|
|
| Re: 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 3 of 11 |
||
|
| (1154508) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:15:23 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by merrick1 on Thu May 3 19:00:53 2012. That's not your typical 2X4 purchase by a long shot. |
|
|
| (1154509) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:18:25 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by J trainloco on Thu May 3 15:21:42 2012. I agree up to the point that a crosstown line to connect to other routes also going to Manhattan would be useful....not as originally stated of someone traveling between "Riverdale and CoOp city".Sort of like the L is a crosstown line, and a crosstown 125th St line would also be of use....to connect all the main routes. |
|
|
| (1154510) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:19:31 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by 3-9 on Thu May 3 16:07:27 2012. The service would be mostly to provide service to that part of queens that doesn't have it right now in the middle, not necessarily to enhance "Rockaway" service. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1154511) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:23:56 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Thu May 3 15:44:57 2012. It was pretty clear that the 6th Ave subway was going to open, it was build while the 6th Ave el was still operating. I have seen photos of the construction there, one of the hardest lines to build, it had to support the el pillars, keep trolley service running, and go around the Hudson Tubes. Very expensive hard subway to build. |
|
|
| (1154512) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:25:09 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by MainR3664 on Thu May 3 18:24:47 2012. The line wouldn't add another route. Either the M or the R would be diverted from the Queens Blvd line to handle the route, probably the R if they wanted full length 10 car trains. |
|
|
| (1154516) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Koi-PublicTransitISMyLifeline on Thu May 3 20:27:06 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Mitch45 on Thu May 3 15:17:47 2012. The el east of Qns Blvd. to 168th St was closed in the mid 1970's and had been completely demolished by 1980 (with the actual structure ending at Sutphin Blvd.); the remaining portion from east of 121st St to Qns Blvd. was in use to and closed in April 1985, IIRC, to make way for the Archer Av. connection. Don't remember exactly when this part was demolished; I'm thinking the early 90's.Koi |
|
|
| (1154523) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Thu May 3 21:38:24 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. if it was then why was the line abandoned? Also your assumption about desires for the Outer Boroughs as usual is completely incorrect. The outer boroughs need a line, queens needs a line, but the abandoned rockaway line is NOT what should be done. There are many sections in Eastern Queens that need the service more. Also theres no where currently that the Rockaway line could go, GCT will be full, Penn is full, you'd need a new way into Manhattan and a terminus, which would make the cost extremely expensive. If you send the line to the LIC Terminal it would be a huge waste of cash.The Stops would be 101 Avenue Atlantic Avenue Jamaica Avenue Myrtle Avenue Union Turnpike Metropolitan Avenue Yellowstone Blvd But then where does the line go from there? Answer that for me and you'll have won the grand prize. |
|
|
| (1154534) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Thu May 3 23:30:39 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by andy on Thu May 3 11:24:52 2012. Or a fleet of R32 cars...
|
|
|
| (1154535) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu May 3 23:35:37 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:18:25 2012. Such a line would also have plenty of usefulness for trips within the borough. I agree that there are many more people headed to Manhattan than across the Bronx, but there's a whole market of people traveling within the borough as well. |
|
|
| (1154537) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Thu May 3 23:42:35 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu May 3 14:02:37 2012. It's especially bad during the summer. Beach traffic. |
|
|
| (1154539) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 23:53:13 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Edwards! on Thu May 3 16:55:38 2012. The transit line, that's the point. I am sure any lease the city made with the school bus company, or that apartment complex would include an escape clause if the line was to be used for transit. |
|
|
| (1154540) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 23:55:05 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Thu May 3 15:25:53 2012. It would be better if the third track went as a single track el over Jamaica Ave between Cypress Hills and Broadway Junction. |
|
|
| (1154542) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Fri May 4 00:50:51 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 12:11:46 2012. With gentrification expanding into Greenpoint, especially close to the East River, that may not be the case in a few years. Look at what happened to Bedford Ave, on the "L" line! |
|
|
| (1154544) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Fri May 4 00:59:43 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Elkeeper on Fri May 4 00:50:51 2012. Yes, I know the "L" line goes under 14th Street in Manhattan, but, if I owned waterfront property along in Greenpoint, I'd be sitting pretty! |
|
|
| (1154547) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Fri May 4 01:11:46 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Elkeeper on Fri May 4 00:59:43 2012. That's because of its proximity to manhattan |
|
|
| (1154556) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri May 4 01:39:26 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:19:31 2012. My questions are where would this line start and end? What train would run on it etc? |
|
|
| (1154559) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Fri May 4 02:25:55 2012, in response to 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. LMAO! Can you imagine preparing for a hurricane and carrying it all on the bus? |
|
|
| (1154561) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri May 4 04:10:47 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu May 3 11:18:25 2012. Because that's impossible. His drive was not to provide transportation, just like the goal of his parks was not to provide recreation facilities. Everything constructed by his authorities and the agencies he headed, at least after 1947, was ultimately about the greatest expenditure he could get from the government, regardless of the utility of the resultant infrastructure. He actually says as much in his fighting against the professional planners who pointed out the massive flaws in his Midtown Expressway proposal. The actual number of people carried by the highways he built were immaterial to his decision of what to build. The highways, the parks, and the dams were all merely an extremely expensive wrapping paper to keep the public and their elected representatives away the incredible amount of government money (be it toll revenue or tax disbursements) being expended by his authorities. And ultimately despite all the promises his highway system has proven about as useful as wadded up wrapping paper and ribbon when it comes to reducing congestion.To that end saying "we need a Robert Moses of mass transit" is to blithely wish for someone who will expend massive amounts of money without any hope of improving the commuting experience of the city's transit riders. You claim to be a planner, yet you invoke a man whose legacy as a profligate spender is all-too-often overshadowed by his staunchly anti-transit stance. His arbitrary micromanagement of some projects drove costs to unheard of levels while ensuring they would never be able to fully achieve their stated goals. Why would you want something like that handling the city's mass transit projects? Not only do we not need a 'mass transit Robert Moses', that is in fact the complete *opposite* of what we need. The last thing NYC needs is an arbitrary and capricious process by which the city would invest its scarce transportation funding on dubious projects. You can ignorantly gripe and groan about the cost of the process by which decisions make, but it's a hell of a lot cheaper than deciding to change things after the concrete has set. |
|
|
| (1154568) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by TERRapin station on Fri May 4 07:16:25 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 Fri May 4 01:39:26 2012. That's why there are transportation planners. They'll figure it out. If you just want some rough ideas then I'm sure a few people here could provide that. |
|
|
| (1154572) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 07:39:06 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:25:09 2012. That's interesting!!! Of course, if the M was the new route, that would be one weird route- as has been pointed out in previous discussions.If the junction with the mainline was in good shape, as others have said, rebuilding this line would deliver more punch for the money than another highway in Florida. Every time I go to visit Mom & Dad, I see another huge highway interterchange getting built. If Florida can snag the Federal $$ for that, the Rockaway Line- and the SIR North Shore Line should be easy. I know they are not- but they should be. |
|
|
| (1154573) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 07:43:05 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Elkeeper on Fri May 4 00:50:51 2012. But the L does go to Manhattan...The G provides some useful connections, and I love it no kess than the rest of the system. But I'm inclined to agree that Mahattan access is key... |
|
|
| (1154576) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri May 4 08:37:53 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 07:43:05 2012. Exactly, the key to the L line's resurgence is because it's a Manhattan route. The key to the neighborhood's that have gentrified along the L line are a direct result of BECAUSE of their proximity to MANHATTAN, and the L line's easy access to such. |
|
|
| (1154577) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri May 4 08:40:37 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by Elkeeper on Fri May 4 00:50:51 2012. What happened to "Bedford Ave" on the L Line, as well as the other stations along the L line, are BECAUSE it goes to Manhattan. The resurgence of Greenpoint, Williamsburg, and Bushwick along the L line is BECAUSE the L line goes to manhattan easliy, and then connects to every trunk line once in Manhattan. The resurgence is NOT because the L line goes to other parts of Brooklyn. The L line's recent success is BECAUSE of it's Manhattan access. |
|
|
| (1154578) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri May 4 08:44:14 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 Fri May 4 01:39:26 2012. The line would connect to the Local tracks at 63rd Drive. So that means that in all likeliness, it would be an extension of one of the Queens Blvd locals, the R or the M that would be diverted from going to Forest Hills, and instead would go down the Rockaway line. If they wanted full length trains, it would be the R, if they figured they coulkd get away with 8 car trains, it would be the M. It would probably either terminate at Howard Beach or somewhere else along the Rockaway line. |
|
|
| (1154580) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri May 4 08:46:01 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Thu May 3 21:38:24 2012. It would make no sense for the LIRR to take over the line again. For it to be successful, it would have to have subway headways, not LIRR headways. You are correct about the stations for the most part...but they would be subway stations, not LIRR stations. |
|
|
| (1154581) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 08:47:01 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. Disagree on your assessment, those buses aren't packed at all times of the day. and just because a bus is packed doesn't mean it demands a replacement by a 10 car subway line that has far less stops than the bus line. 18 buses is = to less than 2 full length subway trains. If 2 full length subway trains can handle the total PM rush, then the corridor doesn't warren the subway line.Further more, if they're going to Manhattan or even Jamaica like your surprise statement claims, then why go ALL THE WAY up to Queens Blvd to take the IND lines, when you got the A line, and even the Airtrain, or even buses to take you to the 2 and 5, and the LIRR. That simply doesn't make sense. Theres options to go to Manhattan or Jamaica far faster so I doubt the commuter is going to Manhattan or Jamaica. Most riders are coming from the businesses at Queens Center, and Woodside, and once again that doesn't the warrant the expense of building a subway line. |
|
|
| (1154582) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 08:55:08 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri May 4 08:46:01 2012. But it still comes back to that same question Chris which no one can provide an answer, where does the line go from there? Second Avenue Line, but it can't go on Queens Blvd so it needs a whole new route. Now if you want to make it a Cross Queens Line the answer is actually quite simple. You can have the route go underground at White Pot Junction underneath Junction Blvd and 94th Street then make stops at the following...Queens Blvd / 63rd Drive 57th Avenue Corona Avenue Roosevelt Avenue 34th Avenue / Northern Blvd Astoria Blvd 23rd Avenue LGA Central Terminal Terminal C Delta Terminal D So technically I think the best thing you could do with this line is make it a line to connect JFK to LGA with transfers to the 7, R, M, J, A along its route. Then this line might have some worth. |
|
|
| (1154583) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri May 4 09:15:42 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri May 4 08:44:14 2012. I would vote for the M, since the R is pretty long already. During hours when the M is a shuttle, extend the G train. As for the southern (northern?) terminus, I would make it Rockaway Park, since the next stop after Howard Beach is Broad Channel anyway, so that way you can eliminate the shuttle. |
|
|
| (1154585) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri May 4 09:49:46 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 08:55:08 2012. That would be great, if you can get the ROW north of Queens Blvd (highly unlikely). |
|
|
| (1154591) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 10:23:29 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by 3-9 on Fri May 4 09:49:46 2012. Thank you, I've studied city planning, and urban development, using demographic data and other tools when I was younger and I had a passion for building subway lines. You learn about connecting areas especially commercial sectors to outlying areas where theres potential for development even if it means sending a subway line to a place where there is nothing out there except the line because people will build there because it offers that quick ride. Or building in an area of high opposition because of the future benefits it will bring. |
|
|
| (1154627) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 13:58:24 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:15:23 2012. Well, it all depends on why one went to Lowe's or Home Depot (I prefer the latter). For heavy and/or large and/or clumsy stuff, you need a rubber-tired vehicle- either your own car or the truck they rent by the hour. For a small power tool, such as a drill or cordless screwdriver, or perhaps a lightbulb you can't buy in the drugstore,you have more options for travel. |
|
|
| (1154628) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 14:02:12 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 19:18:25 2012. I almost couldn't have said it better myself...with the caveat that Downtwon Brooklyn is busy enough that the old MJ train would be very useful if it had survived... |
|
|
| (1154629) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 14:05:12 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 11:48:54 2012. NOW we're talkin'!!! But, unfortunately, for the foreseeable future, alas, it is just that- talk. |
|
|
| (1154630) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 4 14:17:57 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 14:02:12 2012. I suspect that if the downtown Metrotech development had been well underway in 1969, Myrtle would not have come down but would have been upgraded and modernized to provide a better route from Ridgewood to downtown Bkln. |
|
|
| (1154634) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Fri May 4 14:21:53 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 23:55:05 2012. Looks nice on a map, but do you really think the residents of Highland Park area would allow it? Just run the express track up that never-finished ramp just west of Alabama Ave and over the local tracks and platforms, along Fulton Street, as originally planned! |
|
|
| (1154635) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 4 14:22:27 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu May 3 23:55:05 2012. More than likely, the cost difference between a single track structure and a full 3 track structure would be little enough that construction of such a 3 track structure between Bway Jct and Cypress Hills as a complete replacement for the Fulton St segment would be a more desirable option. |
|
|
| (1154637) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri May 4 14:30:36 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 13:58:24 2012. Yes, there are a lot of things one can buy at HD/Lowe's and carry on public transport. It's not all 2x4s and other large things. |
|
|
| (1154638) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 4 14:36:02 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 08:55:08 2012. As originally intended, a city operated Rockaway Line would have gone onto Qns Blvd so that would be the logical place for such a service to go. Diverting the M to the Rockaways at that point would only deprive 1 station of service, 67 Av and the R could certainly handle that since by that point, most of the local riders would have detrained. As for whether or not 8 car trains would be sufficient for Rockaway service, remember that when the C ran to Rock Pk it utilized 8 car trains so that wouldn't be a problem. The only problem I could see is that the M would have to become a 24/7 service to Rockaway and I don't think that a second full time 6 Av service could be justified when Bway passengers would not be getting the benefit of 24/7 R service. Although it would be a bit unwieldy, the only logical service to go to Rockaway would be the R so that when the M stops running, either the E or the F can take over the Qns Blvd Lcl service to serve 67 Av. |
|
|
| (1154640) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 4 14:42:24 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by WillD on Fri May 4 04:10:47 2012. I'm not saying that we need a transit czar who would spend money just for the sake of spending it, but what I was referring to is a person with the political clout to get things done that need to be done. Such examples would be the compete SAS, the Queens super express as originally planned, the extension of the IRT E/Pky line down Utica Av to Kings Plaza and the extension of the Nostrand Av Line to Sheepshead Bay, and a number of other projects too numerous to mention, that would provide rapid transit to areas of the outer boroughs that presently do not have it. |
|
|
| (1154644) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri May 4 14:49:25 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 08:55:08 2012. Why can't it go on Queens Blvd? A Rockaway-bound service can't go on the QB express tracks, but why can't the M or R be extended onto that r.o.w.? |
|
|
| (1154645) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri May 4 14:55:22 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Fri May 4 14:17:57 2012. That's a realistic scenario. But history worked out differently. In 1969, all people saw was decline. By the late '80s, the outlook was better, even if it took another 7-10 years to be realized.... |
|
|
| (1154646) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri May 4 15:21:00 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Fri May 4 14:36:02 2012. The only problem I could see is that the M would have to become a 24/7 service to RockawayWhy not extend the G during the M's off hours? G trains may be short, but it's not much worse than what's there now. (I'm also kind of assuming the full M will run during the day on weekends). Also, the M may be 8 cars, but it will be at least as frequent as what's there now. |
|
|
| (1154654) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 4 16:58:47 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by 3-9 on Fri May 4 15:21:00 2012. Even if the G were to be extended to Rockaway during off hours, one of the Qns Blvd exp services will still have to be routed to the lcl tk at least N/O Roosevelt to serve 67 Av. |
|
|
| (1154656) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri May 4 17:06:31 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by 3-9 on Fri May 4 09:15:42 2012. I think the M would be the better candidate for the Rockaway service if it ever happens. |
|
|
| (1154657) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 4 17:09:42 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 Fri May 4 17:06:31 2012. I don't disagree, but as I mentioned in another post, that would require it to become a 24/7 service and that might rankle a few feathers of Bway R line passengers who might not be able to see the logic behind having 2 24/7 6 Av Qns Blvd services and not a 24/7 Bway service. |
|
|
| (1154661) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 17:37:07 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Fri May 4 14:49:25 2012. Because of capacity issues, and extending the R would be a bad idea due to the ridicioulus length of the line already, extending the M and having it essentially spaghetti its way through Brooklyn, Queens and Manhattan is pointless, when riders who want Manhattan can take the A, the J or the R already, why take the scenic route when the direct route is better? |
|
|
| (1154662) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 17:41:00 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Fri May 4 14:36:02 2012. Sending the M would be pointless, it would be far more beneficial to have the line go to LGA and have the transfer there, at least then you'll be servicing and providing a true North South Link through queens connecting two major airports with multiple lines going towards Manhattan. Rather than extending the M and essentially forcing the line to run 24/7 when there is enough demand to run the line past midnight its full length. The Woodhaven Blvd ridership at night just doesn't justify that type of service. |
|
|
| (1154663) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri May 4 17:55:23 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 17:41:00 2012. However, since there is already a provision, possibly substantial, in place for a connection to QB, that will probably be what is done in the event the Rocky Line is revived. |
|
|
| (1154664) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Fri May 4 18:03:25 2012, in response to Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line, posted by randyo on Fri May 4 17:55:23 2012. You could theoretically revive the V line and have it run from the Rockaways through Queens Blvd to Church Avenue in Brooklyn. But to take a line like the M and have it spaghetti its way through the city seems absurd. |
|
|
| (1154665) | |
Re: Best Article I've Read on Reasons to Reactivate the Rockaway Beach Line |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Fri May 4 18:06:52 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. a 40 minute ride from south Queens to Manhattan is now twice that.I stopped reading right there. 65≠80. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 11 |
||
