Metro North WOH Rail Options Using the Tappan Zee Bridge TZB

Could someone do a crayon on map of these routes? I'm sure I'm not the only one having an issue visualizing them.

Here is a sample map.

This routing uses the Piermont Branch between Suffern and Spring Valley and a dedicated ROW on I-287/95
rest of the way with a stub end branch into downtown White Plains.

Basically HudsonLink + I-BUS.

“Electric ferries” by no means is a impactful or logical effect to areas like haverstaw or Newburgh. Again - commuters have no interest in adding a slow boat to an already longer commute.

Also to the point that there is nothing between haverstraw and Newburgh to generate ridership. This is unequivocally false. Cornwall has one of the highest numbers of NYC/white collar professionals in Orange County, which would draw daily commuters from that area. West Point is one of the largest employers in the area and has some potential with a stop there. Even more so, regular service for large football games, graduations and events would prove useful. Also with Cornwall, you have the storm king trail and mountain there. We all see how well cold spring, breakneck ridge and beacon do with day trippers from NYC - the Cornwall stop would provide that service as well. The area already has a big draw for that crowd. Also, the stretch between Cornwall/West Point/highland falls to haverstraw with no stops can allow for a faster ride, which is also very important to areas north in need of rail.

Newburgh - again the SWF connection alone holds justifiable weight, not to mention what it would do for the ongoing revitalization of that city. This would be a major commuter stop as well as tourism stop. There’s an immediate connection to the waterfront and sightseeing boats. There is also room here for rail service facilities.

The line should ideally serve north of Newburgh as well with regular service up to Kingston: another rapidly revitalizing area with a large NYC prescience already there. In between, a stop by 299 in highland could provide a shuttle connection to SUNY new paltz, a school with a large population that comes from Long Island. There’s also potential to link the other side of the walkway over the hudson for walking/biking.

Additionally - weekend service up to saugerties and Catskill could be attractive as well. Like Kingston, those areas have a lot of attention from NYC residents. There have been recent articles stating the fact that the Catskills have begun surpassing the Hamptons as a favorite NYC getaway.

These are very small instances as to the importance of this line. You won’t see more gained value anywhere in the state with the potential here. The Port Jervis line is what it is and it will serve Penn station, which is fine. This is also not just a rockland county benefit but more so an Orange and Ulster benefit which both severely lack rail options and would benefit the most from them. No ferry will ever be able to deliver on that potential.

What is truly needed is a new commuter/freight rail crossing of the Hudson River, jointly funded by NY State and the freight railroads. It would eliminate the Selkirk hurdle for Hudson Valley freight movements and create a realistic connection for MNRR WOH to Grand Central.

So you want the privately-held Class I railroads to spend millions on a new route that would be used by (maybe) 1-2 low-value trains in each direction that already can get to where they need to without the new route. Good luck selling them on that idea.

As a New Haven Railroad fan, it pains me to say this, but there's a reason nobody ever made a realistic effort to rebuild or replace the Poughkeepsie bridge after Penn Central let it burn. While it was a useful connection for an independent railroad east of the Hudson to have, it was a tough line to operate over with lots of sharp curves and tough grades. As high as that bridge over the Hudson is, that's actually the lowest point on the route! Running via Selkirk, even if it adds a day to travel time, makes a lot more sense from a financial perspective.

Commuter rail will never be added to the Cuomo Bridge. It's either a new railroad bridge or in all probability, nothing.

One big reason there was no rail on the bridge was that Westchester didn't want it. Westchester is more populous and wealthier than Rockland. And even in Rockland there were a lot of NIMBYs. So unless a groundswell of demand for commuter rail from Rockland were to sweep Westchester there will be no political pressure for a new rail Hudson River crossing, either on the Cuomo bridge or on some new bridge.

Correct, Joe. Well said.

JoeG wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 6:53 pm One big reason there was no rail on the bridge was that Westchester didn't want it. Westchester is more populous and wealthier than Rockland. And even in Rockland there were a lot of NIMBYs. So unless a groundswell of demand for commuter rail from Rockland were to sweep Westchester there will be no political pressure for a new rail Hudson River crossing, either on the Cuomo bridge or on some new bridge.

It's not so much that Westchester *didn't*want it so much as its nowhere near the top of the priority list. Before spending money on that the county would want a 3rd track on the Harlem from Crestwood to White Plains, a 5th track on the New Haven as far as Port Chester, a flyover for Amtrak at New Rochelle, some sort of cross-county rail option from White Plains to Rye/Port Chester...

It would benefit Rockland most of all, but it would also benefit Westchester greatly. I do agree, though, that a third track from Crestwood to NWP is needed most of all. A fifth track on the NH is possible in certain spots, but I think yard tracks in the old NYW&B ROW in spots would be of more benefit. There's a good amount of room behind the old Korvette's in Port Chester. A passing track is needed in some spots as well.

So I guess this will not be happening....

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Wed Jul 20, 2022 8:43 amWhile it's definitely needed for NYC it's also sorely needed for White Plains and Stamford. I dare you to sit in 287 traffic at ANY time of the day! For NYC run it down the 87 median to BN; there's no need for connections at Tarrytown. It would be too difficult.

Down 87 would be a really long connection compared to White Plains. There's no obvious connection point either, like there is with White Plains. 287 traffic is horrendous, and that's coming from someone who only drives it on the weekend and tries to time it for less traffic to get around NYC to points beyond.

It would be really nice to have service over the PJ directly to Westchester. Transfer at Suffern.

I think you'd have to transfer, as north of Suffern likely stays diesel, although I guess you could run diesel over the 287 route to STM. I'd envision that route as 25kV/60 with M-10/12 style cars and the M-7/9 fleet serving only the Harlem proper with expanded capacity for the number of trains as well as full 12-car trains to Southeast.

I also agree that West Shore service is sorely needed, and they should restore the old NYNJ to Nyack. You could extend the PJ up to the West Shore as well.

Is that the one that goes close to the shore and to downtown Nyack? The 287 line would provide service to GCT, or could be used to backtrack to a transfer station between Spring Valley and Nanuet (which should also be electrified). With proper pedestrian infrastructure, something we really seem to struggle with in the US, easy access could be provided for pedestrians and bicyclists from downtown Nyack, with car parking on the other end of the platform.

HVrail wrote: ↑Thu Jul 21, 2022 9:15 am“Electric ferries” by no means is a impactful or logical effect to areas like haverstaw or Newburgh. Again - commuters have no interest in adding a slow boat to an already longer commute.

For one, a lot of people are working hybrid now, which extends the reach of useful "commuting" as many people are only going in one or two days per week. Even aside from that, electric ferries are quite useful when the Hudson Line is already a very fast way to get into the city, so that the total travel time is potentially as good or faster than other options. Further, higher frequency service is extremely valuable, and the more you branch out the rail service to serve every little town here or there, the more you dilute service frequency, making the service less valuable.

Also to the point that there is nothing between haverstraw and Newburgh to generate ridership. This is unequivocally false. Cornwall has one of the highest numbers of NYC/white collar professionals in Orange County, which would draw daily commuters from that area. West Point is one of the largest employers in the area and has some potential with a stop there. Even more so, regular service for large football games, graduations and events would prove useful. Also with Cornwall, you have the storm king trail and mountain there. We all see how well cold spring, breakneck ridge and beacon do with day trippers from NYC - the Cornwall stop would provide that service as well. The area already has a big draw for that crowd. Also, the stretch between Cornwall/West Point/highland falls to haverstraw with no stops can allow for a faster ride, which is also very important to areas north in need of rail.

I just don't see the justification for daily commuter service, it might make more sense as a regional rail type of service, although the frequencies would probably be quite low given the distances involved.

The line should ideally serve north of Newburgh as well with regular service up to Kingston: another rapidly revitalizing area with a large NYC prescience already there.

So let's say you come up with some sort of regional rail service, AND you could add enough double track that it doesn't totally muck up CSX's freight operations on the West Side Line, how do you connect it to anything useful? The most obvious connection point would be to make some sort of loopy flyover thing to connect to both the NJT Main Line to Hoboken and the NEC near Secaucus as part of the project to build the shelved ARC loop that will be needed when Gateway is up and running.

These are very small instances as to the importance of this line. You won’t see more gained value anywhere in the state with the potential here.

I still don't see daily commuter value, but I can see value in what you're saying with a regional rail type of service, which is what some of the CT "commuter" trains have turned into anyway. That would also put a lot less scheduling stress on CSX, as while I am generally sympathetic towards passenger rail service over cries of freight operators, there just aren't a lot of ways for freight to get into and out of the NYC area, and those DPU monsters have to run somewhere. Or they have to run 3x as many smaller trains.

Dcell wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 1:02 pmWhat is truly needed is a new commuter/freight rail crossing of the Hudson River, jointly funded by NY State and the freight railroads. It would eliminate the Selkirk hurdle for Hudson Valley freight movements and create a realistic connection for MNRR WOH to Grand Central.

The Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel is the freight project, and that's a freight tunnel, likely not a joint passenger/freight tunnel. It would also be much, much cheaper as a single track freight-only tunnel.

Ridgefielder wrote: ↑Fri Sep 02, 2022 10:40 amIt's not so much that Westchester *didn't*want it so much as its nowhere near the top of the priority list. Before spending money on that the county would want a 3rd track on the Harlem from Crestwood to White Plains, a 5th track on the New Haven as far as Port Chester, a flyover for Amtrak at New Rochelle, some sort of cross-county rail option from White Plains to Rye/Port Chester...

1. 3rd track on the Harlem, yes, and needed to tie-in the 287 line to GCT anyway.

2. Wait... what? A 5th track? Who even asked for that? It was 6 tracks at one point, under rule 251 signaling, with rule 261 and CTC, there is just no point. That's not even a bottleneck, CP 216 SHELL and STM are the bottlenecks. Quad track rule 261 CTC is the creme de la creme of high capacity railroading in 2022.

3. Speaking of CP 216, there's nowhere physically to put a flyover, the modeling for Penn Access has shown that a reconfiguration of it provides adequate capacity for 100 trains per day into Penn in addition to Amtrak and Metro-North traffic to GCT. I was looking at TriBoroRX, and wondering how they could integrate it into the Penn Access project, and looking at CP216 and the traffic levels they are handling there, they could integrate 1/3 of the TriBoroRX trains at grade and run them up to Co-Op City easily without a problem.

4. That's the same project. The 287 rail project likely goes from Rye to Suffern.