Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, I do think it needs to be restructured. I actually think Metro-North and LIRR should be forced to consolidate and that if there was any semblance of sense, they'd work towards standardization of their electrical systems along with New Jersey Transit along with consolidated through-running services. I'm sure there will be a lot of pushback with the union as had happened with SEPTA. These are structural issues that can and should be dealt with. This also wouldn't be the first time metropolitan transit agencies have been restructured, but it's always a slog. In transit circles, it's said that good mass transit goes first organization, then electronics, then concrete. This throwing straight in on concrete is dumb when there is a lot of organization that needs to be changed first (and electronics such as signaling).
However, it's not necessarily true it would need to have heavy restructuring in order for the operation I mentioned (though I think restructuring needs to be pushed regardless). If there is going to be additional capacity and train frequencies already, then it probably needs purchase of a little more rolling stock. In terms of integrated fare, MTA is trying to roll out RFID tap cards at some point which can be fine for boarding for the limited number of stations within the city. Additionally, MTA actually already has a program that creates reduced fare within city limits (aside from the difference in fare zone costs)--it's called CityTicket and it's already in operation for weekdays only. What can be done with fairly little restructuring is basically piggybacking off of current plans (and they'll need to anyways, because the Penn Station Access plan going through the Bronx likely won't fly so well if its prices and service frequencies are bad) and expanding on them via more rolling stock and an expanded CityTicket program. All of that can be done with fairly minimal cost above what is supposedly already in place and can be useful as a case for testing the waters of a NYC RER/S-Bahn kind of service.
What does this have to do with the South Bronx? Well, there are a lot of lines that go through the South Bronx and fast, quick transit will make these places more appealing for working professionals.
Am thinking you'd have to move *heaven and earth* for such a thing to happen, especially with the unions. Thing is Metro North has already increased service to the South Bronx on weekends to attract more ridership. To provide the kind of service you're thinking would need *a lot* of investment in more rolling stock and would have to lengthen the platforms at both Melrose and Tremont assuming you got a *huge* increase in demand to build up the sort of demand you're forecasting. Thing is do not see the South Bronx gentrifying on a large scale despite the increase in rents. Those moving in generally want the subway, and the Metro North stations in the area are in located in rather isolated spots. A place like Riverdale does well with Metro North despite the isolated locations because you have people with $$$ who don't want to be bothered with the subway and are willing the pay the high fares which are almost three times as much as the subway during peak periods. Even at $4.25 the City Ticket does okay but will not see that many people flocking to the thing.
I think you might've missed something. A lot of people have moved out there and it's considered a really hip neighborhood. There's quite a bit of new low-rise construction. Some of my favorite restaurants and bars are out there. This has been going on for a while now, and it's likely the ferry stop gets its go-ahead because people have been living and visiting the area.
You missed the entirety of the thread where I said it basically took more than 15 years to get any infrastructure out there. The point I was making was that areas without transit do gentrify too, and just because it's close to a river, doesn't mean it will gentrify first. Red Hook was my example because it STILL doesn't have the transportation. I know its pending, but 15 years is an awfully long wait. In 15 years from now, i'll be ready to move out of NYC permanently.
Furthermore, you also have to think about the next downturn (and it will come). Which areas are going to take the greater hit; Brooklyn/Manhattan or the Bronx? If you follow the RE market then you know that rents are actually dropping in upper Manhattan. The market's reaching a peak.
The places that will drop the fastest are the places that rose the fastest. If the area rose slow and steadily, (even if it was "the hood"), it will not depreciate so intensely.
You missed the entirety of the thread where I said it basically took more than 15 years to get any infrastructure out there. The point I was making was that areas without transit do gentrify too, and just because it's close to a river, doesn't mean it will gentrify first. Red Hook was my example because it STILL doesn't have the transportation. I know its pending, but 15 years is an awfully long wait. In 15 years from now, i'll be ready to move out of NYC permanently.
Okay, I get what you're saying, though gentrification definitely goes faster with shorter commute times to major work places.
Also, the Red Hook ferry service isn't pending--it's actually currently in service and people have been using the once-free IKEA ferry for almost a decade though I expect the nyc ferry service will reduce those numbers quite a bit. Citibike has also been there for a while now and biking was/is a popular means of getting around down there as long as I've been visiting the place because the physical proximity of Red Hook to other thriving core neighborhoods is very short and well-geared towards biking.
Smack your head harder, I revised it as Tremont as I misremembered the stations. The service pattern I'm talking about is what's called Regional Express Rail or S-Bahn services in other countries. There's no particular name for it in Japan, but it has the same kind of service. It's basically where you work on extending multiple branches out far into the metropolitan area and then have them interlined in areas of high density so that they serve as rapid transit systems. It's a lot more efficient as a service overall and basically better utilizes existing infrastructure.
NYC has a massive number of old rail right-of-ways and areas to potentially add service--the larger issue is that the system still uses stub track'ed terminal ends in the core, but even with that the current slate of projects make it possible for rapid transit-like service in the Bronx. There's the East Side Access which means another East River crossing route and berths for LIRR which then clears up space at Penn Station tracks for non-Hudson crossing trains which is why there's the follow up Penn Station Access plan:
The New Haven lines are trying to add more services. Routing to Penn Station means that more berths are opened up at Grand Central. The new Tappan Zee has the ability to handle commuter rail lines so that there's service connection West of the Hudson. Of these, the last one is the only one that has no real commitment save for having built the bridge to be capable of handling trains, but the Hudson Line which would take that isn't going through the tracks between Melrose and Fordham.
If these all go through, then why wouldn't this be a good use of the infrastructure, especially since the portion there is four-tracked? It'd be a lot cheaper and can come around a lot faster than waiting for the second avenue subway phases to finish and then try to get it expanded into the Bronx while it's about two to three short blocks away from Third Avenue.
Isn't almost all of the Harlem Line ROW up through The Bronx( Park Avenue,alongside Webster Avenue,etc all the way up to Woodlawn) in an open trench(below) street grade already?
Might be better/easier/cheaper to sell air rights above in order to fund a total redo of the channel and turn it all into a tunnel. And think of how beneficial that would be in weaving all those neighborhoods back together. They could make some of it residential, some commercial and some parks.
Am thinking you'd have to move *heaven and earth* for such a thing to happen, especially with the unions. Thing is Metro North has already increased service to the South Bronx on weekends to attract more ridership. To provide the kind of service you're thinking would need *a lot* of investment in more rolling stock and would have to lengthen the platforms at both Melrose and Tremont assuming you got a *huge* increase in demand to build up the sort of demand you're forecasting. Thing is do not see the South Bronx gentrifying on a large scale despite the increase in rents. Those moving in generally want the subway, and the Metro North stations in the area are in located in rather isolated spots. A place like Riverdale does well with Metro North despite the isolated locations because you have people with $$$ who don't want to be bothered with the subway and are willing the pay the high fares which are almost three times as much as the subway during peak periods. Even at $4.25 the City Ticket does okay but will not see that many people flocking to the thing.
Are you talking about the consolidation would require moving heaven and earth or just for more service and CityTicket expansion?
I get it for the consolidation (which is still necessary, because moving heaven and earth is going to be far cheaper in the long run than the way the commuter rail system is currently operated). However, the price for running this specific service is significantly lower.
Recall that I wrote this as an alternative in budget and timeline to a Third Avenue subway system which will take far longer and cost far more than a mythical fifth phase of the second avenue subway. Building stations (or lengthening stations), running/having additional rolling stock on top of the already slated expansions (perhaps the purchase of some shorter EMUs expressly for this purpose?), and working out a system for the rfid fare card can certainly be done within a few years of the East Side Access plan being finished and will cost orders of magnitude less.
Are you talking about the consolidation would require moving heaven and earth or just for more service and CityTicket expansion?
I get it for the consolidation (which is still necessary, because moving heaven and earth is going to be far cheaper in the long run than the way the commuter rail system is currently operated).
Recall that I wrote this as an alternative in budget and timeline to a Third Avenue subway system which will take far longer and cost far more than a mythical fifth phase of the second avenue subway. Building stations (or lengthening stations), running/having additional rolling stock on top of the already slated expansions, and working out a system for the rfid fare card can certainly be done within a few years of the East Side Access plan being finished and will cost orders of magnitude less.
Am talking about the whole thing... You talk about turning the commuter rail into a subway as if it's so easy. One thing you didn't address was political clout. As was said those commuters from the wealthy parts of Westchester, Connecticut and elsewhere will *not* want their lines turned into subways, and am willing to bet that they'd raise hell. They're the main ridership base, so am not sure how you deal with that, but you completely ignored that point. Already several things in place that keep people from the city from using the things more often. The New Haven Line doesn't take on any passengers from Fordham to Grand Central due to an agreement with Connecticut.
Isn't almost all of the Harlem Line ROW up through The Bronx( Park Avenue,alongside Webster Avenue,etc all the way up to Woodlawn) in an open trench(below) street grade already?
Might be better/easier/cheaper to sell air rights above in order to fund a total redo of the channel and turn it all into a tunnel. And think of how beneficial that would be in weaving all those neighborhoods back together. They could make some of it residential, some commercial and some parks.
That's an interesting point. I think if they do this and rebuild Tremont, Melrose and/or other stations, then they can potentially do what is common in East Asia and some other parts of the world where the MTA leases the station and its area for development with some stipulations and gets funding by selling the license to lease and operate the commercial development with a percentage of revenue that also comes to MTA (made valuable by basically being atop the now rapid transit station). Along with the idea of capping parts of the ROW, the creation of a transit/retail center would also help knit neighborhoods together.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 09-07-2017 at 03:35 PM..
What do you all think is stopping the Bronx from seeing rapid gentrification? Any why aren't NYCHA projects allowed to get bulldozed and developed into luxury residential buildings?
Also, when people say things like "my rent is going up because of gentrification. I may no longer afford to be able to live here soon", do they ever think to themselves "hmm, my rent is going up. What can I do to raise my salary or make extra cash so I can keep up with demand or possibly be able to afford one of these luxury apartments being built?"
Some of things needs to be thought out. Just like having kids while living in poverty should be thought out.
What do you all think is stopping the Bronx from seeing rapid gentrification? Any why aren't NYCHA projects allowed to get bulldozed and developed into luxury residential buildings?
Also, when people say things like "my rent is going up because of gentrification. I may no longer afford to be able to live here soon", do they ever think to themselves "hmm, my rent is going up. What can I do to raise my salary or make extra cash so I can keep up with demand or possibly be able to afford one of these luxury apartments being built?"
Some of things needs to be thought out. Just like having kids while living in poverty should be thought out.
It's geometry/geography to some extent. Think of either of the two central business districts in Manhattan as the center of a series of concentric circles. Each subsequent ring is another ten minute or so of travel time to the center. With each ring that you go further out, the larger the area that is enclosed between that ring and the previous ring. Now think of the influx of transplants or the creation of decent paying jobs happening at a steady total amount. If that rate keeps steady, but the area they need to fill to get to the next ring becomes larger and larger then that filling of the ring is going to take longer and longer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
