Lower Montauk Division Discussion

Discussion of the past and present operations of the Long Island Rail Road.

Moderator: Liquidcamphor

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby DogBert » Thu Dec 24, 2015 12:47 am

They literally don't know what they're talking about. There's a nice eye-popping take down of this 'idea' here:
http://ltvsquad.com/2015/10/22/disassem ... mall-plan/

(Bob Holden must have read that article, since he also calls it an 'idea' and not an actual plan).

In a nutshell Crowley is pushing her idea because her real estate developer friends own property near atlas mall. They also own a 'performing arts space' along the bush. No better way to increase property value than with transit.
Light rail on the bushwick branch not only doesn't make sense, the ROW isn't wide enough for 2 tracks along much of the route.

Crowley is also in bed with your friends 'CURES', she says that running passenger trains could prevent freight trains, which 'threaten' the community. Her words, not mine. I guess she feels more threatened by two trash trains moving in the middle of the night verses hundreds of thousands of garbage truck trips.
DogBert
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 7:08 pm

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Tue Dec 29, 2015 3:46 pm

This story has been making the rounds for awhile on transpo blogs like Second Ave. Sagas. The not-very-informed pols are pitching this as light rail or non- FRA compliant diesel LRV's like the NJT RiverLINE DMU's. A complete nonstarter with the long-term stable daytime freight traffic that's got to serve customers during business hours making time separation ops a total impracticality. And the fact that even getting into Jamaica requires mixing with mainline traffic that would crush a Stadler GTW in a slow-speed yard rear-ender. But never trust a pol to spend 45 seconds on Wikipedia answering those open-shut questions before stuffing money in his cronies' pockets calling for a useless study.

FRA-compliant DMU's...yeah, there's some long-term potential there. Emphasis on the long-. If the post-ESA electrification buildouts on the Central Branch and Port Jeff give them an opening for executive decision on a DMU purchase of decent scale for the remaining diesel shuttles they would be to up the shuttle frequencies generously across the board and incorporate some expansion territory like the Lower Montauk. That's not exactly breaking news as those ideas have been kicked around at the conceptual level for decades. But I doubt these folks could be arsed to read up on that. And I bet these are some of the pols representing the NIMBY's fighting the duh-obvious NYCT repurposing of Rockaway over "those types" coming into the neighborhood and are proposing either more expensive/lower frequency commuter rail to price "those types" out or some unicorn mode for themselves only that's slightly less stupidly useless than the Queensway linear park.


None of it is serious. All of it is motivated by decidedly un-serious motives. But it sure will cause a lot of distractions from the hype.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7019
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby DogBert » Tue Dec 29, 2015 10:08 pm

Crowley's idea is basically for light rail (what type, who knows- I'm sure she doesn't), between Hunterspoint ave and the atlas mall (NO service to jamaica). This routing isn't logical at all (requires a reverse move in LIC), but don't tell her or CB5 that...She is also on the record saying they wouldn't need to build platforms (hey, who cares about ADA requirements when you live in fantasy land?), and that light rail would be good for prevent further growth in freight traffic 'which threatens us' (her words, not mine - she's clearly drinking the CURES kool-aid).

This would be hilarious comedy if it wasn't coming from an actual elected NYC official.
DogBert
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 7:08 pm

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby Backshophoss » Tue Dec 29, 2015 11:19 pm

It would be a hard sell to the MTA to allow light rail,and to the City as well,figure on WM to fight this,
there're few places to put in a Trash Transfer Facilty without lots of NIMBY's fighting back.
Just tell them to pay HIGHer FEEs for trash removal. :wink:
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4449
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby railfan365 » Wed Dec 30, 2015 6:41 pm

It's definitely sad that some people would do away with 2 train loads of garbage on a privately owned track in favour of having hundreds of truck trips on the same roads that they travel in their cars.
railfan365
 
Posts: 612
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:55 am

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby DogBert » Wed Dec 30, 2015 11:53 pm

I wish everyone in this city knew how the 2 clowns of CURES want us all to pay higher taxes just so they don't have to look across the street and see trash trains pass through Fresh Pond. They could just sell their homes (worth around 1M in this market) and move anywhere else in the US and live like royalty, far away from the tracks and grime. But no. They rather stay and whine, degrading anyone who doesn't agree with them as being 'into choo choo trains' (as if that were actually bad).

They complain about 'old polluting locomotives' and never mention that replacing it all with trucks would be 10 times worse for pollution and likely cause more traffic deaths. CURES wants people to be run off the road by huge trucks, just so long as they don't have to see it on quiet little otto road across from the train yard that has been there longer than their homes or their families have even been in this country.

The way waste management is set up in this town now, trash trains are the only option for much of the city. They probably couldn't find enough drivers and trucks to replace the trains. The mayor and every other city council member would crumble and beg for trash trains if we went one week without collection.

All this crap needs to keep moving. That's the reality of it. Anyone 'threatened' by that is living in fantasy land.

Food prices in NYC would also go up without the transloading in LIC and Maspeth. Higher taxes and higher food prices = CURES dream.
DogBert
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 7:08 pm

Re: Lower Montauk Discussion

Postby freightguy » Thu Dec 31, 2015 7:10 am

I agree Dogbert and unfortunately it's only going to get busier in that area. I think there is much more activity than when the LIRR was switching in the 80's and 90's. The only solution I see would be to build some storage tracks on the other side of the East New York tunnel. With all the other LIRR freight facilities( LIC and Holban) gone Glendale/Fresh Pond will continue to be the focal point. It's too busy now to just switch during the daytime.

Also north of Bayridge they could build more storage tracks as it is really wide there on the approach to 65st.
Signed off
freightguy
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:18 pm
Location: Medford, NY

Ever a Lower Montauk train to the Main Line?

Postby timz » Sun Feb 21, 2016 6:09 pm

As everyone knows, the trains that carried passengers from LI City to Jamaica via the Montauk usually continued to Oyster Bay. I was surprised to see that in summer 1956 a Speonk train, and, five minutes later, a Farmingdale train ran to Jamaica via the Montauk.

But looks like they weren't supposed to carry passengers; in the public timetable there's no indication that they didn't originate at Jamaica. So: did LIRR ever schedule a passenger-carrying train out of LI City via the Montauk to anywhere on the main east of Mineola?
timz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: Oakland CA

Re: Ever a Lower Montauk train to the Main Line?

Postby Kelly&Kelly » Sun Feb 21, 2016 8:09 pm

Pick through an old timetable. Dozens did.
Kelly&Kelly
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:50 am

Re: Ever a Lower Montauk train to the Main Line?

Postby Backshophoss » Sun Feb 21, 2016 11:49 pm

Any trains that ran on the Lower Montauk were listed in the "City Terminal Zone" public TT's.
Believe the last train was an Oyster Bay to LI City train during the AM/PM rush hours.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4449
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: Lower Montauk Division Discussion

Postby Jeff Smith » Thu Jul 20, 2017 10:32 am

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/ ... tudy.shtml

The New York City Department of Transportation is conducting a study to evaluate the feasibility of reintroducing passenger rail service on the Lower Montauk Branch line. The branch connects the existing Long Island Rail Road stations of Long Island City and Jamaica, passing through the neighborhoods of Maspeth, Ridgewood, Glendale, Middle Village, and Richmond Hill. The Long Island Rail Road provided passenger service along the branch at five stations until 1998. Currently, the branch is used for freight service only.

This study, sponsored by Council Member Elizabeth Crowley, will explore options for restoring passenger service that responds to the needs of adjacent neighborhoods, explore development potential to support passenger service, and balance the demands of current and future freight rail activity.
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7402
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: Lower Montauk Division Discussion

Postby krispy » Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:19 pm

Last two that made stops were 555 and 560, a wb and eb OYB. I never did it but depending on their OTP you could've caught both passing at old Richmond Hill Station, that would've made a nice clip. I enjoyed that ride, especially sailing through Forest Park, but honestly the counts were down in the single digits the last few years, especially once UPS in LI City moved some of it's employees elsewhere. The stations were puddles at grade crossings except for LIC, Pond and Richmond Hill, the signal system would've been needed to be upgraded and if they're seriously looking to run some trains on that branch you'd have to interlock a couple of places or the freight would be seriously impeded. Not to mention some serious work on Dutch Kills bridge. All of this is some serious $$, and after the 3rd track, double tracking the ML, the M9's and if ever ESA gets completed, I have a feeling the well is going to dry up. Not going to happen...
krispy
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:56 pm

Re: Lower Montauk Division Discussion

Postby Backshophoss » Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:26 pm

Passenger service on the lower Montauk became a moot point when the C-3's went online,they are only accessible with a high level platform.
none of the lower Montauk "stations" were rebuilt with High levels,now the Cutoff is abandoned, and parts of the trackage have been
undercut to allow larger freight cars.
LIRR turned the lower Montauk into a Secondary track,and turned control and dispatching to NY&A,in that process one of the mainlines
is now a "storage" track. The ABS signals are now rusting in place.
The LIRR is still on the hook to maintain any grade crossing signals in the area.
If that last "drawbridge" on what was the "C" secondary fails inspection,there goes access to LIC yard from the lower Montauk.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4449
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: Lower Montauk Division Discussion

Postby NIMBYkiller » Thu Jul 20, 2017 10:11 pm

I don't see anything coming out of this study. In its current form, the line is more or less useless for passenger service. Even with Jamaica about to take off, and even with LIC blowing up as it has, I doubt there's enough demand between the two to warrant the resumption of LIRR service as is. There are some creative options, and it could be a key part of taking our regional transportation system to the next step that is so desperately needed. At least one track must be maintained as is for NYA though, so options are limited:
1. A single track super express subway with passing sidings and a couple of stops for currently unserved communities. This has very limited potential in terms of TPH. I'd love to see a study, but I doubt it would end up being worth it
2. Connect to a new tunnel to NYP, hooking either into tracks 1-5 or a portion of the new gateway tracks. The idea here is that with the city growing as much as it has, the most bang-for-your-buck expansion needs to be undertaken. The crossings into/out of Manhattan and subways have become either maxed out (both in terms of TPH and passenger carrying capacity) or are rapidly approaching that point. Expanding the subway network to cover parts of Queens that already have the LIRR cutting through is a waste. Rather than building multiple new subway lines, why not build one tunnel to make more use of the existing network? Hooking this two track line into NYP would allow the opportunity for additional service from the densest areas of the city (and Long Island). The only way it works though is with through running. I know it's not a popular idea, and there may be limited demand, but it's the only way to make the most of the limited capacity available.
3. Connect the Bushwick Branch to a new tunnel to a lower Manhattan terminal for all the same reasons listed above.

Call them fantasy or whatever, but nobody can deny that we are rapidly approaching (or in my opinion, already at) a regional transportation crisis. There's not a whole lot more that can be done with the existing subway network, and anyone who's been to Court Sq, ridden the 7, or the L, can attest to how crowded things have gotten, due in large part to the redevelopment in North Brooklyn and LIC (and it's going up into Astoria now as well). Hell, there's platform conductors at Hoyt-Schermerhorn because of the crowds transferring off the G onto the A/C trains that are arriving already packed. The roads are no better. The only crossing south of 60th St that moves reliably well is the upper level of the Manhattan Bridge, but when it regularly takes over an hour to get from the LIE to the other side of the Queensboro Bridge, you can't tell me there isn't a problem. Evenings trying to get into the Holland Tunnel? FUGHEDABOUDIT! Inbound Lincoln after 4PM? Just park and wait til tomorrow. We're at the point (past the point) that the entire regions transportation system needs a reevaluation/restructuring coupled with some key capacity additions.
NIMBYkiller
 
Posts: 1365
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:24 pm
Location: Port Washington

Re: Lower Montauk Division Discussion

Postby hrfcarl » Fri Jul 21, 2017 11:16 am

NIMBYkiller wrote:I don't see anything coming out of this study. In its current form, the line is more or less useless for passenger service. Even with Jamaica about to take off, and even with LIC blowing up as it has, I doubt there's enough demand between the two to warrant the resumption of LIRR service as is....

Call them fantasy or whatever, but nobody can deny that we are rapidly approaching (or in my opinion, already at) a regional transportation crisis.....


Both of these statements are true: Unless the Lower Montauk and/or Atlantic Branch can be brought into Manhattan, then there won't be much benefit. I doubt many deny NYC's existing regional transportation infrastructure is reaching or is at its limits, but unless costs and completion time can be made more reasonable (ESA and 2nd Ave Subways for example), there is very little chance of any true expansion.
hrfcarl
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Long Island Rail Road (LIRR)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nyandw and 5 guests