|
|
| Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion (1525601) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Oct 2 10:22:29 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Oct 1 22:22:19 2019. what would be a good new line or project that would significantly decrease the number of people who live more than 1/2 mile from a subway?One needs to provide subway access beyond the existing terminals, to significantly reduce the number of people living more than 1/2 mile from a subway. Let me suggest 2 projects that fulfill this and also can be implemented on the cheap. It involves re-purposing the LIRR but not in the way that has been suggested. I'd run LIRR shuttles at 5 minute headways between their outer reaches within Queens and the existing subway terminal. The fare would equal the subway with a free transfer between subway and LIRR at the terminals. Such service cannot interfere with the existing LIRR service. Thus the shuttle terminals would need their own turnaround tracks. I've made these suggestions several times over the years. The Bayside-Willets Pt shuttle would use the Port Washington Branch. There are turnaround facilities at Willets Pt and just east of Bayside. There's a convenient transfer at Willets Pt. The Jamaica trains would use the unused Richmond Hill station for turnarounds. One shuttle would run on the mainline between Richmond Hill and Belmont Park. The second would run between Richmond Hill and Rosedale on the Far Rockaway Branch. The third would run between Richmond Hill and St. Albans on the West Hempstead Branch. Additional turnaround facilities would be required for all 3 branches. This would increase the percentage of people living within 1/2 mile of a subway stop from 47.3% to 54.2%. However, the percentage of people living within 2 miles of a subway stop would increase from 83.6% to 98.2%. The second figure is in line with 99.5% and 98.9% figures for Brooklyn and the Bronx. The bus network would be modified to serve these new stations and not provide direct access to the existing Flushing and Jamaica terminals. This would result in a lot less need for buses and the bus network's inordinate deficit, compared to heavy rail operations. I've not calculated what the distance to subway would have been, had the IND Second System been built. It would be an interesting exercise. |
|
|
|