Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee
I've been rather busy and haven't been able to respond to the previous comments to-day, but plan to. I just wanted to quickly say that along with putting the cart in front of the proverbial horse, this conversation about who will operate this service is being looked at all wrong. You cannot look at the Bay Ridge branch as a corridor the service will be operating ON, IN or OVER. I believe what will be the case is a 2 track system SHARING the branch ROW but not sharing the branch, if that makes sense. Whether that means a freight track just on the other side of a short fence, a sheet pile wall or a twelve foot concrete wall, whatever, I think the goal is to create an isolated system just like any other metro, including the NY subway. This is logical for any number of reasons. Also, remember that the Sea Beach Line already shares a short section of the row and a short interlining with it is possible. I will address this opinion further later but I actually believe this will be a NYCT subway line, built to subway standards, with maybe a modified B division scaled vehicle, hopefully very modern in appearance, not stainless (!), and automated (!!), and no I don't just think this because I'm obsessed with this service having the route bullet (X) lol. I don't see any evidence that this corridor would REQUIRE mainline specifications for any reasons, and fully expect either corridor fencing or wall, paired with possible freight movements relegated to overnight hours (but probably not even that) to be enough to get FRA sign-off. LIRR doesn't want to operate a half orbital distributive metro service completely within city limits on a branch they abandoned decades ago, that's just not happening, nor would they likely be any good at it.
More to come, gottta go.
|
There are many very good reasons to build this as part of the mainline rail network and not as an isolated subway line. Perhaps the biggest one is space along the corridor, to provide the most flexibility for passenger and freight service it makes sense for a 3-track buildout where freight can use all 3 tracks off-peak going down to 1 track during peak periods, and passengers can use 2 tracks at all times. Separating the two means you need significant sections of 4 or even 5 track, since the freight service would need its own passing and storage sidings, which runs into costly problems with retaining walls, land acquisition and the jet fuel pipeline that runs beneath the 4th trackway.
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.