Hochul Revises Cuomo's Penn Station Plan

So the Penn Station redevelopment plan is back on. The biggest changes are a reduction in height of the 10 towers that will be built around the station, and most severely the elimination of the track annex (adding Penn Station South trackage to supplement the existing 4 tracks).

I think axing the tracks is a huge mistake - (1) they're sorely needed and can help shift NJT riders to one dedicated part of the station and (2) the rebuild of the station would allow those tracks to be integrated into the new layout. Doing them later will require some future planning on how to connect them so we don't end up with another hodgepodge appendage onto the new facility.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/03/nyre ... ochul.html

I feel like the better way to solve NYP capacity issues is instead of building more tracks is to merge LIRR and NJT operations and run trains thru.

danib62 wrote:I feel like the better way to solve NYP capacity issues is instead of building more tracks is to merge LIRR and NJT operations and run trains thru.

I don't really see how that solves much. Right now NJT runs through trains to a yard in Queens for layup - why not add capacity in NYP so they can lay up more of them there instead of the run through. I just don't think there's enough demand to run revenue trains thru Penn to Long Island from NJ as an end-all solution to Penn Station's congestion issues. Most people's destination is NYC.

There's also the issue of the existing platforms being way too inadequate for today's crowds of commuters. Building a new section would allow for larger platforms and better planning for people flow - allowing NJ riders to enter and disembark toward the southern end of the station.

Why, oh why must South Penn Station be nixxed from this plan? I remember seeing a proposed map stating that the 7 Train could connect with the southern end of South Penn Station. I'm guessing this "New York South Station" was removed due to costs? I also agree that this is a horrible idea in which it not only prevents more storage for NJT trains, but also prevents future growth for more scheduled NJT and Amtrak trains. I can easily see Acelas, Regionals and Keystones (and maybe even LD trains? Can anyone confirm?) being able to utilize this expansion. Also, why were seven tracks proposed in particular instead of a different amount?

danib62 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 10:03 am I feel like the better way to solve NYP capacity issues is instead of building more tracks is to merge LIRR and NJT operations and run trains thru.

The problem with Penn is that the current station is operating at something like 200% of design capacity. That has nothing to do, really, with NJT.

When the station opened in 1910, no New Jersey commuter services were handled there. The Raritan Valley line (then the CNJ main line) went into the CNJ's Communipaw terminal in Jersey City. The Morris & Essex and Montclair-Boonton lines ran to the DL&W terminal in Hoboken. And the PRR's own services-- now the North Jersey Coast Line and Northeast Corridor Line-- terminated at the PRR's Exchange Place station in Jersey City. The only suburban services using Penn were the LIRR trains.

The only possible solution that makes sense here is expanding the footprint.

Ridgefielder wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 12:22 pm The problem with Penn is that the current station is operating at something like 200% of design capacity. That has nothing to do, really, with NJT.

The only possible solution that makes sense here is expanding the footprint.

By how much? When will there ever be enough capacity at Penn Station?
Another solution could work if those in power and with the money wished, is to build an entirely new Amtrak Station in Manhattan. The new Hudson River tunnels could be built toward it, and it could use the new East Side Access tunnels under the East River as well. Place this new station somewhere between Penn Station and Grand Central Station. If you are going to spend another 6 to 8 Billion dollars rehabbing Penn Station after already spending Billions of dollars on the ex Post Office Hall, why not spend that much money on an entirely new train station? Other cities as large as New York City use multiple stations, even for HSR. You just do not have to have every train go to the same station.

No additional tracks and platforms make no sense. Someday complete Gateway project will be finished. That includes the 2 new tubes, rehab old tubes , Portal north and south, and 4 tracking from new bores exit to Newark Penn. Then capacity for number of trains able to go under the Hudson during rush hours will double. Without additional space where are all the passengers going to go coming inbound.? Then you will have 2 - 3 times that number of passengers waiting for trains during outbound afternoon rush.

LIRR and soon to be MNRR will not give up any track and platform space. Plus the new tunnel bores are to be south of the present bores. Without Penn south NJT would cut thru too many puzzle switches reducing total number of trains possible to go under the Hudson. Bad idea. Penn south with wider platforms and more exit stairs per platform will handle NJ Transit crows fairly well with Amtrak probably using mostly the older tracks and platforms ?

danib62 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 10:03 am I feel like the better way to solve NYP capacity issues is instead of building more tracks is to merge LIRR and NJT operations and run trains thru.

Among other issues, there will be the third rail vs overhead catenary thing to work out.

BitterOldRRExec wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 5:16 pm

danib62 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 10:03 am I feel like the better way to solve NYP capacity issues is instead of building more tracks is to merge LIRR and NJT operations and run trains thru.

Among other issues, there will be the third rail vs overhead catenary thing to work out.

Don't be surprised if they yank out third rail in the old tunnels when they rehab them.

I hope they fully repair the 3rd rails - LIRR doesn't use cat.

west point wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 5:10 pm No additional tracks and platforms make no sense. Someday complete Gateway project will be finished. That includes the 2 new tubes, rehab old tubes , Portal north and south, and 4 tracking from new bores exit to Newark Penn. Then capacity for number of trains able to go under the Hudson during rush hours will double. Without additional space where are all the passengers going to go coming inbound.? Then you will have 2 - 3 times that number of passengers waiting for trains during outbound afternoon rush.

LIRR and soon to be MNRR will not give up any track and platform space. Plus the new tunnel bores are to be south of the present bores. Without Penn south NJT would cut thru too many puzzle switches reducing total number of trains possible to go under the Hudson. Bad idea. Penn south with wider platforms and more exit stairs per platform will handle NJ Transit crows fairly well with Amtrak probably using mostly the older tracks and platforms ?

Sooner or later more tracks will be needed. But you don't have to level every building near Penn including the Hotel PA, one or two historic churches, etc. Most of what has been called Penn South is just a real estate grab with plans to build numerous office towers that we don't need. Instead, it should be limited to only what's needed to give the Pits of Penn the needed capacity. Also, run through of trains, say Jamaica to Newark and other destinations would greatly reduce congestion in the West Side Yard and far more.

I don't blame NY for axing expansion that primarily benefits NJ residents. Let NJ fund that.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

eolesen wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 7:39 pm I don't blame NY for axing expansion that primarily benefits NJ residents. Let NJ fund that.

Yeah, this part of the NYT story is not encouraging: 'Alluding to the track expansion and construction of the Gateway tunnel, Ms. Hochul said. “Yes, I support them and we’ll get them done.” But she characterized those projects as “primarily for Amtrak and New Jersey Transit riders.”' Well, she is from Buffalo . Funding is a question mark in any case.

You'd think with two new governors, the Port Authority could be tamed, but it's quite the dragon. It's one of those entities with its own pot of gold. Self-funded, that is, and they can be fearsome beasts, or sometimes just convenient pets, like the ABC liquor store monopoly in Virginia (and maybe NC and Pennsylvania). Every few years powerful politicians in Va. call for eliminating the ABC and so far they have always lost. Airports and their ticket tax are a middle ground in tenacity, but the PANYNJ is much bigger than airports. Nice to see some airport funds can now go to related public transit. The highway gas tax was similarly cracked a few years ago.

The NJ governor has a fresh mandate as of two days ago, but Hochul is up for re-election next year. One reason Gov. Christie got blown for his PANYNJ shenanigans is because NJ has better public records laws or practices than NY does. Gov. Cuomo simply deep-sixed his communications with the PANYNJ.

If you don't have the NYT article, there's somewhat mangled reading of it in the Gothamist https://gothamist.com/news/hochul-backs ... with-twist It paints a rosier picture of track expansion, but really like the NYT says, Hochul makes that Phase 2. The problem is she doesn't want to take down so many buildings south of Penn. The governor's press release is all about community input and removing the ceiling over the platforms to make an open hall ("the size of Moynihan's and Grand Central's halls combined"). Not mentioned: the opinions of engineers, the striped cap type or the pocket protector type. Just some fluff from the MTA in her endorsement quotes. https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/govern ... urrounding

What the Gothamist also gets sort of wrong is the public space. In both Cuomo and Hochul's plan there's a 30,000 square foot plaza. But Hochul includes it in 8 acres (348,480 sq. ft.) of total public space. The new plan still has plenty of questionable office space and mollifying of the Vornado Realty Trust, but also 1800 residential units. Of that, it "mandates one building as residential, which will include 162 permanently affordable units - more than the entire number of residences that would be displaced if the southern expansion of Penn Station occurs." The latter thing is Phase 2.

Here's a better write-up than the Gothamist, with opposing opinions about adding tracks and through-running: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/11/04/ ... -capacity/