|
|
| Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line (1154253) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 11 |
|
|
| (1154253) | |
Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012 Queens Courier |
|
|
| (1154255) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed May 2 15:42:00 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. Not that I wouldn't want to see the Rockaway Bch branch reactivated, but depending on where in manhattan a Rockaway bound passenger is boarding, the route through Fulton St in Bkln can actually be up to 20 min FASTER than one via Qns Blvd. |
|
|
| (1154257) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:53:13 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Wed May 2 15:42:00 2012. Yes, it is not meant to improve transportation to lower Manhattan. It is for Midtown as well as improving north/south intra borough transit in Queens, making trips possible without an indirect subway trip to Manhattan or very long bus trips currently involving three or four buses and several hours of time that no one would want to make.The potential to improve transit to multiple destinations in Queens at a reasonable cost because of the existing right of way are endless. It makes far more sense than the City's solution of Select Bus on Woodhaven Boulevard which would only save buses ten minutes or so and would take away a lane adding 20 minutes to trips by auto and diverting traffic from Woodhaven to the overcrowded Van Wyck as well as the BQE. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1154260) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed May 2 16:02:16 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. While I agree on the reasons and necessity for restoration of service along the Rockaway ROW, it's not quite a "shovel-ready job", as the author suggests. Given the glacial pace ofprojects like SAS, I don't hold out muchhope for seeing trains running along this route during my lifetime. Consider that volumes of bureaucratese would be generated by such a lroject before a single tree is felled, or a single nail struck. Reactivating the RROW is a long-overdue idea (Robert Moses notwithstanding, the original plan should havebeen followed the moment the PRR signed the papers), but one unlikely to progress past the talking stage.Incidentally, IINM, monies from the 1951 bond issue to do SAS ended up at least partially being used to do Rockaway subway service the "long way around". |
|
|
| (1154266) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 16:26:21 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. That is a well written article. It points out a problem that our subway system has in general: with the exception of the Crosstown (and maybe the connections at Broadway Junction) the system doesn't have provisions for travel not headed towards the CBD. That's a problem that needs far more than just the reactivation of the Rockaway ROW. |
|
|
| (1154271) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed May 2 16:49:48 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. I think the passenger transfer from the Jamaica el would be rather clumsy from the equivalent of 99th Street to a rebuilt 102nd Street mezzanine, as well as the unlikelihood that two stations would be placed a half mile apart, the other being Woodhaven Jct. |
|
|
| (1154272) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed May 2 16:59:50 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Wed May 2 15:42:00 2012. If you're headed to Lower Manhattan or Midtown below 34th St, then yes, Fulton Street subway service would be faster than a service via Queens Blvd. |
|
|
| (1154273) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Wed May 2 16:59:58 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. When did Robert Moses propose a Rockaway Beach Branch? |
|
|
| (1154275) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 17:09:22 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 16:26:21 2012. Agreed, but it's a start. That and the Triboro Rx Plan could make a real difference if other connections are made as suggested like creating a transit hub in Rego Park and better access to LaGuardia.If I might also add, affordable Park and Ride lots at key points on the Rockaway and Triboro Rx line could actually get people out of their cars and onto mass transit. |
|
|
| (1154277) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed May 2 17:15:19 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 16:26:21 2012. There's plenty of it, it just goes via the CBD. I can take a single train from Forest Hills to Bay Ridge, I just have to go through Manhattan. Since this is where the vast majority of riders want to get to/from, I'll just have to deal. |
|
|
| (1154279) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed May 2 17:22:58 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed May 2 16:02:16 2012. I wouldn't be too sure about that. The SAS was planned long before the Flushing Line extension to Javits was even though of and it looks like like the Flushing line extension will be actually operating before the rails are even laid in the SAS. The former LIRR ROW is completely above ground and needs no excavation work but mostly land clearance. Also, depending on the accuracy of available info, the tunnel connections from 63 Dr on the Qns Blvd line are reported to be almost completely intact form the subway infrastructure all the way to the LIRR ROW so construction in that area may well be minimal so it could be possible for upgrading of the Rocky Bch branch t keep pace with the construction of the SAS depending on which political forces have the most clout. |
|
|
| (1154298) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by andy on Wed May 2 18:31:06 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. This was a good article but also has some historical and geographic inaccuracies:(1) "White Pot Junction is actually the bastardized Dutch name for the area in Kew Gardens where the Rockaway line splits off the LIRR mainline to head south to the Rockaway Peninsula." INCORRECT. White Pot Junction was the name of the old LIRR interlocking just west of the current Forest Hills Station where the Rockaway Beach Branch splits from the LIRR Main Line. It is in Rego Park, not in Kew Gardens as the writer states. The name White Pot was given to the area by its original European settlers because according to legend they purchased the land from its original native American inhabitants for three white pots. (2) "When the old Board of Estimate approved Rockaway for the subway, at the last moment the route was changed from the Rockaway Beach Branch as proposed by Robert Moses to the much longer A train route through Brooklyn. The Board of Estimate made this decision in private. There is no record of what was said, and there has never been an explanation for the sudden change in route. Speculation abounds." INCORRECT. Robert Moses had nothing to do with the implementation of NYC's purchase of the old LIRR Rockaway Line. In the early 1940s he did play a key role in the elimination of grade crossings on Atlantic Avenue and on the Rockaway Peninsula. Under his leadership the LIRR tracks were tunneled under Atlantic Avenue from East New York to Jamaica, and placed on the still-used concrete el structure on the Rockaway Peninsula that the A train uses today. (3) "Originally, the NYC Board of Transportation planned to link the Rockaway Beach Branch to the subway under Queens Blvd. just east of the 63rd Drive Station. It was never built." TRUE. The IND subway tunnel was built with two turnouts, just east (operationally north)of the 63d Drive Station, to and from the LIRR Rockaway line. The idea was to allow subway trains to access Rockaway using this route, in lieu of the LIRR, in the 1930s as soon as the subway opened. This of course never happened. The reason for choosing the Fulton Street route in 1956 was because by then the Queens Blvd. IND was already overcrowded and could not absorb additional trains. Remember, this was long before the 63d Street Tunnel was built. The TA decided to keep Rockaway service along Fulton Street where a four track subway had the capacity. It was not a secret decision. |
|
|
| (1154299) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 18:40:00 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed May 2 17:15:19 2012. You used a pretty bad example. What if you want to go from Riverdale to Co-op city? How about from Bay Ridge to Flatbush? I understand that we can't have EVERY one of these non-CBD trips covered by a rail line, but far too many of them rely on bus trips, or even a bus to bus transfer. Not only are these trips slow, but many heavily used bus lines are patronized to the point that, from an operations standpoint, they've become inefficient compared to rail solutions. |
|
|
| (1154300) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 18:43:31 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 17:09:22 2012. Bronx needs a cross borough line as well.What are the statistics on current park and ride lots? I'm not sure that Park and Ride makes sense for Intra Borough trips. If i'm already in a car, why would I park it somewhere and board a train for a trip not entering the CBD? |
|
|
| (1154302) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Wed May 2 18:57:52 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. Im confused here, yes I read the article, However, is this a go for getting this line back in action? |
|
|
| (1154306) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 19:14:00 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 18:43:31 2012. If your destination is within an easy connection of the rail line, with the congested highways, the hassle of finding a parking place and paying through the nose for it, and the high cost of gas, you may be able to get to your destination in about the same time or quicker and not have to put up with driving there and could use the time productively. |
|
|
| (1154307) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by TERRapin station on Wed May 2 19:17:01 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Wed May 2 18:57:52 2012. LOL, no. |
|
|
| (1154308) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 19:17:40 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Wed May 2 18:57:52 2012. I think it makes a good case for this line as well as other abandoned and underused right of ways. Jobs are growing outside Manhattan and all the City is interested in is making transit better in Manhattan by now proposing extending the #7 to 23 Street. |
|
|
| (1154309) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed May 2 19:22:19 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed May 2 17:15:19 2012. Since this is where the vast majority of riders want to get to/from, I'll just have to deal.The flaw with using words like "majority" is that the minority who would like direct service connections that do not exist number greater than the ridership of some subway lines in "lesser" cities... I'm thinking things like the Bx12, Woodhaven Blvd Corridor, and the aggregate of Jamaica-Flushing buses. |
|
|
| (1154317) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 20:06:02 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 19:14:00 2012. However, generally, parking is not an issue for most trips outside the CBD, and traffic, while a hassle, is often not bad enough that the subway is faster. |
|
|
| (1154322) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Wed May 2 20:18:28 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 18:40:00 2012. What if you want to go from Riverdale to Co-op city?Bx7 or Bx20 to Bx12+; Bx10 to Bx26 or Bx30. How about from Bay Ridge to Flatbush? B8 I think I see your point. |
|
|
| (1154325) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Wed May 2 20:24:27 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. Lines need a place to go, a terminal, its cute they want to reactivate the line but theres no place to send all the trains. The ridership in the rockaways isn't high enough, and if the Q53 and the Q22 can handle the passengers, wheres the need for the subway line? I certainly don't see it. |
|
|
| (1154326) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 20:31:22 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Wed May 2 20:24:27 2012. It was high enough for decades when the line operated.Also it would spur development and make the area much more desirable. Apparently that is only a consideration for the far west side in Manhattan. We don't have to have the same thinking for the outer boroughs. Who cares if travel is inconvenient outside of Manhattan. They're the only ones who matter although the outer boroughs pay the same taxes. |
|
|
| (1154328) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by LA Scott on Wed May 2 20:33:59 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 20:31:22 2012. The people who live along the line would fight any additional development, especially the sort of upzoning that the West Side saw. |
|
|
| (1154329) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed May 2 20:36:56 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed May 2 16:59:50 2012. We are going to have to wait to see if the full casino gambling referendum is passed. Then, you will see real demand for rapid transit to connect north and south Queens. Right now, there just isn't enough interest- and no money! |
|
|
| (1154337) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Wed May 2 21:00:42 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:53:13 2012. The buses on Woodhaven Blvd can stop closer to destinations (like Home Depot) than a rail line that will make, what? 2 or 3 stops? And I've found those buses to be pretty quick. |
|
|
| (1154345) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed May 2 21:39:00 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by LA Scott on Wed May 2 20:33:59 2012. Maybe. However if the Aqueduct convention center becomes a reality, the NIMBYs will lose to the power of the state gov't if the state wants it. |
|
|
| (1154348) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed May 2 21:57:32 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by R36 #9346 on Wed May 2 20:18:28 2012. Another poor example..while the topic at hand IS PUBLIC transportation..the "main idea" we are hashing about is rail traffic,specifically subway transportation in Queens..not buses. |
|
|
| (1154350) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed May 2 22:02:09 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by LA Scott on Wed May 2 20:33:59 2012. Of course they would,especially those that have taken over part of the ROW for their own use... |
|
|
| (1154351) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed May 2 22:16:36 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 20:31:22 2012. TRUTH..which explains WHY there hasn't been any subway construction for "new lines" outside of Manhattan for years[not counting projects like Archer Avenue subway project,which was inconclusive].We NEED new routes...just as much as "the city" does..in dead zones in ALL the "outer boro's".. |
|
|
| (1154352) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed May 2 22:18:22 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Elkeeper on Wed May 2 20:36:56 2012. Agreed. |
|
|
| (1154354) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by John of the Bronx on Wed May 2 22:20:22 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by andy on Wed May 2 18:31:06 2012. Mr. Castellano's description of the origins of White Pot junction square with those put forth by the Kew Gardens Civic Association:http://www.oldkewgardens.com/ss-beginning-0020.html What source did you use? Your description of the 63rd St. Bellmouth tunnels is correct--they turn towards the LIRR on 66th Ave. But was this the planned route to Rockaway? I know that a station was built at Roosevelt Avenue above the current station for the Rockaway line which would have eventually used the Rockaway Beach line for access to the Rockaways. The Transit Museum offers tours of this station every now and then, I was fortunate enough to visit it with them. If you have any more information on the potential use of the 63rd Drive bellmouths, please let me know. As a historian, all of this is very interesting to me. |
|
|
| (1154355) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed May 2 22:25:08 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Wed May 2 20:24:27 2012. SHEESH..What happened to people with imagination?..in the "old days"..the created "terminals" in places where there was nothing was around it!Today..people whine and complain.."we dont need this..dont need that..this wont work.." meanwhile..there are other cities out there creating whole systems from nothing.. its a damn shame..with all of this unused TRACKAGE around..and lack of service around so many neighborhoods..we need someone with some damn backbone to get the job done..REAL CITY PLANNING..REAL RAIL BUILDING..and NONE OF THE DAMN WHINING ABOUT WHAT WE CANT DO...OR WHAT WONT WORK. THIS kind of attitude got us NOTHING for years..and THAT needs to change. |
|
|
| (1154357) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Wed May 2 22:35:49 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by andy on Wed May 2 18:31:06 2012. Also, (4) "The Rego Park Station is less than 10 minutes from Penn Station."Under what operating conditions? Woodside is about 10 to 11 minutes from NYP via the LIRR. A station along the LIRR main at 63rd Drive would be at least 13 minutes from Penn Station, and such trains would need to skip Woodside to obtain that minimum time. |
|
|
| (1154362) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by andy on Wed May 2 23:29:34 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by John of the Bronx on Wed May 2 22:20:22 2012. My source for the origins of the name White Pot come from the 1939 classic guide to NYC, The WPA Guide to New York City. On page 581 it is noted that the name White Pot came from the legend that Indians sold the property that became today's Forest Hills for three white pots. Whether or not that story is true, or the Kew Gardens Civic Association story is true, is irrelevant. The fact is that the site of the LIRR's old White Pot Junction is in Forest Hills or Rego Park, but not Kew Gardens.With regard to the unused bellmouth north of 63rd Drive Station, in December 1933 The New York Times reported that the LIRR and NYC Board of Transportation were close to an agreement under which the new IND subway would be connected to the LIRR Rockaway Line at that location, enabling the IND to take over the LIRR service to and from Rockaway. Problem was, the following month a new mayor (LaGuardia) came to power and his administration had higher priorities than extending the IND to Rockaway using the LIRR tracks. The bellmouths are still there today, of course. They connect to both local tracks only. So if the connection were built today some R or M trains that now end at 71/Continental Ave. could run all the way to Rockaway. Think about it - an R train from Bay Ridge to Far Rockaway, or an M train from Metropolitan Avenue to Rockaway Park. The M, if that routing ever came to be, would resemble a pretzel. |
|
|
| (1154364) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Wed May 2 23:34:47 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Wed May 2 20:24:27 2012. [If] the Q53 and the Q22 can handle the passengers, where's the need for the subway line? I certainly don't see it.Therein lies the problem. The Q53 and the Q22 can handle the passenger load only by stuffing the buses. Many times, the bus is jam packed before it leaves the Rockaways, leaving little room for those wanting the bus along Cross Bay and Woodhaven Boulevards. Demand there is high as well. Most of the crowd boarding south of Jamaica Avenue does not get off at next subway station up the line, but at Queens Center Mall, where you can transfer to – SURPRISE – the IND Queens Boulevard line. If ridership in the Rockaways isn't enough to support the new line, ridership along the Woodhaven/Cross Bay corridor should be more than enough. During the PM peak, frequency along the corridor is at 18.7 buses per hour, or on average, a bus every 3 minutes, 12.5 seconds, and that's just the combined Q11, Q21, and Q53 frequencies. Don't forget that the QM15, QM16, QM17, and BM5 also use the corridor. |
|
|
| (1154369) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Thu May 3 00:06:40 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by andy on Wed May 2 23:29:34 2012. The M, if that routing ever came to be, would resemble a pretzel.It would become the new 9 train, in that its route on the map would resemble the shape of the digit 9. |
|
|
| (1154371) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu May 3 00:31:45 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by R36 #9346 on Wed May 2 23:34:47 2012. I would say the only reason there isn't *more* demand is because the Q53/21/11 are jammed. How many people take less efficient routes involving the A, J, Q23, Q54, etc just to avoid the chaos? |
|
|
| (1154381) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Mr RT on Thu May 3 07:17:10 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. Mr. Castellano researched his article well before publishing it.However I'm not as pro activation of the line as he is. |
|
|
| (1154383) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Thu May 3 07:52:19 2012, in response to Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:00:34 2012. There's a million good reasons to reactivate the Rockaway line but unfortunately, it will never happen. There simply isn't enough political will to jump all of the hurdles that come with this project. It took 75 years to get a real start on the SAS and even so, we're not getting a full replacement for the 2nd Avenue El. And that was for a line that is clearly needed. |
|
|
| (1154388) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Thu May 3 08:19:32 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu May 3 00:31:45 2012. Can't really tell unless an origin/destination survey is performed.Those who start with the J train have it a bit easier though since they can simply transfer at Sutphin/Archer for the E train. Those who start with the A either have to grab the E in Manhattan or transfer to the J at Broadway Junction. |
|
|
| (1154407) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Thu May 3 10:33:25 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed May 2 17:15:19 2012. True. The best way to improve intra-borough transit is with improved bus services. For example there is still no bus service from the east shore of Staten Island (Hylan Corridor) to the College of SI campus or South Avenue office parks.In Brooklyn instead of spending Billion$ we don't have converting the Bay Ridge LIRR ROW into a subway line, beef up service on the B6 and B11. If you think Brooklyn College generates enough bus trips then create bus lines from Bay Ridge through Bensonhurst to the campus area. Such a line could include a section along 65 Street which has been proposed many times. Subway construction is extremely expensive and disruptive. |
|
|
| (1154408) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 10:44:30 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by 3-9 on Wed May 2 21:00:42 2012. Who the hell would be taking the subway to Home Depot? Aside from small purchases, who's going to drag home a 2X4 and most of the stuff Home Depot sells on a subway train?That said, the location of the old Parkside Station (Metropolitan Ave) would be a great location for a subway station....Residential homes, Trader Joes, Staples, Michaels, all sorts of stores....but I can't imagine Home Depot being a big draw for people taking the subway. |
|
|
| (1154409) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 10:45:42 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed May 2 16:59:50 2012. Yes. For Lower Manhattan, but not for Midtown.For example, the J train is quicker to Chambers St from Jamaica Center than the E is to Chambers St. |
|
|
| (1154410) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 10:49:41 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed May 2 16:02:16 2012. People think that all they have to do is cut down the trees and lay some new tracks, and the whole thing is done.While the ROW exists, it would be like completely rebuilding a line from scratch. All the roots of those trees have compromised the ROW, and have to be removed. The bridges all rebuilt. They were never designed to have roots in them from trees. Trees can rip apart the best of concrete, and all you need is one. And there are thousands. This is not to say it's prohibitive, just that it's much more involved than people realize. |
|
|
| (1154411) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 10:50:34 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Wed May 2 17:22:58 2012. The 7 extention was WAY less involved than building the SAS, so it's no surprise it's opening first. |
|
|
| (1154413) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 10:54:04 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 16:26:21 2012. The vast majority of riders are still headed for Manhattan. Reactivating the Rockaway line will have more to do with providing that mid section with subway service (to Manhattan) direct that they do not have right now, than providing Far Rockaway people with ride to Flushing.How many Rockaway people percentage wise would rather go to "Flushing" than to Manhattan? |
|
|
| (1154414) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Thu May 3 10:55:58 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 15:53:13 2012. It gave me an idea: a subway under Junction Boulevard, connecting the Rockaway line to LaGuardia Airport.Stops would be at 63rd Drive, 57th Avenue, Corona Avenue, Roosevelt Avenue, Northern Boulevard, Astoria Boulevard, 23rd Avenue, and LaGuardia Airport. Portions of the line would need to be dual level. While we're at it, might as well build a subway under the Long Island Expressway to Kissena Boulevard, but easily extendable all the way out to Little Neck Parkway. After Woodhaven/Junction, stops would be at 108th Street, College Point Boulevard, Main Street, Kissena Boulevard, 164th Street, Utopia Parkway, 188th Street, Francis Lewis Boulevard, Bell Boulevard, Springfield Boulevard, Douglaston Parkway, Marathon Parkway, Little Neck Parkway. |
|
|
| (1154415) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 10:56:56 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 19:14:00 2012. Parking is only a real serious issue in manhattan, and crossing over the river is part of the problem. If I am going to one part of Queens to another, car is still faster and easier than dealing with a train.I am walking distance to an LIRR station in Suffolk, yet if I am going to Queens I will almost always drive instead of dealing with the train. Even if I am going to Manhattan, I rather drive, park my car near some subway station in Queens or Brooklyn, and then take the subway into Manhattan rather than deal with the train. |
|
|
| (1154420) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 11:07:43 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by J trainloco on Wed May 2 18:40:00 2012. Percentage wise, how many people are traveling from "Riverside to Coop City", that a rail line would be needed to be spent on it? |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 11 |
|
