Riverdale Proper. It would tuck into the old Putnam ROW see below.  

 

Edited March 22, 2017 by RailRunRob

[Via Garibaldi 8]

No, you miss understood the would spilt before the Marble Hill Metro-North station it wouldn't technical touch Riverdale Proper. It would tuck into the old Putnam ROW see below.  

 

Oh you want to use that area again?  Yeah I think we talked about that idea before and I recall being iffy on it.  I would have to see how that all played out in terms of the track situation and so on. 

[RailRunRob]

So just the Harlem River section of the Hudson Line.

[RailRunRob]

Oh you want to use that area again?  Yeah I think we talked about that idea before and I recall being iffy on it.  I would have to see how that all played out in terms of the track situation and so on. 

Right we did talk about it in the context of having a second FRA-regulated service Between Subway and Commuter rail. Not Subway. But this section of the line has unused space that could be utilized. I feel it could ease some of the pressure coming to Kingsbridge and Riverdale to a lesser existent as well as open up options for the West Bronx. A lot cheaper than subway.  

No you guys misunderstood my point;

 

I meant it's not feasible to run a subway service right next to a railroad. Weren't there like 4 track connections between the subway system and the LIRR/MNRR (i.e between the and LIRR?)

See my examples from Chicago and Boston. You just have to separate the ROW's FRA/FTA regulations.