• Uplifting Rochester News?

  • Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New York State.
Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New York State.

Moderator: Otto Vondrak

  • 114 posts
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  by roadster
 
It work well while Conrail had it there, but Conrail wanted to consolidate their container/van services to Dewitt and Buffalo. Conrail felt there wasn't sufficient traffic to continue the cost of the service at Rochester. That and Conrail management's incentives to yearly reduce operating budgets, by offering bonuses for doing so to managers. So less service, means reduced budget cost, manager gets a few grand extra at end of year in his pocket. Less crews, less equipment, less chance of incidental cost.
  by MP366
 
And the second iteration was in conjunction with Triple Crown(NS), so when CSX took over the Rochester operations the likelihood of that particular RoadRailer operation staying was unlikely.
  by nessman
 
tenthousandhobbies wrote:Is it Falls Road that would theoretically be able to connect with the Rochester Industrial track over near Lee Rd. ? I would think that Falls Road could make a case for CSX giving them the right to purchase the intervening 12 miles or so, because Conrail cut that connection probably to avoid it ever becoming a competing line. That way Falls Road could serve industries in the western part of Rochester and it would give a detour for CSX if their line ever suffered a shutdown. Just some thoughts. It may be that this thread is going the way of Rochester industry...
This has been answered many times before on here... but the short answer is 'no'. At around $1 million/mile to lay down new track there's no benefit. No industrial customers between Brockport and Rochester large enough for rail. The few industries left on the Falls Road Industrial up to Lee Road provide very few car loads as it is. as for a backup route? The mainline rarely sees a shutdown lasting more than a day in the worst-case scenarios - and there are alternate routings available.
  by nessman
 
drewh wrote:NY State could do a lot to improve the upstate economy. Imagine what high-speed rail from Toronto to Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, and NYC would do to help spur the economy. Its not like the ROW never existed and there already is decent service ALB-NYC. Even just upgrading to 90-110mph service from ALB-BUF with multiple frequencies would be something.
High speed rail won't do a bloody thing for the upstate economy. The cost to construct and maintain the infrastructure, stations and rolling stock, etc... will cost more than any economic return such a service may bring. Besides, I can make the trip in my Honda from Rochester to NYC in 5 hours via Syracuse > Scranton > Stroudsburg on $30 worth of gas. Amtrak can't compete with that.
  by Flat-Wheeler
 
I can make the trip in my Honda from Rochester to NYC in 5 hours via Syracuse > Scranton > Stroudsburg on $30 worth of gas. Amtrak can't compete with that.
I challenge you to actually try that, repeatedly. What ... you make no stops anywhere along the way ?
From my experience, I highly doubt this is legally possible most of the time (with construction delays, inclimate weather, accidents, blimps landing on 81, etc)
You must drive a hard bargain. Literally.

Let's stay focused on freight deliveries to the Rochester region, and steer queer from the High Speed Amtrak Turbo Train crap that'll likely not happen again.
  by BR&P
 
The trouble with being gone 3 weeks is it takes a whole evening just to read what you missed! :-D

Just a comment on the posts saying things are cyclical, this party will be in a while, then the other one, etc. The problem is that the exodus of industry, jobs, tax base etc is a 1-way street. We have Democrats now - if tomorrow we had all Republicans it's unlikely they would or could make drastic enough changes to bring back what we have lost. And while Atlas Shrugged may be fiction, the scenario in the book is exactly what we are seeing. The businesses and producers may not be vanishing to some mysterious "destroyer", but to greener pastures, be they southern states or China. As fewer and fewer remain to pay IN, we are still increasing the ways we pay OUT. It just plain can't go on forever.

I'm a lifelong NY resident and there are many things I love about the state. But consider this: Our daughter lives in Tennessee. Her father-in-law is into income property. He has some 26 or so parcels - homes and trailers he rents, a 30 or so acre piece of land with a lake and 5 rental houses, his own home, you name it. By comparison, I live in a split level in suburbia up here - 1/3rd acre, a decent house but not fancy by any means. Our daughter's father-in-law pays about one half as much property tax on ALL HIS PROPERTY COMBINED as we pay on our house alone up here. While residential and industrial taxes are not exactly parallel, the general concept should be obvious. And when Mr. Gollisano (sp?), an astute business man, finds he can save over $13,000 a DAY by moving away, doesn't this mirror the concepts in the book that failure to retain producers and enterprise will ultimately result in total collapse?

Reality says that there is no dramatic upturn coming to Rochester, whether or now we have "high speed rail", and as mentioned above most production that we do have or will get most likely will not be of the sort requiring rail service.
  by goodnightjohnwayne
 
nessman wrote:
drewh wrote:NY State could do a lot to improve the upstate economy. Imagine what high-speed rail from Toronto to Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, and NYC would do to help spur the economy. Its not like the ROW never existed and there already is decent service ALB-NYC. Even just upgrading to 90-110mph service from ALB-BUF with multiple frequencies would be something.
High speed rail won't do a bloody thing for the upstate economy. The cost to construct and maintain the infrastructure, stations and rolling stock, etc... will cost more than any economic return such a service may bring. Besides, I can make the trip in my Honda from Rochester to NYC in 5 hours via Syracuse > Scranton > Stroudsburg on $30 worth of gas. Amtrak can't compete with that.
What about the other costs associated with driving into Manhattan, such as thruway/bridge/tunnel tolls, depending on the route? What about the expense of paying for parking in Manhattan? What about the time lost to rush hour traffic?

Obviously, there are other costs per mile associated with your Honda, other than just the price of fuel. For many people, the costs associated with insurance and depreciation far outweighed fuel costs, even during last year's price spike.

Oddly enough, I do think that Amtrak is very competitive for upstate travelers, especially when New York is the destination. The benefits of "high speed rail" are less obvious.
  by goodnightjohnwayne
 
roadster wrote:It work well while Conrail had it there, but Conrail wanted to consolidate their container/van services to Dewitt and Buffalo. Conrail felt there wasn't sufficient traffic to continue the cost of the service at Rochester. That and Conrail management's incentives to yearly reduce operating budgets, by offering bonuses for doing so to managers. So less service, means reduced budget cost, manager gets a few grand extra at end of year in his pocket. Less crews, less equipment, less chance of incidental cost.
I'm not one to defend Conrail, but I do think that the potential of Rochester as a Roadrailer hub was fairly limited and the Roadrailer concept itself has never been as successful as some might have hoped. An investment was made and losses were carried in hopes of generating a viable business. It didn't work out then, and I think it would have less of a chance of working today, given the irretrievable decline of industry in the Rochester area.
  by scottychaos
 
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:
What about the other costs associated with driving into Manhattan, such as thruway/bridge/tunnel tolls, depending on the route? What about the expense of paying for parking in Manhattan? What about the time lost to rush hour traffic?
easy solution to all those issues..NEVER drive all the way to New York City! ;)

I have lived in the Southern Tier, Capital District, Hudson Valley or Western NY my entire life..
so I have lived all over the state..Waverly, Corning, Albany, New Paltz and Rochester..
I have been to New York City dozens of times..I have NEVER once driven my own car there! ;)
From anywhere upstate, the best way to get to NYC is to drive to the Hudson Valley..leave your car at Peekskill
or any other Metro North station, then take the MNCR into the city..quick and easy..

I agree its a nightmare to try to drive into the city..but there is also no reason to do so.
Right now, I would never consider taking Amtrak directly from Rochester to NYC..
driving *close* to the city, then hopping on MNCR, is quicker and cheaper than taking Amtrak the whole route.
and not having to deal with your car in the city is a blessing..of course, there is no real need for a car in the city anyway.

Lets see..I can do some basic math right now..

Rochester to Peekskill (one way) = 5 hour drive, ~$30 in gas, no tolls. (route 17)
MNCR Peekskill to Grand Central = 1 hour and $16.
total = 6 hours and $50

Amtrak Rochester to Penn Station = 8 hours and $76
(the schedule says 7 hours 17 min, but lets be realistic and say 8 hours..we know they wont be on time.)

So right now, driving to the MEtro North is quicker, cheaper, and much less of a hassle..
it wins all around..(unless maybe if you are a family of 4 with a ton of luggage..but I always "travel light")

High Speed Rail, if it is ever built, will likely be quicker than my "Drive to Metro North" system..
but it certainty wont be cheaper..

Scot
  by MP366
 
Two thoughts:
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:given the irretrievable decline of industry in the Rochester area.
.....BINGO!!!!
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:Oddly enough, I do think that Amtrak is very competitive for upstate travelers, especially when New York is the destination. The benefits of "high speed rail" are less obvious.
....you neglect the cost of the per passenger subsidy that Amtrak receives from the state and federal governments for operating the trains. If the real cost were to be passed on to the traveling public, you'd probably have a lot more speeding Hondas on their way to New York City....
  by sd80mac
 
scottychaos wrote:
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:
Lets see..I can do some basic math right now..

Rochester to Peekskill (one way) = 5 hour drive, ~$30 in gas, no tolls. (route 17)
MNCR Peekskill to Grand Central = 1 hour and $16.
total = 6 hours and $50
Scot
you forget 2 tolls. Thruway from Roch to Syracuse and Bear mountain bridge. sorry about being picknit. LOL.


Is it $76 now? I paid $104 for roundtrip last sept. - 286 and 49

I still would take amtrak... relax and easier... no hassle with dumb drivers...

Now your system gave me a thought... I might drive to Albany/Troy, about 3 hours. and take amtrak from there. It only have one stop, at Hudson. It's straight shot into Penn Station (not sure if it applies to ALL amtrak trains) It's about 2 hours. Or I could go for Amtersdam or Schenechanty (sp) since its closer and easier to get from thruway
  by scottychaos
 
sd80mac wrote:
you forget 2 tolls. Thruway from Roch to Syracuse and Bear mountain bridge. sorry about being picknit. LOL.

No thruway at all..
take 390 south to route 17..(I86)
but yes, there is probably no way to cross the Hudson without paying a toll somewhere..

but still, no mater how you crunch the numbers, its still quicker and cheaper than Amtrak..

I like going south enough to get on the Metro North, and not deal with Amtrak at all, because I have always found MNCR to be MUCH quicker, cheaper, and more efficient than Amtrak..(and they run a lot more trains..which makes scheduling your trip much easier)
your idea of going to Troy could work..but IMO it would better to just keep driving south to get the MNCR and cut Amtrak out of the equation all together..
(MNCR runs all the way up to Poughkeepsie)

Scot
  by railwatcher
 
Rochester, NY downtown to 8th Ave and 42nd St., New York, NY is 5 hours 18 minutes using the thruway to Rt 81. and 5hours , 36 minutes going Rt 390 to I 86/Rt 17 to I 81. But that doesn't really stack up the costs as much as where your going to park when you get to Manhatton. Daily rates for parking tend to reach a third digit. The gas wont be bad and the tolls arent that bad, but you will never forget the parking. Take the train, take a bus and spend time visiting with your family and friends. 8 hours on Amtrak will be fine, after all, your a railfan! I have done the trip on a bus in 6 hours, try finding a parking spot for a bus. :wink:
  by BR&P
 
I've got a better idea. Who needs New York City anyway? Why all the fuss, spending, rate comparisons, and angst about going there? I have been there on ONE trip, going and coming back, to change planes at LaGuardia. On the trip home we flew in over the harbor, I saw the Statue of Liberty and the Empire State Building. There! Been there, done that, cool! No desire to get within 100 miles of the place again. It was a Saturday night, 7:30PM, traffic jams worse than we have here at rush hour everywhere I looked down from the plane. Someone above mentioned triple digit cost to park your car. So why would anybody care to put up with that?

Take the "improved access" and "high speed rail" money and use it for political costs to wall off NYC and make it the 51st state. Then let's turn Up State or West New York State or whatever into an industry-friendly state and try to reverse the drain and decline. That's the only way you're going to have uplifting rail news in Rochester. And we all know what the chances of it happening are.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8