Railroad Forums 

  • Poll on a PVL Suffern Extension

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

Moderators: lensovet, Kaback9, nick11a

Poll on a PVL Suffern Extension

2010
4
15%
2020
4
15%
2030
2
8%
Later
1
4%
Never
15
58%

 #5677  by NIMBYkiller
 
Why doesn't NJT do this? Screw the NIMBYs, the tracks are there, right? If not, atleast ROW is

 #5712  by BlockLine_4111
 
CRRLIFan wrote:Why doesn't NJT do this? Screw the NIMBYs, the tracks are there, right? If not, atleast ROW is
From what I hear the NIMBY populace in that locality has "a lot of clout" to be politically correct.

 #5956  by NIMBYkiller
 
The tracks were there first. They saw them, they deal with them. End of story with the NIMBYs.

 #6170  by Irish Chieftain
 
CRRLIfan wrote:Why doesn't NJT do this?
Those are not NJ Transit's tracks to begin with—they are in New York State, Rockland County. Therefore, it would take Metro-North's involvement to get moving on such a project. And Metro-North, like the rest of the MTA, listens to NIMBYs all too closely.

The only thing that would spur a reactivation of the Piermont Branch a.k.a. original Erie Line would be if a rail crossing over the Tappan Zee (still in proposal stage) were to become a reality; then, you could have Metro-North running from GCT to Port Jervis. (That would be an interesting sight, having Genesis IIs and Shoreliner IIs passing through places like Spring Valley, Monsey, Tallman, Tuxedo, Campbell Hall, etc...but a long shot still and all right now...) Of course, such a service may indeed exclude PVL operations...

 #6216  by NIMBYkiller
 
The whole tpz and 287 idea is for a line from Stewart Airport, down the PJ line, on the old erie, across tpz, down 287, then GCT bound trains connect to the harlem line, and other trains would continue via 287 to Port Chester. I hope that those trains will then continue to either Stamford or even New Haven.

 #6224  by MSC34
 
I recall from our discussions on the old forum that part of this right of way is in in private ownership (and thus no tracks) and/or part washed out. If that is the case, it sounds like the state will need to acquire land, by purchase or condemnation, and that could be costly considering the location.

Is this even in the planning stage? I thought MTA performed a Draft EIS for the TZ II only.