|
|
| HBLR 8 Street extension (926395) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
|
|
| (926395) | |
HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by R42 4787 on Thu Apr 22 01:43:44 2010 What is the current status of the HBLR's 8 Street Bayonne extension? 8 Street station is shown on maps and timetables as a future station. However, NJ Transit makes no mention of it its site under future capital projects. I do see track work south of 22 St. Is there even a proposed completion date? |
|
|
| (926396) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 22 02:24:49 2010, in response to HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by R42 4787 on Thu Apr 22 01:43:44 2010. Last I heard, construction was in the latter phase and it should be open within the year. |
|
|
| (926399) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 03:10:40 2010, in response to HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by R42 4787 on Thu Apr 22 01:43:44 2010. NJ Transit makes no mention of it its site under future capital projectsThat's because it's a current capital project under construction. Spending an absurd amount of money for light rail once more, too ($58.4 million for one mile; but I guess that's better than what the system has cost overall). Is there even a proposed completion date? Nope; all that the NJT page says is that it'll be open this year. Amazing that they tore it all apart just to rebuild it again, eh? How much cheaper would it have been to have kept the CNJ main line open as it was, with the only capital spending back in the 60s on a PATH extension to CRRNJ Terminal . . . ? How about the Newark & New York, which could have been serving the Prudential Center nowadays . . . ? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (926432) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by ebtmikado on Thu Apr 22 07:20:40 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 03:10:40 2010. “For all sad words of tongue and pen, The saddest are these, 'It might have been'.”-John Greenleaf Whittier squeak |
|
|
| (926498) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Thu Apr 22 12:46:39 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 03:10:40 2010. When the service was eliminated, it wasn't felt it was necessary. 30+ years passed between the end of the original service, and the new service that was built. The direction of the country changed twice in the interim. |
|
|
| (926503) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 22 12:55:15 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Thu Apr 22 12:46:39 2010. Yeah, rail was dying in 1967, no way they could have forseen it's rebirth in 35 years later. |
|
|
| (926527) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 15:05:50 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Thu Apr 22 12:46:39 2010. When the service was eliminated, it wasn't felt it was necessaryYeah, because it wasn't the PRR or E-L. |
|
|
| (926576) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Thu Apr 22 19:10:15 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Thu Apr 22 12:46:39 2010. When the service was eliminated, it wasn't felt it was necessary. 30+ years passed between the end of the original service, and the new service that was built.Of course, the CNJ would take you to the Jersey City Communipaw terminal and it was a ferry ride to the west side of Manhattan. Now it's a light rail ride that connects with PATH and Hoboken Terminal. Much faster and more convent. Light rail did what heavy rail couldn't. Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (926602) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 20:16:48 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Newkirk Images on Thu Apr 22 19:10:15 2010. Again, all that NJ had to do was get the PANYNJ to build a PATH connector to CRRNJ Terminal, which was originally planned back in H&M days. Instead, they spent more money building the Aldene abomination, which involved elevating the LVRR through Roselle Park and Union. So in effect, light rail doesn't do anything that heavy rail didn't do, because there was no heavy rail built (both CNJ and H&M were FRA rail).You can't ride this light rail from Elizabeth or Roselle, you know. You also can't ride it westward into Pennsylvania.  |
|
|
| (926626) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Thu Apr 22 20:49:53 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 15:05:50 2010. because it wasn't the PRRMaybe they should have spent some pennies on electrification and a Manhattan terminal like a real, proper railroad. :-) |
|
|
| (926706) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by JohnnyMints on Fri Apr 23 00:30:50 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 20:16:48 2010. You can't ride this light rail from Elizabeth or Roselle, you know. You also can't ride it westward into Pennsylvania.No, but the LR could be extended under Newark Bay to connect with Elizabethport, Broad Street, and on to Cranford, where an easy connection to the Raritan Valley Line can be made. IINM, there is plenty of room between the east and westbound tracks (where tracks used to exist) at Cranford. It *can* be done... |
|
|
| (926739) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 23 03:55:00 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 20:16:48 2010. Wjy did they end the H%M at 34th? WTF IS AT 34th>!>?!? |
|
|
| (926751) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:10:44 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 23 03:55:00 2010. Ran out of money, the story goes. It was supposed to go all the way to Grand Central Terminal. |
|
|
| (926752) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:12:35 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Thu Apr 22 20:49:53 2010. The PRR kept Exchange Place Terminal open for half a century after NYP opened because it was far closer to Wall Street, and thus advantageous. They even electrified it, with overhead wires and all. Of course, if most of Hudson County became part of New York City, who'd complain about waterfront terminals? |
|
|
| (926753) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:24:46 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by JohnnyMints on Fri Apr 23 00:30:50 2010. the LR could be extended under Newark Bay to connect with Elizabethport, Broad Street, and on to Cranford, where an easy connection to the Raritan Valley Line can be made"Under Newark Bay" was a pipe dream expressed by Jeff Warsh, IINM. Given how much HBLR has cost already, how much would that cost? On top of that, the 8th Street extension is incompatible with such a notion, being elevated. Furthermore, NIMBYs are against the idea of turning Cranford into a light rail transfer station (one of their canards has to do with limited parking at the station). Yes, there is still room for six tracks on the ROW at Cranford, but there are high platforms in place that are in use on both sides of the ROW; there isn't enough room to build a platform for light rail where the express tracks used to be if you put them there, and it'd cost a pretty penny to turn one side of the station into an island platform for the RVL and the other side into an island platform for light rail (the LRT side would have to be lowered, since both the HBLR and NCS, assuming some resurrection of the Newark-Elizabeth LRT idea, have low-floor vehicles). There was also some (short-lived?) advocacy group active during the late 1990s known as "CLAANG", who wanted the Newark-Elizabeth LRT extended all the way to Plainfield, based on the four-track CNJ main line configuration. Of course, nowadays you have the complications of the high platforms at Westfield and Plainfield Watchung Avenue, which were built on the roadbed of the former local tracks. An equally short-lived proposal had LRT using the former Rahway Valley Railroad to reach Kenilworth, Union, Springfield and Summit (which was more short-lived than the Union County project intended to rebuild the RVRR from Cranford to Summit so that the Morristown & Erie could get from its home rails to Linden via the former B&O SIRR; only the SIRR was rebuilt, and some tracks were laid on the Rahway Valley in Cranford but no further than that). |
|
|
| (926754) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:29:47 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:24:46 2010. There was also some (short-lived?) advocacy group active during the late 1990s known as "CLAANG", who wanted the Newark-Elizabeth LRT extended all the way to Plainfield, based on the four-track CNJ main line configuration. Of course, nowadays you have the complications of the high platforms at Westfield and Plainfield Watchung Avenue, which were built on the roadbed of the former local tracksBesides that, the bridge over Crossways Place, between Westfield and Fanwood stations, was rebuilt as a two-track arch bridge. Before the rebuild, the tracks used the local trackbed instead of the express tracks, possibly due to the condition of the older bridge. The whole CLAANG thing was, to me, reminiscent of "PATH to Plainfield" . . . And of course, none of the above holds any potential for rail service between the NY metro area and the Lehigh Valley metro area (Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton). Would be nice if there were even a proposal for Amtrak to serve the area via the Lehigh Line with an engine change at Newark Penn, but that's even a pipe dream . . . |
|
|
| (926771) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by ebtmikado on Fri Apr 23 07:45:02 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:29:47 2010. The engine change used to be at the LV's "Newark" interlocking,at the top of the hill from the NEC to the Lehigh Line. squeak |
|
|
| (926803) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 10:55:49 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:24:46 2010. On top of that, the 8th Street extension is incompatible with such a notion, being elevated.Plenty of room before the bay and the channel for it to descend below grade. |
|
|
| (926804) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 10:58:08 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 20:16:48 2010. At the time, with mass transit, and rail transit in particular, in a rapid decline, it made more sense to consolidate the existing services than to plan ahead for the future. This is why things now get feasibility studies with 30 year lifespans. |
|
|
| (926809) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:10:13 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:12:35 2010. It also had a PATH connection. Communipaw had ONLY the ferry to connect it to Manhattan, making it cost prohibitive. Even E-L abandoned their costly ferry service because PATH was nearby. Of all the railroads serving the NJ-NYC commuter market, the CNJ was the least financially sound. |
|
|
| (926811) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:16:07 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 22 20:16:48 2010. That should have been done 90 years ago. In 1967, it was just too expensive. PATH was new and they were busy attempting to rescue the system from decades of neglect. Expansion was out of the question.Now, had the CNJ taken over Exchange Place in the 1950's.... The Pennsy and the CNJ should have merged in the 50's. It would have shut out two competitors from the NY market (Reading, B&O) and it would have given the PRR competition for service that was dominated by both Erie and the DLW. Unfortunately, CNJ stock was mostly owned by the hated Reading company so any co-operation before the mid 60's was out of the question. |
|
|
| (926812) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:17:48 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by JohnnyMints on Fri Apr 23 00:30:50 2010. Who wants to go from Bayonne to Cranford? Most people in Bayonne want to get to the Jersey Waterfront or NYC. Public transportation cannot provide an alternative for everyone, it can only do so for the dominant destination. That's why there are no subways which run directly from Far Rockaway to the Bronx. |
|
|
| (926813) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by ebtmikado on Fri Apr 23 11:18:30 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:10:13 2010. After the Aldene Plan was implemented, shuttle trains operated between E. 33rd St., Bayonne and E'port. I believe that service was cut back to W. 8th St. before being eliminated. I feel it would make much more sense to reactivate the Newark Branch via the existing West Side branch, thru South Kearny (major industrial area-much employment) then on to Newark. squeak |
|
|
| (926814) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:18:57 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:10:44 2010. It still should, even if it means the line must go deep under the IND/BMT/LIRR. |
|
|
| (926816) | |
CORRECTION!!!! Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by ebtmikado on Fri Apr 23 11:21:06 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by ebtmikado on Fri Apr 23 11:18:30 2010. CORRECTION!!!! The shuttles ran to Cranford, stopping at E'port and Elizabeth. Lee squeak |
|
|
| (926817) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:21:29 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 05:29:47 2010. I think it's more logical to have Amtrak service to Scranton and Binghamton via the Cut-off and the Lower Tier (ex-Erie) Main. |
|
|
| (926818) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:23:57 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by ebtmikado on Fri Apr 23 11:18:30 2010. That was the old "Culver Shuttle" approach. Make service as crappy and useless as possible until you drive down patronage and you could justify abandonment. It must've driven them mad that it took 10 years to achieve (Bayonne service was eliminated in 1978). |
|
|
| (926831) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Fri Apr 23 12:12:45 2010, in response to HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by R42 4787 on Thu Apr 22 01:43:44 2010. I wonder if they'll cut the S89 bus to terminate at 8th St when the new extension opens.Another interesting thing is that the Bayonne Bridge is posing to be a huge problem for large ships and now a replacement bridge/tunnel is imminent. Maybe a HBLR extension to Staten Island isn't that far off? |
|
|
| (926832) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Fri Apr 23 12:18:54 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Fri Apr 23 12:12:45 2010. Maybe a HBLR extension to Staten Island isn't that far off?As I have said int he past, I think that the main barrier is political. Why would NJ want the increase the readily accessible labor supply when that increase is in NY? |
|
|
| (926834) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 12:29:24 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by trainsarefun on Fri Apr 23 12:18:54 2010. It would benefit NJ. It's NY that will balk. They won't assist in making Jersey City more enticing for SI residents. |
|
|
| (926837) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:33:25 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by ebtmikado on Fri Apr 23 11:18:30 2010. Except there's no longer a bridge across Newark Bay. |
|
|
| (926838) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:34:43 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:18:57 2010. It never will; especially now that GCT is no longer a major intercity rail terminal, as it was before Amtrak. |
|
|
| (926839) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:37:32 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by trainsarefun on Fri Apr 23 12:18:54 2010. I don't see that as much of a barrier. Increasing interstate commuting possibilities expands the pool of labor and the pool of jobs to both markets.A nice little pipe dream is light rail conversion of the SIR; LRT along the North Shore with a branch down South Ave to the Teleport complex; and a connection to HBLR. |
|
|
| (926841) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Fri Apr 23 12:40:44 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 12:29:24 2010. It would benefit NJ.I don't see communities in and around the Gold Coast saying that at all. The thinking is mostly that why should NJ confer this benefit on NY's SI? |
|
|
| (926842) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Fri Apr 23 12:42:01 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:37:32 2010. It's mostly a one way street, though. The transit is mostly useful just for getting people to jobs in NJ, not so much in SI, which is rather like Nassau and Suffolk County in terms of rail usefulness. |
|
|
| (926850) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 13:15:59 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by trainsarefun on Fri Apr 23 12:40:44 2010. It would hurt NY by pointing out (painfully) that SI is a LOT closer to Jersey than the rest of NYC. NY would not want to subsidize a rail service which more easily allows SI residents to work in NJ. Right now these people have to drive, costing the government a lot less. |
|
|
| (926852) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 13:18:37 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:33:25 2010. And one ain't being built again. |
|
|
| (926853) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 13:19:54 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:34:43 2010. It's a monster commuter destination, it would be of major benefit to Jersey riders. Manay midtown riders from Jersey have to use the subway at 33rd St. |
|
|
| (926856) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 13:20:50 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by trainsarefun on Fri Apr 23 12:42:01 2010. Exactly, which is why NY will not allow it. |
|
|
| (926859) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Tony Clifton on Fri Apr 23 13:21:58 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 10:55:49 2010. >>Plenty of room before the bay and the channel for it to descend below grade.<<I'd like to see a depth chart of the channel and the final plans for the 8th Street station, but at first glance, there does not appear to be plenty of room. I'd be interested in seeing your analysis. |
|
|
| (926873) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Fri Apr 23 13:52:46 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:37:32 2010. I look at an HBLR extension to SI, as a method of easing Staten Island's currently clogged and inefficient transportation network. Economical benefits come as a side benefit because it has the possibility to bring more jobs to NJ but it's mainly reducing Staten Island's lengthy commute times that should be addressed.From Forest Av & Richmond Av, you can currently catch the S89 (15 minutes), HBLR to Exchange Pl (16 minutes) and then the PATH to WTC (6 minutes).. about 40 minutes total! Compare that to the express bus which takes 55-60 minutes and local bus/ferry/subway is about 1 hour and 10 minutes but could fluctuate up to 1 hour and 30 minutes because of the ferry's natural unreliability. This is why I believe the S89 should run all day, but also shows how quickly anyone from the furtheraway portions of Staten Island can reach Manhattan if an HBLR extension was built. |
|
|
| (926875) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 13:57:27 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Fri Apr 23 13:52:46 2010. I look at an HBLR extension to SI, as a method of easing Staten Island's currently clogged and inefficient transportation network. Economical benefits come as a side benefit because it has the possibility to bring more jobs to NJ but it's mainly reducing Staten Island's lengthy commute times that should be addressed.SI should seriously consider seceding from NY and joining NJ. |
|
|
| (926876) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 13:58:21 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:23:57 2010. And of course drive down patronage by reducing service constantly. Just couldn't take the chance that high demand would have prompted a reopening of the old terminal, or even worse extending past Bayonne into Hoboken Terminal (gasp) . . . |
|
|
| (926878) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 14:00:50 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 13:58:21 2010. Well, service to Hoboken has basically been introduced with the current service. I'm not sure that would have been economically feasible in the 70's, Bayonne was still seedy, and Jersey City was not the employment center it is now. |
|
|
| (926880) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 14:01:08 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:21:29 2010. Yeah, if your focus is to serve Scranton.There used to be trains going via the CNJ and RDG to Harrisburg PA. That's a far shorter route than today's Keystone Service with its double-back into 30th Street. Don't recall if the LVRR also went to Harrisburg via the RDG, but Amtrak could run such a route nowadays. |
|
|
| (926882) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 14:06:16 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 10:55:49 2010. Plenty of room before the bay and the channel for it to descend below gradeNo there is not. The extension is elevated too far above grade. To even attempt to send it down below grade at that point (a very long run or a prohibitively steep grade) requires a lot of eminent-domain disruption. If there was even a question of tunneling under Newark Bay, the 8th Street extension would have been built underground. And there is still the question of expense. |
|
|
| (926884) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 14:08:23 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Hank Eisenstein on Fri Apr 23 12:34:43 2010. It's never going to NYP either. |
|
|
| (926886) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 14:10:38 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 11:10:13 2010. And yet the PRR demolished it. If they had held onto it into PC days and ran the Metroliner into it, I'd say a revival would have occurred . . . |
|
|
| (926891) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Apr 23 14:13:35 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 14:01:08 2010. I think the Keystone is meant to primarily serve PA residents to Philly.I agree service to Allentown makes some sense, but in what manner is debatable. I like the idea of Amtrak running via the Cutoff to Scranton, Binghamton, Elmira, Corning and Hornell. Allentown may best be served by extending the ex-CNJ from Phillipsburg or the ex-Reading from Philly by NJT or SEPTA. |
|
|
| (926892) | |
Re: HBLR 8 Street extension |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 23 14:14:13 2010, in response to Re: HBLR 8 Street extension, posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Fri Apr 23 13:52:46 2010. Won't happen. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
|
