DOCSLIB.ORG

2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey 2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey Executive Summary Report Prepared for: Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp. Prepared by: Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Engineering Department In Association with: Revised September 2010 Table of Contents Purpose .................................................................................................................. 1 Survey Schedule ...................................................................................................... 1 Survey Methodology ................................................................................................. 1 Key Findings and Selected Tables from the Final Weighted Database .............................. 5 System-Wde Origins-and-Destinations .............................................................. 5 System-Wide Boarding and Exiting Station Pairs ................................................ 9 Access and Egress Modes.............................................................................. 11 Trip Frequency and Trip Purpose .................................................................... 11 Demographics ............................................................................................. 14 Tourist ....................................................................................................... 15 Weekday Station-by-Station Findings ............................................................. 15 2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey i List of Tables Table ES-1 - Sample Size .......................................................................................... 4 Table ES-2 - Top 10 Boarding and Exiting Station Pairs - WEEKDAY Survey ..................... 9 Table ES-3 - Top 10 Boarding and Exiting Station Pairs - SATURDAY Survey .................. 10 Table ES-4 - Top 10 Boarding and Exiting Station Pairs - WEEKDAY AM Peak Period (7AM to 10 AM) ................................................................................................................. 10 Table ES-5 - Access and Egress Modes - Weekday and Saturday Survey ....................... 12 Table ES-6 - Purpose of the Trip by Trip Frequency - Weekday (All Respondents) ........... 13 Table ES-7 - Purpose of the Trip by Trip Frequency - Saturday (All Respondents) ........... 14 Table ES-8 - Gender ............................................................................................... 15 Table ES-9 - Tourist ............................................................................................... 15 Table ES-10 - Top Two Access or Egress Modes of New York Station Trips ..................... 16 Table ES-11 - Top Boarding or Exiting Stations of New York Station Trips ...................... 17 Table ES-12 - Top Access or Egress Modes of Grove Street, Exchange Place, and Pavonia/Newport Trips ............................................................................................ 18 Table ES-13 - Top Boarding or Exiting Stations of Grove Street, Exchange Place, and Pavonia/Newport Trips ............................................................................................ 19 Table ES-14 - Tabulations and Cross Tabulations ....................................................... 20 List of Figures Figure ES-1 - PATH System Map ................................................................................ 2 Figure ES-2 - Weekday Origins .................................................................................. 5 Figure ES-3 - Inter and Intrastate Trips - Weekday ...................................................... 6 Figure ES-4 - Saturday Origins .................................................................................. 7 Figure ES-5 - Inter and Intrastate Trips - Saturday ...................................................... 7 Figure ES-6 - Origins 7AM to 10AM ............................................................................ 8 Figure ES-7 - Inter and Intrastate Trips - 7 to 10 AM Weekday ...................................... 8 2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey ii Station Snapshots Figure 1 - Weekday Trips Boarding at the World Trade Center Station Figure 2 - Weekday Trips Exiting at the World Trade Center Station Figure 3 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Christopher Street Station Figure 4 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Christopher Street Station Figure 5 - Weekday Trips Boarding at 9th Street Station Figure 6 - Weekday Trips Exiting at 9th Street Station Figure 7 - Weekday Trips Boarding at 14th Street Station Figure 8 - Weekday Trips Exiting at 14th Street Station Figure 9 - Weekday Trips Boarding at 23rd Street Station Figure 10 - Weekday Trips Exiting at 23rd Street Station Figure 11 - Weekday Trips Boarding at 33rd Street Station Figure 12 - Weekday Trips Exiting at 33rd Street Station Figure 13 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Newark Penn Station Figure 14 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Newark Penn Station Figure 15 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Harrison Station Figure 16 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Harrison Station Figure 17 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Journal Square Station Figure 18 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Journal Square Station Figure 19 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Grove Street Station Figure 20 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Grove Street Station Figure 21 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Exchange Place Station Figure 22 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Exchange Place Station Figure 23 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Pavonia/Newport Station Figure 24 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Pavonia/Newport Station Figure 25 - Weekday Trips Boarding at Hoboken Station Figure 26 - Weekday Trips Exiting at Hoboken Station Report Appendices Appendix A – Survey Methodology and Survey Instrument Appendix B – Weighting Factor Methodology Appendix C – Survey Coding and Logic Check and Record Layout Appendix D – Final Weighted Tables 2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey iii Purpose As part of its research activity, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANY&NJ) maintains an ongoing program designed to monitor and analyze trends in interstate transit ridership. The 2009 System-Wide PATH Passenger Survey data will assist the Port Authority with their monitoring efforts and with updating their database on current trends in inter- and intrastate ridership. Previous system-wide surveys have been conducted in 1996, 2001 (both before and after the events of 9/11), 2004 and 2007. The findings from the system-wide interview surveys are contained in three documents – the Executive Summary Report, Station Snapshots, and the Report Appendices. This document is the Executive Summary Report and contains key system-wide and station-based findings that are highlighted in figures found in the Station Snapshots document. The Station Snapshots document contains two figures for each station that show the origins, destinations, boarding and exiting stations, and travel modes of passengers that enter and exit each station on a typical weekday. The Report Appendices contain a full set of tabulations and cross tabulations of the data. A follow-up telephone customer satisfaction survey was also conducted in the fall of 2009 and the findings are discussed in a fourth document entitled "PATH Customer Satisfaction Study Wave VII". Survey Schedule The interview surveys were conducted on a typical weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday) and Saturday at all PATH Stations (see Figure ES-1) in the months of September and October of 2009. Weekday surveys were conducted between the hours of 5 AM and 1 AM and Saturday surveys were conducted between 8 AM and 10 PM. Survey Methodology An interview-assisted approach was used to conduct a short origin-and-destination survey (about two to three minutes to complete). The survey was conducted by interviewing PATH customers as they passed through the turnstiles to access the train platforms. A survey form was developed and programmed into a hand-held Palm© Personal Digital Assistant (PDA). 2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey 1 Figure ES-1 PATH System Map 2009 PATH System-Wide Passenger Survey 2 The PDA recorded the time of day of the interview and the interviewer recorded the gender of the customer being surveyed. The interviewer proceeded to ask the following questions and then asked for a follow-up contact name and telephone number: 1. At which station will you leave PATH? 2. Where is your final destination (town, zip code, or nearest intersection, if Manhattan)? 3. After you leave PATH, how will you get to your final destination (via what mode)? 4. Where did you begin your trip (town or zip code, or nearest intersection, if Manhattan)? 5. How did you get to this PATH Station (via what mode)? 6. What is the main purpose of your trip? 7. Are you a tourist? 8. How often do you make this trip by PATH? Depending on a survey respondent’s answer to a particular question, follow-up questions may have been asked. If a person responded that he/she took a bus as his/her access or egress mode, he/she was asked whether it was a NJ Transit, MTA, or private bus and the bus route they used. If a person said he/she walked as his/her access or egress mode, the surveyor asked a follow-up question whether he/she used any other forms of transportation as part of his/her trip because the walk category in the survey is only for those trips that involved only walking. For the final question, the interviewer asked the customer if he/she would be willing to participate in a follow-up telephone survey by providing a contact name and telephone number. The customer was informed that if he/she provided a contact name and telephone
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 7.31.11 NYT Ironstate Harrison
    Sunday, July 31, 2011 Reviving a Tired Town By ANTOINETTE MARTIN said, “it’s possible you’ve never heard ium building called the River Park at of Harrison.” Which is why “we are Harrison, at the edge of the sprawling HARRISON - STARTING leasing next launching a major branding effort — redevelopment area, set beside the month beside the PATH station here: not just for Harrison Station, but for the river. Built by the Roseland Property 275 new rental units with an attended entire area.” Company and Millennium Homes, it lobby, a fitness center, an outdoor pool Employing the slogan “Connect sold out quickly. But by the time a sec- and volleyball court, a residents’ Here,” Harrison Station will be mar- ond building opened the following lounge, and garage parking — all keted for its exceptional transit access: year, the condominium market was tak- within walking distance of a major- steps from the PATH and from a new ing a dive. The second building eventu- league soccer stadium. parking garage; 2 to 3 minutes from ally sold out, with the help of a year- Wait a minute. Did we just say Harri- Newark, 10 minutes from Jersey City, free-mortgage offer. son? 15 from Hoboken, and less than half an Last year, a 25,000-seat stadium for Once an industrial center down on its hour from Manhattan or Newark Lib- the New York Red Bulls professional luck, Harrison in Hudson County is erty International Airport. The site is soccer team was completed across now a locus of planned redevelopment off Interstate 280 and has quick access Frank E.
    [Show full text]
  • Right of Passage
    Right of Passage: Reducing Barriers to the Use of Public Transportation in the MTA Region Joshua L. Schank Transportation Planner April 2001 Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA 347 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10017 (212) 878-7087 · www.pcac.org ã PCAC 2001 Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank the following people: Beverly Dolinsky and Mike Doyle of the PCAC staff, who provided extensive direction, input, and much needed help in researching this paper. They also helped to read and re-read several drafts, helped me to flush out arguments, and contributed in countless other ways to the final product. Stephen Dobrow of the New York City Transit Riders Council for his ideas and editorial assistance. Kate Schmidt, formerly of the PCAC staff, for some preliminary research for this paper. Barbara Spencer of New York City Transit, Christopher Boylan of the MTA, Brian Coons of Metro-North, and Yannis Takos of the Long Island Rail Road for their aid in providing data and information. The Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee and its component Councils–the Metro-North Railroad Commuter Council, the Long Island Rail Road Commuters Council, and the New York City Transit Riders Council–are the legislatively mandated representatives of the ridership of MTA bus, subway, and commuter-rail services. Our 38 volunteer members are regular users of the MTA system and are appointed by the Governor upon the recommendation of County officials and, within New York City, of the Mayor, Public Advocate, and Borough Presidents. For more information on the PCAC and Councils, please visit our website: www.pcac.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix Exhibit a AM Volume Capacity Ratio Through Year 2050
    Jersey City Master Plan / Circulation Element Appendix Exhibit A AM Volume Capacity Ratio Through Year 2050 W e s tt N e w Y o r k To w n e n hh i L ty N gg n u J o 3 uu C n e oo g N r J r e r B 3 S oo E C O BB N D A R nn Y oo tt gg nn ii N ll J 49 r 5 r SE CO A N A DA RY hh tt rr oo NN T L y n d h u r s tt T o w n s h ii p W N & E S Y M N N IG L A T S F E o W r - m E e K I r l P y N o r tt h B e r g e n T o w n s h ii p N B R e U r T g . e .J n N L , i 5 n 9 e I- Y N R N J or 4 A the 95 D as N t Co O rr C ido E r S Li ne T N E M S e c a u c u s To w n N IG L A T S E U n ii o n C ii tt y W - E W e e h a w k e n T o w n s h ii p K I No P rt N he R as t U Co T rr .
    [Show full text]
  • Master Plan Reexamination Report
    Town of Harrison Hudson County Master Plan Reexamination Report November 2017 Adopted December 14, 2017 Prepared by Heyer, Gruel & Associates Community Planning Consultants 236 Broad Street, Red Bank, NJ 07701 (732) 741-2900 Town of Harrison November 2017 Master Plan Reexamination Report ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Harrison Master Plan Reexamination Report 2017 Town of Harrison Hudson County, New Jersey November 2017 Adopted December 14, 2017 Prepared By: Heyer, Gruel & Associates Community Planning Consultants 236 Broad Street, Red Bank, NJ 07701 (732) 741-2900 The original of this report was signed and sealed in accordance with N.J.S.A. 45:14A-12 ____________________________________ Susan S. Gruel, P.P. #1955 ____________________________________ M. McKinley Mertz, AICP, P.P. #6368 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Heyer, Gruel & Associates 2 Town of Harrison November 2017 Master Plan Reexamination Report ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Contents INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 5 PERIODIC REEXAMINATION .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • IRUM Comments on Hudson Tunnel Scoping Document
    INSTITUTE FOR RATIONAL URBAN MOBILITY, INC. George Haikalis One Washington Square Village, Suite 5D President New York, NY 10012 212-475-3394 [email protected] www.irum.org November 30, 2016 Mr. RJ Palladino, Senior Program Manager Ms. Amishi Castelli NJ Transit Capital Planning Federal Railroad Administration One Penn Plaza East—8th Floor One Bowling Green, Suite 429 Newark, NJ 07105 New York, NY 10004 [email protected] [email protected] Re: Hudson Tunnel Scoping Document Dear Mr. Palladino and Ms. Castelli: The Institute for Rational Urban Mobility, Inc. (IRUM), is a NYC-based non-profit concerned with reducing motor vehicle congestion and improving the livability of dense urban places. A key IRUM effort is to make the case for transforming the three commuter rail lines serving the NY-NJ-CT metropolitan area into a coordinated regional rail system with frequent service, integrated fares, and thru-running, first at Penn Station and then by linking Penn Station with Grand Central Terminal. The Hudson Tunnel project is a key element of such an effort, and IRUM has followed the development of this project with considerable interest. IRUM submitted scoping comments on the Hudson Tunnel project in a May 17, 2016 letter to the project team, along with a lengthy attachment – The Hoboken Alternative (copies attached). 1. NJ Transit and USDOT responses to IRUM’s comments shown in the Hudson Tunnel Scoping Summary Report are deeply flawed. On Page 31 of the Scoping Summary Report, the Hoboken Alternative is wrongly dismissed as follows: “An alternative that passes near the Hoboken Terminal, would be substantially longer (with proportionally greater cost) than alternatives that go more directly between the NEC alignment near Secaucus and PSNY.” This is simply wrong.
    [Show full text]
  • Hoboken Alternative
    The New ARC Hudson River Passenger Rail Tunnels: The Hoboken Alternative December 1, 2009 Prepared by George Haikalis President, Institute for Rational Urban Mobility One Washington Square Village, Suite 5D New York, NY 10012 212-475-3394 [email protected] www.irum.org Why via Hoboken? year time frame in the current plan, before any additional trains can be Routing the new Access to the handled across the Hudson. Region’s Core (ARC) Hudson River passenger rail tunnels by way of Other Important benefits of the Hoboken Terminal – the Hoboken Hoboken Alternative Alternative – allows existing rail infrastructure to be used more Significant environmental gains would productively. When combined with be realized as well. Since the Hoboken “Penn Station First” -- a simpler and Alternative routes trains over existing more direct Penn Station connection in underutilized tracks and bridges Manhattan -- the Hoboken Alternative through the Hackensack holds the promise of reducing Meadowlands, no wetlands would be construction cost of the new tunnels destroyed. A less costly construction and its essential related component -- scheme will greatly reduce the the Portal Bridge Capacity Expansion project’s carbon footprint as well. The project -- by more than $8 billion or route better serves the waterfront, 70% of the total $11.4 billion cost. providing motorists with a more attractive alternative and reducing Even in good times this option merits congestion which is at critical serious consideration, but in light of levels. the growing economic difficulties facing New Jersey and New York it is Routing the new tunnels by way of extremely important to give fair and Hoboken offers significant savings in impartial consideration to credible operating cost, while providing a much options.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report Narrative 2018
    Annual Report Narrative 2018 Submitted as part of the MTA 2018 Annual Report Pursuant to New York State Public Authorities Law Section 2800(1) Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2018 Annual Report to the Governor Pursuant to New York State Public Authorities Law §2800 MTA 2018 ANNUAL REPORT NARRATIVE Pursuant to New York Public Authorities Law Sections 2800 (1)(a)(1), (6), (11), (13), and (17) Section 1—Operations and Performance Performance 1 NYC Transit (Subways and Buses) Long Island Rail Road ▪ Metro-North Railroad ▪ MTA Bus Company ▪ Bridges and Tunnels Section 2—Accomplishments and Initiatives Customer Service Initiatives 17 Interagency ▪ NYC Transit (Subways) ▪ MTA Bus Operations (NYCT Department of Buses, MTA Bus Company) ▪ Long Island Rail Road ▪ Metro-North Railroad ▪ Bridges and Tunnels Operations/Technology Initiatives 26 Interagency ▪ NYC Transit (Subways) ▪ MTA Bus Operations (NYCT Department of Buses, MTA Bus Company) ▪ Long Island Rail Road ▪ Metro-North Railroad ▪ Bridges and Tunnels Sustainability/Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Initiatives 35 Interagency ▪ NYC Transit (Subways) ▪ MTA Bus Operations (NYCT Department of Buses, MTA Bus Company) ▪ Long Island Rail Road ▪ Metro-North Railroad ▪ Bridges and Tunnels Safety/Security Initiatives 43 Interagency: MTA Police Department ▪ NYC Transit (Subways) ▪ MTA Bus Operations (NYCT Department of Buses, MTA Bus Company) ▪ Long Island Rail Road ▪ Metro-North Railroad ▪ Bridges and Tunnels Cost-Cutting/Revenue Initiatives 54 Interagency ▪ NYC Transit (Subways) ▪ MTA Bus Operations (NYCT Department of Buses, MTA Bus Company) ▪ Long Island Rail Road ▪ Metro-North Railroad ▪ Bridges and Tunnels Section 3—Capital Projects Commitments/Completions The MTA Capital Programs 61 Capital Program Progress 62 Funding Received Through December 31, 2018 ▪ Capital Program Progress, 1982-2018 ▪ Capital Program Progress, 2018 New York City Transit (Subways) 64 Major 2018 Commitments ▪ Major 2018 Completions MTA Bus Operations (NYCT Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 4 World Trade Center 150 Greenwich Street New York, NY 10007
    Thomas P. DiNapoli 110 State Street State Comptroller Albany, New York 12236 STATE OF NEW YORK OFFICE OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER July 29, 2021 Kevin O’Toole Chairman Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 4 World Trade Center 150 Greenwich Street New York, NY 10007 Re: Selected Aspects of Accommodations for Passengers With Disabilities Report 2019-S-41 Dear Mr. O’Toole: Pursuant to the State Comptroller’s authority as set forth in Section 7071 of McKinney’s Unconsolidated Laws of New York, we have conducted an audit of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) to determine whether it has complied with selected requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and corresponding federal regulations to make its facilities accessible to passengers with disabilities. Our audit covered the period from June 24, 2019 to March 12, 2020. Background The PANYNJ was established in 1921 as an interstate public entity created to control the port district of New York and New Jersey, maintaining the trade and travel infrastructure of the area. PANYNJ’s portfolio of five airports, an interstate rail system, three bus terminals, and three cruise terminals serve the transportation needs of millions in the New York City metropolitan area. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Act or ADA) was signed into law to provide people with disabilities the right to access and participate in the same day-to-day activities as everyone else. The Act defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of an individual’s major life activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Replacement and Upgrade of the PATH Harrison Station Engineers
    Replacement and Upgrade of the PATH KSE Harrison Station Harrison, New Jersey PROJECT NAME Performance of Expert Professional Architectural and Engineering Services for the KS Engineers, P.C. Replacement and Upgrade of the PATH Harrison Station Engineers . Surveyors Construction Managers PROJECT OWNER New Jersey Port Authority of New York & New Jersey New York Pennsylvania PROJECT CLIENT Connecticut Dattner/PB Joint Venture [email protected] www.kseng.com START/ END DATES 2013 – Present PROJECT DESCRIPTION KS Engineers, P.C. has been retained to provide civil design of site improvements associated with the major development of the PATH Harrison Station. The existing PATH Harrison Station is located at the intersection of Frank E. Rodgers Boulevard and the Amtrak Northeast Corridor line. This station is part of the Newark to World Trade Center line on the PATH System. In response to the ongoing transformation of Harrison’s former industrial district along the Passaic River with high-profile mixed-use residential, commercial, and recreational development projects such as Red Bulls Soccer Stadium, the Port Authority of NY & NJ is investing in the redevelopment of the existing transit station to increase its capacity, and establish the station as a central hub for the surrounding community. The station’s redevelopment plan involves the creation of four distinct but unified plaza areas with signature head house buildings to define the geographic reaches of the station. For each plaza area, KSE is responsible for the civil design of the site utilities, grading and drainage including LEED/Sustainability, and access and egress for vehicles and pedestrians. In addition, KSE is responsible for the design of off-site improvements, including a pump station and storm drainage, to the adjacent Hudson County arterial serving the station area, Frank E.
    [Show full text]
  • Trip to Philadelphia and New York June 25 – 28 , 2003
    Trip to Philadelphia and New York June 25th – 28th, 2003 By Saul Wilson With Assistance from Joyce Steeves Photos and Tourist Sections by W. Stephen Wilson Trip to Philadelphia and New York June 25th – 28th, 2003 Introduction th th From June 25 to 28 , 2003 my father and I took 36 trains belonging to seven different transit companies through five different states, as a Christmas and Birthday present. I developed about 15 different schedules in the planning stages, be- fore settling on this particular one, just about twenty-four hours before it happened. What started as a two-day train-only trip became five days, three of which were dedicated to trains. My dad then decided that at least three hours a day had to be devoted to sightsee- ing. Philadelphia - June 23rd We left Baltimore at 7:47a.m. on train 172 to Philadelphia. We had originally planned to switch trains at Wilmington to take the R6 Norristown commuter train to Philadelphia, but because I wanted to see different lines and the connection time was only four minutes, we changed the schedule. When we arrived in Philadelphia we explored 30th Street Station and bought day passes. We went on to the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) platforms, which are above Amtrak’s, and waited for the Norristown train. We were sched- uled to take the 9:36a.m. train, but there was a train thirty minutes earlier, so we A SEPTA R1 Airport train arriving in 30th Page 2 Street Station Philadelphia. Trip to Philadelphia and New York June 25th – 28th, 2003 decided to take it.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 History of Circulation in Jersey City 2.2
    Jersey City Master Plan / Circulation Element 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS As part of the background work in developing this Circulation Element, a detailed assessment of the history of circulation in Jersey City and an inventory of the baseline conditions of the City’s transportation system were prepared. 2.1 History of Circulation in Jersey City Photo Source: Jersey City Division of City Planning Strategically located on the Hudson River and with easy access to Upper New York Bay, the City of Jersey City was an important center for shipping and maritime activity during the peak of the industrial revolution of the early nineteenth century. This status was reinforced when the Morris Canal was completed at Jersey City in 1836, giving the City shared direct linkage with the Delaware River at Phillipsburg and with important inland points, such as Newark and Paterson. Jersey City continued to serve as a transit point between Upper New York Bay and inland points to the west, but as the industrial revolution progressed, new technologies enabled the development of newer, more efficient forms of transport than canals. Consequently, railroads followed and terminals were constructed along the Hudson River waterfront and other points in the City. One example is the historic Central Railroad of New Jersey Terminal, which originally opened in 1864 and is located in what is now Liberty State Park. With terminals located on the Hudson River, it was not long before ideas about a rail linkage to New York City began to evolve. This led to the construction of what is now known as the Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) train, which commenced operations in 1907 after many arduous years of tunneling under the Hudson River.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2011 Bulletin.Pub
    TheNEW YORK DIVISION BULLETIN - FEBRUARY, 2011 Bulletin New York Division, Electric Railroaders’ Association Vol. 54, No. 2 February, 2011 The Bulletin LATE DECEMBER BLIZZARD PARALYZES Published by the New METROPOLITAN AREA York Division, Electric Railroaders’ Association, by Bernard Linder and Randy Glucksman Incorporated, PO Box 3001, New York, New On mid-Sunday morning, December 26, onk to Montauk remained suspended. The York 10008-3001. 2010, it began with light snow flurries, but by next morning Far Rockaway and West the time it ended the next afternoon, it was Hempstead got their service back. As For general inquiries, rated as the sixth worst storm to hit the met- Wednesday dawned, trains ran on all contact us at nydiv@ ropolitan area. This storm was certainly one branches, albeit with a few cancellations. Bus erausa.org or by phone at (212) 986-4482 (voice for the history books. The snowfall amounts service was provided east of Ronkonkoma mail available). The ranged from 12 to 32 inches (Rahway, New and Speonk. Rail service returned between Division’s website is Jersey), but with the high winds, the drifts Speonk and Montauk on Wednesday eve- www.erausa.org/ accumulated to several feet. As could be ex- ning, while the service from Ronkonkoma to nydiv.html. pected, the railroads were especially hard hit, Greenport had to wait until Friday morning. Editorial Staff: and below are summaries of each. It should Member Larry Kiss and his wife were aboard Editor-in-Chief: be noted that railroad crews worked around Train #203 (12:41 PM Greenport/ Bernard Linder the clock to restore service.
    [Show full text]