• Cuomo Announces Plan to Expand Penn Station

  • Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.
Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: Tadman, nick11a, Kaback9, ACeInTheHole

  by Jeff Smith
 
Arlington wrote: Wed Jan 08, 2020 9:55 am Is there a reason, though, why LIRR couldn't have a few platforms on another level that would be "angled south" (on a slight diagonal vs the street grid?)
I suppose the could extend Penn South with some tail tracks extending back to the existing East River tunnels. It's just not necessary, though, as the additional platforms as Jaap noted alleviate the existing platforms which would help LIRR.
  by Arlington
 
We're grateful that the original Penn Station has supported 100+ years of waxing, waning, and re-growth. I think we need another 100 year vision for NYC, either that Penn South "keep going" and turn north to meet GCT Under or that LIRR have access.
  by Jeff Smith
 
I'm pretty sure any tunnel connection to MNRR is almost impossible for either utility or engineering reasons. Thus, my foam about an elevated link LOL.
  by Riverduckexpress
 
Jeff Smith wrote: Wed Jan 08, 2020 10:02 am I'm pretty sure any tunnel connection to MNRR is almost impossible for either utility or engineering reasons. Thus, my foam about an elevated link LOL.
The ARC Summary Report suggested it was physically feasible, but that it would require disrupting and moving around a track of the Lexington Av subway and possibly underpinning nearby buildings (along with a compatible fleet, of course). Seems like it's really just a question of how much interagency cooperation and subway/surface disruption is politically feasible today. I think Cuomo has reaffirmed that any rail project can move forward, or at least have the ball start rolling, regardless of merits or cost, if it has the right people backing it.
  by JamesRR
 
Riverduckexpress wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:09 am
Jeff Smith wrote: Wed Jan 08, 2020 10:02 am I'm pretty sure any tunnel connection to MNRR is almost impossible for either utility or engineering reasons. Thus, my foam about an elevated link LOL.
The ARC Summary Report suggested it was physically feasible, but that it would require disrupting and moving around a track of the Lexington Av subway and possibly underpinning nearby buildings (along with a compatible fleet, of course). Seems like it's really just a question of how much interagency cooperation and subway/surface disruption is politically feasible today. I think Cuomo has reaffirmed that any rail project can move forward, or at least have the ball start rolling, regardless of merits or cost, if it has the right people backing it.
I doubt any Penn/GCT connection will ever come to fruition. There's just so much infrastructure to work around, most notably the deep water tunnels - but also so many subway lines. In reality, getting the Hudson tunnels and Penn South project done would be Herculean enough. Don't forget - these Penn South tracks would likely serve some MNR trains coming into Penn in the future (from the west)
  by Yankees1
 
Don't forget - these Penn South tracks would likely serve some MNR trains coming into Penn in the future (from the west)
That's a great point- The 3 lines that will benefit from the Secaucus Loop once the new tunnel is built (excluding Meadowlands) usually terminate in New York State, where a lot of their ridership comes from. These 3 lines (along with Raritan Valley and MoBo) will be the biggest winners from Gateway and the expanded track space. This is helpful because NYS and the MTA will have a vested interest in seeing these projects through
  by rr503
 
Riverduckexpress wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:09 am
The ARC Summary Report suggested it was physically feasible, but that it would require disrupting and moving around a track of the Lexington Av subway and possibly underpinning nearby buildings (along with a compatible fleet, of course). Seems like it's really just a question of how much interagency cooperation and subway/surface disruption is politically feasible today. I think Cuomo has reaffirmed that any rail project can move forward, or at least have the ball start rolling, regardless of merits or cost, if it has the right people backing it.
Part of the issue here is that American rail engineers like to box themselves in insofar as the breadth of their changemaking purview is concerned. They just take things like a loco-hauled rail fleet incapable of ascending steeper (>3%) grades as given, rather than suggesting that involved railroads move to an EMU-dominated fleet that would allow steeper grades, and, in turn, avoidance of many (if not all) of these obstacles.

As for this Penn expansion project, it has little to no value in my opinion. These billions dollars would be an excellent down payment on the infrastructure and equipment required to implement schemes that do not scream of transportational sclerosis, for example through running, or improvements that would allow greater potential capacity in the core entrance where it is really needed: the Hudson crossing.
  by Hawaiitiki
 
JamesRR wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:18 am
I doubt any Penn/GCT connection will ever come to fruition. There's just so much infrastructure to work around, most notably the deep water tunnels - but also so many subway lines. In reality, getting the Hudson tunnels and Penn South project done would be Herculean enough. Don't forget - these Penn South tracks would likely serve some MNR trains coming into Penn in the future (from the west)
Finishing the PATH tunnel from 9th Street to Astor Place would solve the East Side access problems for NJ commuters for a lot cheaper and a lot less disruption (and would take strain off Penn/North River Tunnels). But since its going to take the PA 10 years to get the PATH 2 miles to Newark Airport using underutilized/abandoned properties & ROWs (i.e. far easier than tunneling), I can't see the Astor Place extension ever getting done either.
  by JamesRR
 
Hawaiitiki wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:20 am
Finishing the PATH tunnel from 9th Street to Astor Place would solve the East Side access problems for NJ commuters for a lot cheaper and a lot less disruption (and would take strain off Penn/North River Tunnels). But since its going to take the PA 10 years to get the PATH 2 miles to Newark Airport using underutilized/abandoned properties & ROWs (i.e. far easier than tunneling), I can't see the Astor Place extension ever getting done either.
That's not really practical. PATH isn't a great alternative for NJ commuters. I regularly come in and out of NYC on NJT, and often jump onto PATH at Newark. It's very crowded (they're small subway cars) and the ride takes just as long to get to the city as is riding on a NJT train. Also, taking PATH to Astor Place then taking the already overcrowded IRT #6 uptown is a crazy route no commuter would want to take. Too cumbersome and inconvenient.

The subway platforms at Penn - particularly the 8 Ave locals - need to be enlarged and better integrated into the Penn Complex, to better facilitate commuters transferring to uptown E locals - and disembarking from them in pm rush, heading back into Penn Station.
  by ExCon90
 
There always used to be, and I think still is, a passageway from the south end of the downtown local platform passing directly under the subway and opening into the Amtrak (upper) concourse right near west gate Track 16, but it was very poorly signed, and you almost had to know it was there. Better signage would make that transfer very easy.