SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   New York City - Transit News (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=154524)

k1052 Jan 19, 2022 5:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 9500901)
The 2nd reason is for future extensions. Hochul's plan also includes the Cross Harbor Tunnel, which can be used for passenger service to Staten Island and the North Shore if and only if Interboro is also built to mainline specs. The same goes for the Hell Gate Line at the other end. For now Amtrak is putting the kibosh on using Hell Gate for Interboro so it can't have a Bronx connection, but that could change with different Amtrak leadership. Would be great if MTA didn't also erect a huge technological barrier to that future extension.

Related to this is there any reason not to put the 4th track back on the Hell Gate? NYAR could expand their business if they can take more cars over more of the day (would need yard expansion though) and would help accommodate the Triboro.

Busy Bee Jan 19, 2022 6:18 PM

I have little doubt it will get its fourth track back even if it isnt immediately, or ever, used for an interboro connection scheme. An interlocking at the junction with the fremont secondary (or even just switches further railroad north) could give M-N Hell Gate Line trains more scheduling flexibility with Amtrak over the bridge and the NYCR.

mrnyc Jan 19, 2022 7:49 PM

more on the interborough express:


Bronx Residents Say They're Left Out of Governor’s Inter-Borough Express

by Stephen Nessen


When Governor Kathy Hochul revived a nearly 30-year old transit idea to use freight tracks running from southern Brooklyn through Queens for a new passenger rail line, she did not include the Bronx, which had been part of a proposal originally laid out by the Regional Plan Association.

Now, some Bronx residents are pushing back, saying they would also like a quick connection to the other boroughs.


more:
https://gothamist.com/news/bronx-res...orough-express

ardecila Jan 19, 2022 7:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 9507693)
Related to this is there any reason not to put the 4th track back on the Hell Gate? NYAR could expand their business if they can take more cars over more of the day (would need yard expansion though) and would help accommodate the Triboro.

No legitimate reason, no.

I heard someone mention that they'd have to move the signal huts that sit in the 4th trackway and they couldn't possibly find another place for them... I swear NY planners and pols will latch onto any reason to explain why they can't do something.

Busy Bee Jan 19, 2022 8:02 PM

Signal huts. That's hilarious. What's the latest Norwegian marvel..? Like a ship canal that goes through a mountain tunnel with an underwater highway or something? And we can't restore a track because of a "signal hut."

k1052 Jan 19, 2022 8:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 9507922)
No legitimate reason, no.

I heard someone mention that they'd have to move the signal huts that sit in the 4th trackway and they couldn't possibly find another place for them... I swear NY planners and pols will latch onto any reason to explain why they can't do something.

lol figures

mrnyc Jan 20, 2022 3:32 PM

ask the mta:


Q: Are you planning on expanding subway lines anytime soon? It’s been 11 years since we saw the V train running. Any chance that the V or another retired subway line may be restored? — Name withheld

A: When it comes to retired lines, not at this moment. But we’re always looking at new ideas. Right now, we’re particularly excited about Governor Hochul’s Interborough Express proposal, which is moving into the environmental review phase. The project smartly repurposes existing freight rail infrastructure to better connect communities in western Brooklyn and Queens not currently served by rail.

We’ll be considering Interborough for inclusion in the 2025-2029 Capital Program, but further evaluation is required before anything is set in stone. Still, the environmental review is an exciting first step. We’ll keep you posted on what letter this new line might receive in the future.

The next Ask the MTA column is scheduled for Feb. 13. Send us your questions at askthemta@amny.com.

Busy Bee Jan 20, 2022 3:57 PM

Quote:

We’ll keep you posted on what letter this new line might receive in the future.
Seems like a peculiar thing to say if you weren't working with the assumption the new service will be subway based. But then again it's absurdly early in the process and I'm not sure I'd put too much value in the response of a low level MTA staffer.

Crawford Jan 20, 2022 4:02 PM

I assume the Interborough Line would be a subway line. If not, you'll have very angry unions, because they'll see it as a trojan horse for automation (which is a good thing, BTW, but off-topic).

Trying to make it a subway line, but not officially a subway line, sounds like a mess. Better to fix the existing subway staffing rules than create a parallel system. Or make it a "subway line" like the Staten Island Rail. It's a subway line on maps, it's a subway line re. fares, it just technically isn't a subway line, but the public doesn't know or care.

Interborough Line is so blindingly obvious. It's (relatively) cheap, benefits almost the entire city, and will have strong ridership. The interplay with existing routes is fantastic.

mrnyc Jan 20, 2022 4:15 PM

so here we see mta already looks at it as a regular numbered or lettered subway line. and why not, that is that is what makes the most sense operationally and to riders.

ardecila Jan 20, 2022 5:08 PM

That's a huge jump to conclusions when a detailed study has not been performed, especially since LIRR is the current owner of the line (or CSX, for a section) and will need to continue operating freight service along the entirety.

If LIRR was willing to abandon the line it would be a different story, but Hochul's plan also includes the Cross Harbor Freight Tunnel which is useless unless the Bay Ridge Branch continues to serve freight. This is by far the best way to reduce truck traffic in the NYC region and in Manhattan specifically, so I don't think MTA will close off that possibility.

Of course, it's possible to build subway next to active freight, but this requires a lot of expensive mitigations that will be difficult to do since the neighborhoods along the ROW are so densely built-up.

k1052 Jan 20, 2022 5:48 PM

Per the docs that are getting FOILed now MTA sees FRA compliant 3rd rail powered heavy rail as the much preferred solution. So LIRR style trains internally configured like NYCT cars. Please god at least turnstile the stations so no conductors on board.

Crawford Jan 20, 2022 5:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 9508938)
That's a huge jump to conclusions when a detailed study has not been performed, especially since LIRR is the current owner of the line (or CSX, for a section) and will need to continue operating freight service along the entirety.

LIRR is the MTA, which owns the corridor. It's the exact same ownership.

LIRR and the subway are both MTA (alongside Metro North, MTA Bus, NYC Bus, and a few other agencies).

There's very little active freight on this corridor. Basically one or two trains a day. Not that they need the land, since the corridor is wider than most existing subway corridors, but if they wanted to buy out the one freight operator, it would probably be cheaper than building a single subway station. But that would assume they need four tracks, which is unlikely.

k1052 Jan 20, 2022 6:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 9509027)
There's very little active freight on this corridor. Basically one or two trains a day. Not that they need the land, since the corridor is wider than most existing subway corridors, but if they wanted to buy out the one freight operator, it would probably be cheaper than building a single subway station. But that would assume they need four tracks, which is unlikely.

There is no desire to terminate freight service here, in fact they want to grow it as has been happening. They're buying new car floats even. Given the size of the ROW and the likely option the MTA is going to take there is no reason they can't coexist.

ardecila Jan 20, 2022 6:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 9509027)
LIRR is the MTA, which owns the corridor. It's the exact same ownership.

LIRR and the subway are both MTA (alongside Metro North, MTA Bus, NYC Bus, and a few other agencies).

I'm well aware of that, but LIRR is still a entity with its own railroader culture that is very different from NYCTA. They are benchmarked against other commuter and freight railroads, not transit agencies, and operate with a lot of independence. MTA's control over LIRR is mostly as a pass-thru for funding, similar to how RTA interacts with Metra in Chicago or LA Metro interacts with Metrolink.

If Hochul wants to, she can force a wholesale transfer of the Bay Ridge Branch from LIRR to NYCTA but it would be done over the objections of LIRR and would mean the end of freight service. Splitting the ownership down the middle is possible but requires a lot of expensive and space-consuming infrastructure due to various regulations.

Legacy systems didn't have these requirements, so CTA Orange Line sits side-by-side with freight tracks, as do various DC Metro lines, etc with just a chainlink fence separating them. That's no longer possible. Regulations either require a very wide separation between tracks where space permits, or a crash wall where space is limited. The crash wall is basically a 3ft thick military-level fortification to stop a derailing freight train, so it's not cheap to build.

Crawford Jan 20, 2022 7:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 9509062)
There is no desire to terminate freight service here, in fact they want to grow it as has been happening. They're buying new car floats even. Given the size of the ROW and the likely option the MTA is going to take there is no reason they can't coexist.

I mean, yeah, if they want to grow freight, go for it. The corridor right of way is pretty huge, and can accommodate both.

I'm skeptical that this route will really generate a ton of freight, though, considering it hasn't done so for decades despite subsidized cross-harbor freight ferries. And most of the arguments for growing freight rail within urban centers will disappear once trucking is electric.

Thinking about this more, I bet this line will have very heavy Asian (really Chinese) ridership, as it will link up the two largest Asian concentrations in NYC. This will be a direct route from Sunset Park-Bensonhurst to Elmhurst-Flushing areas.

k1052 Jan 20, 2022 8:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 9509233)
I mean, yeah, if they want to grow freight, go for it. The corridor right of way is pretty huge, and can accommodate both.

I'm skeptical that this route will really generate a ton of freight, though, considering it hasn't done so for decades despite subsidized cross-harbor freight ferries. And most of the arguments for growing freight rail within urban centers will disappear once trucking is electric.

Thinking about this more, I bet this line will have very heavy Asian (really Chinese) ridership, as it will link up the two largest Asian concentrations in NYC. This will be a direct route from Sunset Park-Bensonhurst to Elmhurst-Flushing areas.

NYAR does about 30,000 carloads a year. Given the state of the trucking industry I'd strongly suspect interest in their service to grow. The motive power of trucking isn't really the issue here, finding drivers is.

Busy Bee Jan 20, 2022 8:47 PM

For anyone who hasn't done so already I would highly recommend reading as much as you can about the long desired Cross-Harbor freight tunnel concept. Start with the wiki article. Read all of it. You can't really understand the full context of the triboro proposal without understanding what the goals are of the other players including the corridor requirement of double stack container car compatibility. These competing goals will likely substantially shape the triboro scheme if it ever becomes reality.

mrnyc Jan 21, 2022 3:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9509324)
For anyone who hasn't done so already I would highly recommend reading as much as you can about the long desired Cross-Harbor freight tunnel concept. Start with the wiki article. Read all of it. You can't really understand the full context of the triboro proposal without understanding what the goals are of the other players including the corridor requirement of double stack container car compatibility. These competing goals will likely substantially shape the triboro scheme if it ever becomes reality.

yeah i was wondering about the cross harbor freight plan and how it would work with an also at least dreamed of staten transit tunnel. i guess this interborough plan would put the final kibosh on cross harbor? :shrug:

i mean lets just get the brooklyn/queens section built out and up and running for now. anything else seems so expensive and far in the future its kind of silly to worry too much about it. in the meantime we could have this service up and running for decades. :tup:

Busy Bee Jan 21, 2022 4:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 9510023)
i guess this interborough plan would put the final kibosh on cross harbor? :shrug:

There's no reason to think that. They just need to coordinate everything so one does not preclude the other.


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.