|Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line (1155038)|
|Home > SubChat|
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon May 7 06:05:06 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Andrew Saucci on Sun May 6 19:00:15 2012.As said in my other post, I don't see Aqueduct actually being replaced.
It may prove to be much cheaper if they do build a larger convention center on (mostly) the opposite side of the (A) tracks (with some of it built between the end of the clubhouse and mile chute at Aqueduct, using the existing parking lot there) since building it over Aqueduct means they also would have to do one of three things:
1. Winterize the massive grandstand of Belmont Park.
2. Build a new grandstand where the training track at Belmont is and set it up for winter racing.
3. Build an entirely new racetrack to replace Aqueduct.
That's why I like option 4, and that is build the convention center, but mostly use land on the other side of the tracks that is for the most part deserted and/or has a very limited number of the homes and connect it to both the subway stations and racetrack/casino. Even with having to relocate some people, it would not be too many and I suspect that would prove to be the least expensive option.
That also, BTW makes the 7 extension even more important because you likely would then see high rises built to replace the existing Javits Center.
(There are no responses to this message.)