Hochul Revises Cuomo's Penn Station Plan

JamesRR wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 10:58 am

danib62 wrote:I feel like the better way to solve NYP capacity issues is instead of building more tracks is to merge LIRR and NJT operations and run trains thru.

I don't really see how that solves much. Right now NJT runs through trains to a yard in Queens for layup - why not add capacity in NYP so they can lay up more of them there instead of the run through. I just don't think there's enough demand to run revenue trains thru Penn to Long Island from NJ as an end-all solution to Penn Station's congestion issues. Most people's destination is NYC.

There's also the issue of the existing platforms being way too inadequate for today's crowds of commuters. Building a new section would allow for larger platforms and better planning for people flow - allowing NJ riders to enter and disembark toward the southern end of the station.

As for adding new tracks, I've always been told that the capacity of a station is nothing but the smallest of the following three capacities: the capacity of connecting railway lines, that of platform tracks and that of station throats. During the steam era, mainline trains were mostly locomotive-hauled, which made very inefficient use of platform tracks, making capacity of platform tracks the limiting factor. That's probably why giant terminals with long station throats and few connecting railway lines, as GCT or penn station were popular at that time.

Today's trainsets - whether push-pull or MU - take much less time to serve a station. Thus, platform tracks may no longer be the limiting factor. In a few cases, higher throughput is/will be achieved not by building more tracks, but by adding more connecting lines and/or making improvement to the throats while delicately eliminating some of the existing tracks - as what has been done under the ESA project.

The gateway program will add a pair of new tubes to penn station, improving the throughputs of connecting lines. The gigantic "A" interlocking, however, may continue to pose challenges to operation. This is partially remedied by additional signals within the interlocking, which enabled more flexible route selection at the cost of safety, i.e. being excluded from PTC. I suspect merely adding new tracks would make the situation even worse.

The expansion into Penn South wouldn't just benefit NJT riders. It will also benefit the future Metro-North trains that will run in from the West Side. And honestly, the whole NY doesn't benefit let NJ pay is a nonsense argument. Both states feed off each other. A LOT of people roll in from NJ and spend a lot of money in NYC.

I don't see how we can build 10 new skyscrapers as part of this "rehab" of Penn and not actually build out the infrastructure required to bring people in. They literally killed the one crucial element of this thing. Although it was originally part of Gateway it still seems prudent to build it now, at least the shell of it, and plan to integrate it with the rest of the station.

hxa wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:26 am As for adding new tracks, I've always been told that the capacity of a station is nothing but the smallest of the following three capacities: the capacity of connecting railway lines, that of platform tracks and that of station throats. During the steam era, mainline trains were mostly locomotive-hauled, which made very inefficient use of platform tracks, making capacity of platform tracks the limiting factor. That's probably why giant terminals with long station throats and few connecting railway lines, as GCT or penn station were popular at that time.

Not to go off-topic here, but its worth noting that neither GCT nor Penn were ever served in any way by steam locomotives. And the majority of trains operated into both stations were probably MU from the get-go since the NYC, NH and LIRR had all electrified their inner suburban networks by 1907.

Agree, GCT and Penn were both products of the electric era. GCT was deliberately designed to be a massive "yard" style terminal where trains could layup. In fact Penn pales in comparison with only 21 tracks compared to GCT's near 60 passenger tracks.

While Penn wasn't designed as a terminal per se, it's role as one has grown with the growth of the LIRR over 100 years and the growth of NJT over the last 40 years.

hxa wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:26 am As for adding new tracks, I've always been told that the capacity of a station is nothing but the smallest of the following three capacities: the capacity of connecting railway lines, that of platform tracks and that of station throats. During the steam era, mainline trains were mostly locomotive-hauled, which made very inefficient use of platform tracks, making capacity of platform tracks the limiting factor. That's probably why giant terminals with long station throats and few connecting railway lines, as GCT or penn station were popular at that time.

Today's trainsets - whether push-pull or MU - take much less time to serve a station. Thus, platform tracks may no longer be the limiting factor. In a few cases, higher throughput is/will be achieved not by building more tracks, but by adding more connecting lines and/or making improvement to the throats while delicately eliminating some of the existing tracks - as what has been done under the ESA project.

The gateway program will add a pair of new tubes to penn station, improving the throughputs of connecting lines. The gigantic "A" interlocking, however, may continue to pose challenges to operation. This is partially remedied by additional signals within the interlocking, which enabled more flexible route selection at the cost of safety, i.e. being excluded from PTC. I suspect merely adding new tracks would make the situation even worse.

Think about this, everyone. When the two new Gateway tunnels come in, they will come in on the NJ Transit "side" with only a few through-run tracks that have to swing all the way out to hit the East River tunnels. In effect, "A" interlock gets split into two effective interlocks, A-North and A-South. A-North gets all the Amtrak traffic while A-South gets mostly NJ Transit traffic (and all the Empire service). Throughput is doubled because you're not cramming them through one set of tracks but two.

In the long run once Penn south is built with longer platforms the talked about East river tunnel bores 5 and 6 might be built that would connect to all Penn south and probably present NYP tracks 1 - 6 ? But who knows, that will be long after I am dead ?

You can watch the Governor’s news conference here, at the end she takes questions from transit media who ask about Penn South and through running.

https://youtu.be/DU-E1yMNwgE

In short Penn South is still happening, but will be part of Gateway project. Also thru running can happen in the future, nothing being down would preclude that possibility.

The most important take away is that there is a window of opportunity to do this project That window was created by Amtrak vacating their space in Penn when they moved to Moynihan coupled with the LIRR’s East side access opening in December 2022. They want to do this project now during a 4-5 year time frame from when East Side opens up to when Metro North is ready to access Penn. Waiting for Gateway would be beyond that window.

The signing into law the new infrastructure bill means Gateway is happening.

What I’m curious about is the Hulu theater, Cuomo’s previous plan included buying the space from MSG and building a West train hall.

From the MTA’s PENN plan website:

The single-level alternative could also be combined with a grand new entrance on Eighth Avenue and the light-filled West Train Hall built in the space currently occupied by Madison Square Garden’s 5,600-seat Hulu Theater. We would first need to purchase the theater from MSG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I prefer the single level approach, as part of Penn's current problem is the old "exit concourse" that creates a dungeon like feel to the place.

As for Penn South, it was actually originally part of Gateway. Cuomo's plan somehow made it a "NY" project, but it's now just reverting back to being part of Gateway Phase II.

Penn South would certainly have to happen. Those 9 additional tracks at NYP are very important as they will provide additional capacity for NJT trains that layover at NYP rather than having to head to Sunnyside Yard. Heads up, MNR trains that access NYP won't be coming from the West Side of Manhattan. Those MNR trains will be coming from the New Haven and Hellgate as part of the plan to connect the East Bronx with Westchester, Fairfield County as well as NY Penn Station.

I agree that upstairs at NYP, it's time and has been to transform the station buildings. People getting on and off of trains at a large hub deserve to see more when it comes time for cleanliness, providing ample shopping and dining options, and waiting areas with seats. Those additional 18 escalators and 11 elevators will be needed to help keep the crowds flowing that are traveling between upstairs and downstairs and vice versa to catch their trains.

The underground passageways between Herald Sq, the 33rd St Path Station, and NY Penn Station are very important. They need to be built in a manner anticipating that people will feel safe walking through them. The pedestrian underpasses will help reduce the amount of foot traffic on 34th Street, especially in inclement weather. What would be nice is maybe stores can be added in the pedestrian subways, just like the underground passageways in Montreal and Toronto.

I have to admit, I'm somewhat a fan of the two level design at Penn, but do realize that it's not really used as it was designed (separate departure and arrival levels) but if it were better used that way it might help.

That said, if I were going to argue for it, I'd definitely argue for opening up large areas between the upper and lower platforms in order to give everything a more open feeling.

That said, at the end of the day, I don't think it's that big of an issue for me to really care about.

They might give some thought to making the pedestrian passageways wide enough for four lanes: the outside two for walking, the inside two for running, with appropriate ideograms in the paving. (They could even call the inside lanes the "Dashing Dan" lanes ...)

The passageway between a Penn station and Herald Square should be renovated to something similar to the Dey Street Passageway. I’ve used the Dey Street Passageway on a daily basis to connect from the 4/5 trains at Fulton to the PATH at the WTC. It’s bright, clean and wide enough for those who need to hustle past the tourists.There are no stores but there are a couple of kiosks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Much of what she says is needed. But remember, commuters don't need fancy and Taj Mahal, but we do need easy access, including a redone passageway as we've discussed. Lots more elevators and escalators. A favorite example - getting from the LIRR level upstairs to what has long been the Amtrak level - on the west end just one narrow set of stairs. So there is a lot to be done. And yes, I want the cheap, fast food back, free of beggars, clean and edible!

More tracks - some have pushed run through trains as freeing up capacity, and I agree. Don't know if we need Penn South, at least not today. Lots to do first. But what we don't need is to flatten everything around Penn and build a bunch of empty office towers. We need Hotel PA to be updated and kept affordable. We don't need to tear down one or more historic churches. We need a lot more of homeless services, not eliminating what we already have (in the churches). We can't let actual needs cover up a huge real estate grab.

The main project that is needed where the tracks are is the brand new tunnels but that’s an Amtrak thing.

The comment about more stairs, etc reminded me that all this work though won't fix one of the major issues with the platforms: the fact that to support MSG itself a number of additional posts were pushed all the way through the platform level, leading to awkward platform widths at spots. While more stairs and elevators would be a nice thing, I think ultimately, removing MSG and the supports would be a huge help too.