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.
The issue with connecting to Woodside is that the tracks join the main line going to Penn Station after Woodside station.
The issue with the LIC and Hunterspoint stops are that those are terminal stations that those are stations that terminate in LIC rather than going into Penn Station. Perhaps it’s possible for those existing stations to be served and to go into Penn Station, but I’m not sure of it.
There really should be at least an intermediate station to serve LIC that goes to Penn Station though given the development there and doing so could help shift the land use towards a greater mix of commercial and office rather than all that residential.
Thanks, appreciate it. I was just curious since you guys were talking about adding new stations in Queens whether it was technically possible for the project to connect to existing LIRR stations.
My concern with the LIC area in general, not related to this project, is whether the 7 train can handle the increased ridership tied to all the new construction. It's already very crowded. Some upgrades are being done now that will increase capacity somewhat but will it be enough?
This benefits Bronx residents and passengers who regularly travel to and from New Haven.
Passengers took about 8.1 million rides to and from Bronx stations on Metro-North last year, and about two-thirds travel to points north: places like White Plains, Stamford, and Greenwich, according to William Wheeler, the director of special project development and planning at the MTA.
"This is the largest reverse commute market that we know of in the United States,” he said, “and it’s grown 150% since 1990.”
Bronx MetroNorth Stations also include stations on the Poughkeepsie branch, which would be unrelated to this project and therefore reduce the number of passengers benefits from this project. Even putting that fact aside, 8.1 million rides in a year sounds like a lot until you put it into perspective. The subway alone carries 6 million riders in A SINGLE DAY. When you combine bus ridership, NYCT serves more customers in a single day then the amount of NYC riders that would benefit from this in an year.
In a perfect world, I would be all for this project but we have to be realistic and spend our transit dollars wisely. Seeing as NYC has the burden of financing the majority of the MTA, we owe it to NYC tax payers to make sure our transit dollars are spent on projects that benefit the MAJORITY of transit riders. We need to have priorities, and metronorth, with its all already astronomical subsidies from the city, isn’t one of them.
Bronx MetroNorth Stations also include stations on the Poughkeepsie branch, which would be unrelated to this project and therefore reduce the number of passengers benefits from this project. Even putting that fact aside, 8.1 million rides in a year sounds like a lot until you put it into perspective. The subway alone carries 6 million riders in A SINGLE DAY. When you combine bus ridership, NYCT serves more customers in a single day then the amount of NYC riders that would benefit from this in an year.
In a perfect world, I would be all for this project but we have to be realistic and spend our transit dollars wisely. Seeing as NYC has the burden of financing the majority of the MTA, we owe it to NYC tax payers to make sure our transit dollars are spent on projects that benefit the MAJORITY of transit riders. We need to have priorities, and metronorth, with its all already astronomical subsidies from the city, isn’t one of them.
Blah blah blah. You're comparing a commuter rail road to an entire subway system. Very bright.
Blah blah blah. You're comparing a commuter rail road to an entire subway system. Very bright.
When both systems draw from THE SAME FINITE capital budget, the comparison makes sense. Think pierrepont, think. We can either waste billions on the commuter rail that mostly benefits surbanities that want to choke the MTA financially, or we can invest in NYCT, where it’s riders fund the majority of the MTA. You can’t do both unless you want the MTA take on an absurd amount of debt and further exacerbate the maintenance problems we have today.
I say, if surbnites really want/need this project, let them pay for it. Let’s invest NYC transit dollars for NYC residents.
As a preface to all the other comments, I'd invite everyone to take a look at the U-Bahn system in Berlin, the RER system of Paris, the Chuo-Sobu and Yamanote line in Tokyo, the Taiwan rail system within Taipei, the various systems of London outside of the tube itself especially the Crossrail program, and several other programs where the commuter rail system has become an intrinsic part of the rapid transit system within the urban core.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MC305
Thanks, appreciate it. I was just curious since you guys were talking about adding new stations in Queens whether it was technically possible for the project to connect to existing LIRR stations.
My concern with the LIC area in general, not related to this project, is whether the 7 train can handle the increased ridership tied to all the new construction. It's already very crowded. Some upgrades are being done now that will increase capacity somewhat but will it be enough?
No thanks necessary. I think the snarkiness isn't very helpful at all. With signal upgrades and other improvements, the 7 train will be able to handle more, but I'm with you in that it's not enough. There needs to be more and the disparate plans for various commuter rail lines within and close to the city are key to this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astorian31
Bronx MetroNorth Stations also include stations on the Poughkeepsie branch, which would be unrelated to this project and therefore reduce the number of passengers benefits from this project. Even putting that fact aside, 8.1 million rides in a year sounds like a lot until you put it into perspective. The subway alone carries 6 million riders in A SINGLE DAY. When you combine bus ridership, NYCT serves more customers in a single day then the amount of NYC riders that would benefit from this in an year.
In a perfect world, I would be all for this project but we have to be realistic and spend our transit dollars wisely. Seeing as NYC has the burden of financing the majority of the MTA, we owe it to NYC tax payers to make sure our transit dollars are spent on projects that benefit the MAJORITY of transit riders. We need to have priorities, and metronorth, with its all already astronomical subsidies from the city, isn’t one of them.
I am not arguing to any extent that signal upgrades and improvements to the subway system aren't more necessary. However, I'd argue that the MTA can and needs to improve its service in parallel. Signal upgrades are the priority, but that by itself will not be enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astorian31
When both systems draw from THE SAME FINITE capital budget, the comparison makes sense. Think pierrepont, think. We can either waste billions on the commuter rail that mostly benefits surbanities that want to choke the MTA financially, or we can invest in NYCT, where it’s riders fund the majority of the MTA. You can’t do both unless you want the MTA take on an absurd amount of debt and further exacerbate the maintenance problems we have today.
I say, if surbnites really want/need this project, let them pay for it. Let’s invest NYC transit dollars for NYC residents.
There is a way to make these suburbanite dollars and their voting clout, since MTA is a state agency, work for NYC as well. It comes in the form of making the commuter rail system work for all parties much as the various systems I've mentioned at the top of this post. A narrow-minded look at this doesn't help because NYC, the city, ultimately needs to be competitive nationally and globally and annexing is not going to happen. The signal upgrades for the subway are absolutely necessary and should be first priority, but you can't necessarily get everyone in a state agency to go along with it and it is not by itself sufficient. What we need is a second system that improves things for the region as a whole.
There have been various plans for something called the second system in NYC--my argument is that the second system has been available to us the whole time. It's been available in the same way that it has been available and has been acted upon by virtually every other major city in the developed world. NYC's peer cities have often been argued to be London, Paris, and Tokyo and they have in various degrees acted upon the very basic idea of turning the commuter rail system into a through-running secondary rapid transit system within the city.
We have had some missteps, and I'd argue that our expenditure on East Side Access in the way we did it was a primary one though it's hard to say we should cancel it after the expenditure we've already put in. Instead of complex interlocking and giant subterranean stations in some of the most expensive parts of town (the Upper East Side and Midtown East), I think it should have been built as a through-running system that went from Grand Central down to lower Manhattan and crossing to Brooklyn into Atlantic Terminal as a loop. Even as it stands, work like this should be what MTA runs towards to make sure that this happens as it means fewer suburbanites having to transfer for their end destinations and therefore lessening by a huge amount the number of people that get thrown into morning rush hours on the subway, but also offers an express rapid transit line for city residents which would serve as a very strong argument for why to do this.
With combined NJ Transit/LIRR lines, a loop from Grand Central LIRR to downtown Manhattan then to Atlantic Terminal in Brooklyn, Penn Station Access, the Triboro RX Plan, and a bit more such as greater frequencies on LIRR/Metro-North/NJT commuter rail, we will have essentially created a "second system" within the city where all these commuter rail services interline. We are right now saddled by people too stupid to think about this in a pragmatic way and this is unlikely. I think this is horrendous, even though I've got mine in terms of very short commutes. My opinion is that we do not think about this in a reasonable way and have a ton of idiot naysayers.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 02-24-2018 at 12:05 AM..
As a preface to all the other comments, I'd invite everyone to take a look at the U-Bahn system in Berlin, the RER system of Paris, the Chuo-Sobu and Yamanote line in Tokyo, the Taiwan rail system within Taipei, the various systems of London outside of the tube itself especially the Crossrail program, and several other programs where the commuter rail system has become an intrinsic part of the rapid transit system within the urban core.
No thanks necessary. I think the snarkiness isn't very helpful at all. With signal upgrades and other improvements, the 7 train will be able to handle more, but I'm with you in that it's not enough. There needs to be more and the disparate plans for various commuter rail lines within and close to the city are key to this.
I am not arguing to any extent that signal upgrades and improvements to the subway system aren't more necessary. However, I'd argue that the MTA can and needs to improve its service in parallel. Signal upgrades are the priority, but that by itself will not be enough.
No, signal upgrades by itself will not be enough, but that doesnt mean there arent other capital plans that more worthy of being funded instead of this one. Surbanites arleady got more then they deserve with their massively over budget east side access. I see no reason to comprimise further with them when this money would be better spent finishing the second ave subway, extending the Utica Ave branch, buying more trains for increased service (some lines cant run more trains becasue there simply aren't any,) or countless of other projects.
There is a way to make these suburbanite dollars and their voting clout, since MTA is a state agency, work for NYC as well. It comes in the form of making the commuter rail system work for all parties much as the various systems I've mentioned at the top of this post. A narrow-minded look at this doesn't help because NYC, the city, ultimately needs to be competitive nationally and globally and annexing is not going to happen. The signal upgrades for the subway are absolutely necessary and should be first priority, but you can't necessarily get everyone in a state agency to go along with it and it is not by itself sufficient. What we need is a second system that improves things for the region as a whole.
There have been various plans for something called the second system in NYC--my argument is that the second system has been available to us the whole time. It's been available in the same way that it has been available and has been acted upon by virtually every other major city in the developed world. NYC's peer cities have often been argued to be London, Paris, and Tokyo and they have in various degrees acted upon the very basic idea of turning the commuter rail system into a through-running secondary rapid transit system within the city.
We have had some missteps, and I'd argue that our expenditure on East Side Access in the way we did it was a primary one though it's hard to say we should cancel it after the expenditure we've already put in. Instead of complex interlocking and giant subterranean stations in some of the most expensive parts of town (the Upper East Side and Midtown East), I think it should have been built as a through-running system that went from Grand Central down to lower Manhattan and crossing to Brooklyn into Atlantic Terminal as a loop. Even as it stands, work like this should be what MTA runs towards to make sure that this happens as it means fewer suburbanites having to transfer for their end destinations and therefore lessening by a huge amount the number of people that get thrown into morning rush hours on the subway, but also offers an express rapid transit line for city residents which would serve as a very strong argument for why to do this.
With combined NJ Transit/LIRR lines, a loop from Grand Central LIRR to downtown Manhattan then to Atlantic Terminal in Brooklyn, Penn Station Access, the Triboro RX Plan, and a bit more such as greater frequencies on LIRR/Metro-North/NJT commuter rail, we will have essentially created a "second system" within the city where all these commuter rail services interline. We are right now saddled by people too stupid to think about this in a pragmatic way and this is unlikely. I think this is horrendous, even though I've got mine in terms of very short commutes. My opinion is that we do not think about this in a reasonable way and have a ton of idiot naysayers.
I admire your optimisy, but unfourtanetly there are too many roadblocks for your dreams of a second system to even be realistic in NYC.
The first issue, where are you gonna send the trains when you start running the more frequent service necessary for the commuter rails to function as a second system? Grand Central can handle turning around more metro north trains, but the terminals on the other side can't, at least not the scale of increased service you're suggesting. PennStation can certainily not handle any increase in LIRR trains. Many parts of the commuter rail sysem is also single tracked, and surban residents fight tooth and nail against changing that. If you're thinking of avoding those problems by having many of the trains turn around within the city limits, where would you do it? Jamaica Station certainly wouldnt be able to handle it. Where would you store the hundred of additional new train cars necessary to run such an increase in service. Where would the money to fix these issues come from?
Sure, you could solve some of these issues by combining the LIRR and NJT and making Pennstation a through service station rather than a terminal, but then how would you even get to point where you combine the 2 agencies? LIRR and MetroNorth DO NOT get along, and they are both part of the MTA. What makes you think LIRR would want to merge with NJT? Not only that, but a big draw of living in NJ is avoiding NYC taxes, including the MTA tax. Combining the two agencies would require NJ to start contributing to the MTA. Good luck convincing ANY NJ state legislator (Republican or Dem) to pass a tax that dimishes one of the reasons for moving to Jersey in the first place.
See where I'm going with this? Your ideas are nice, and on paper, they are GREAT!!! But the truth of matter is all the things you are proposing are not only politically infeasible, they will also cost tens of billions, if not hundreds of billions of dollars to implement. We've already placated surburban riders with over 10 billion dollars sunk into east side access. Lets refocus our prioties and fix (and upgrade/expand) NYCT first. Instead of wasting tens to hundreds of billions of dollars trying to create a second sytem, lets finish the 2nd Ave subway. Not just down into lower Manhattan, but send it into Brooklyn like it was meant to. Lets extend Utica Ave. Reactivate the Rockaway branch, extend the N and 7 in queens. Completely revamp the bus system, including redisigning routes to better match service patterns. There are countless of better uses for the money.
Don't get me wrong. I am in no way shape or form suggesting that we should abandon any improvements to the commuter rail system, but how about we stick to minor improvements to the commuter rails (like double tracking remaining single track areas little by little) and focus on getting NYCT up to date and expanding it. Once the subways are no longer falling apart and modernized, and comple some of the big ticket construction items like 2nd Ave subway, should we start to consider some of your suggestions. Now is not the time.
Bronx MetroNorth Stations also include stations on the Poughkeepsie branch, which would be unrelated to this project and therefore reduce the number of passengers benefits from this project. Even putting that fact aside, 8.1 million rides in a year sounds like a lot until you put it into perspective. The subway alone carries 6 million riders in A SINGLE DAY. When you combine bus ridership, NYCT serves more customers in a single day then the amount of NYC riders that would benefit from this in an year.
In a perfect world, I would be all for this project but we have to be realistic and spend our transit dollars wisely. Seeing as NYC has the burden of financing the majority of the MTA, we owe it to NYC tax payers to make sure our transit dollars are spent on projects that benefit the MAJORITY of transit riders. We need to have priorities, and metronorth, with its all already astronomical subsidies from the city, isn’t one of them.
8.1 million REVERSE commute rides. That's a lot of people going in the "wrong" direction. It's the largest reverse commute in the nation. (I know, I know, you didn't read the study.) There is a lot more to this than the commute. It's opening up employment in other localities in the Tri-state area, making working in parts of Connecticut viable. It's also making a viable alternative for commuters coming from Connecticut and became a high priority after several derailments that causes major issues for months.
You obviously DID NOT READ the study. This has been studied and planned since the early 2000s for economic and business viability. This is not a fly by night idea.
And you fail to recognize that the current 6 train cannot handle any more passengers. You fail to recognize the Coop city (a population of 43,000) needs a viable alternative to get into Manhattan. The Parkchester condos is a population of nearly 30,000. Much of that complex is not close to the subway. There are a ton of tall, high density buildings in the area where people commute via bus to get to the 6 train. (A train that is sardine cans.) There are a bunch of new high density housing complexes in the works because you know, there is a housing shortage. You can't add thousands of more people in an area and just add them to the most crowded subway line in the city. How are you going to get them to work? Without more transit, its not viable. This part of the Bronx actually needs more transit options simply because the current transit, the most congestion subway line in the city, needs to move more people.
Read the study before you complain about why it sucks because there is solid reasoning written in the study.
When both systems draw from THE SAME FINITE capital budget, the comparison makes sense. Think pierrepont, think. We can either waste billions on the commuter rail that mostly benefits surbanities that want to choke the MTA financially, or we can invest in NYCT, where it’s riders fund the majority of the MTA. You can’t do both unless you want the MTA take on an absurd amount of debt and further exacerbate the maintenance problems we have today.
I say, if surbnites really want/need this project, let them pay for it. Let’s invest NYC transit dollars for NYC residents.
You act like four stops in the Bronx does not benefit NYC residents. Somehow, if it were making stops in Queens, I have a feeling you wouldn't have such vociferous objection.
The new Bronx Metro North stations will not benefit only the commuters to Westchester/CT or Manhattan, but also people who need to get between the Bronx and up further north (Upstate New York and New England). Right now, a train trip from Boston to the Bronx involves taking Acela to Manhattan, then a bus or subway to the Bronx - expensive and takes forever. The new rail service will really open the Bronx to the overland business (winky wink, Jeff Bezos!).
Incidentally, the initial information was that the physical construction of the stations would start at the end of 2019, and the first trains would start running in 2022 (actually end 2021/New Year's 2022) - I don't know what the projected timeline is now.
8.1 million REVERSE commute rides. That's a lot of people going in the "wrong" direction. It's the largest reverse commute in the nation. (I know, I know, you didn't read the study.) There is a lot more to this than the commute. It's opening up employment in other localities in the Tri-state area, making working in parts of Connecticut viable. It's also making a viable alternative for commuters coming from Connecticut and became a high priority after several derailments that causes major issues for months.
You obviously DID NOT READ the study. This has been studied and planned since the early 2000s for economic and business viability. This is not a fly by night idea.
And you fail to recognize that the current 6 train cannot handle any more passengers. You fail to recognize the Coop city (a population of 43,000) needs a viable alternative to get into Manhattan. The Parkchester condos is a population of nearly 30,000. Much of that complex is not close to the subway. There are a ton of tall, high density buildings in the area where people commute via bus to get to the 6 train. (A train that is sardine cans.) There are a bunch of new high density housing complexes in the works because you know, there is a housing shortage. You can't add thousands of more people in an area and just add them to the most crowded subway line in the city. How are you going to get them to work? Without more transit, its not viable. This part of the Bronx actually needs more transit options simply because the current transit, the most congestion subway line in the city, needs to move more people.
Read the study before you complain about why it sucks because there is solid reasoning written in the study.
You should reread your own quote: "8.1 million rides to and from Bronx stations." Let's look at the ridership table from a link you yourself have provided:
Tremont
20 inbound | 77 outbound | 97 total
Melrose
13 inbound | 126 outbound | 139 total
Fordham
737 inbound | 5,354 outbound | 6,091 total
Williamsbridge
167 inbound | 536 outbound | 703 total
Morris Heights
36 inbound | 107 outbound | 143 total
University Heights
40 inbound | 212 outbound | 252 total
Obviously the report does not include totals for all Bronx station, but its safe to assume that given these pathetically low ridership totals, the 8.1 million ridership figure is for for ALL MetroNorth Commutes involving a Bronx Station. Not just reverse commutes from the Bronx. It is common for MTA officials to twsit numbers to try to spin things in their favor. Lets take a deeper dive into the report you provided.
"Outbound rides are priced much more favorably for Bronxites. For example, while a weekday fare travel- ing inbound from Melrose to Grand Central Termi- nal costs $8.25, the outbound cost from Melrose to White Plains is only $3.50, despite being more than twice as far away."
Again, these reverse commutes require MASSIVE SUBSIDIES. Even more so than your typical MetroNorth ride, which already recieves massive subsidies itself.
"Additionally, outbound ridership is very reliant on the accessibility and connectivity of the station to their final destination, the so called “last mile”. Distant office parks which do not provide shuttle service may be inaccessible to transit riders."
"Nonetheless, despite all the current deterrents and low ridership levels, according to Metro-North, the outbound commute from Manhattan and Bronx stations represents the largest rail reverse commute market in the country."
Here's another MTA spin. They ADMIT that reverse commute ridership is LOW. I would say pathetically low, but they spin it as a positive by comparing to the rest of the country. Being the best of the worst is not a positive. The rest of the country has pathetic public transport, of course reverse commuting in NY is going to be the largest in the country. Do Not Forget though that this reverse commute statistic INCLUDES Bronx AND MANHATTAN.
Perhaps it is you that should learn to read things carefully rather than taking statements made by MTA PR at face value?
-----------------------------
It is impossible to argue that this project DOES NOT BENEFIT SURBANITES MORE than city residents. Will there be benefits to city residents? Yes. But NYC residents could be much better served by other projects instead. Just like current Bronx MetroNorth stations see pathetically low ridership totals, so will these new stations. Even just focusing on Bronx residents, rebuilding the 3rd Ave El (by extending the 2ve subway) as a subway would be an undoubtly better use of scarce transit resources.
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.
