Home  Maps  About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3 4 5 6]

< Previous Page  

Page 4 of 6

Next Page >  

(1465431)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:37:22 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:17:53 2018.

You still have to go through a formal closure procedure with hearings. There are political risks, as they found the hard way with St Albans with its 1 train at the time, with a van size load of people headed to the VA Hospital.

So basically, let sleeping dogs lie when there is nothing to gain. They didn't give a shit if it would have saved Oyster Bay commuters 5 minutes.

Post a New Response

(1465432)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:38:51 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:37:22 2018.

Pure speculation on your part.

Post a New Response

(1465433)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:39:53 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:20:39 2018.

I understand that about the Queens stations. The Suffolk stations had something. It proves my point further that since there was no infrastructure, therefore no gain to getting rid of them

Post a New Response

(Sponsored)

iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It

(1465434)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:41:19 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:14:47 2018.

I am not defending them. I am telling you probably why they were allowed to stay until 1998.

Post a New Response

(1465435)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:45:01 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:38:51 2018.

That's right it is.
But you have no theories of your own, but to criticize other's for theirs.

Post a New Response

(1465437)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:45:31 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:39:53 2018.

No they didn't. Many were just gravel in Suffolk. Blue point was nothing. Many of the other Suffolk nothing either.

Post a New Response

(1465438)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:45:53 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:41:19 2018.

Still makes no sense
At all.

Post a New Response

(1465439)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:48:21 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:45:31 2018.

Jamesport, Cutchogue , Center Moriches, Mill Neck, and Southampton College all had a shelter or an awning and a few lights polls.

Post a New Response

(1465440)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 20:01:49 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:48:21 2018.

No to James port and cutchogue (closed in early 80s), but yes to sothhampton LIU, center moriches and Mill neck did, but closed in 1998 so irrelevant to this. I purposely didn't use any of the 1998 closings.

Post a New Response

(1465441)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 20:01:50 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:48:21 2018.

No to James port and cutchogue (closed in early 80s), but yes to sothhampton LIU, center moriches and Mill neck did, but closed in 1998 so irrelevant to this. I purposely didn't use any of the 1998 closings.

Post a New Response

(1465442)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 20:01:50 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:48:21 2018.

No to James port and cutchogue (closed in early 80s), but yes to sothhampton LIU, center moriches and Mill neck did, but closed in 1998 so irrelevant to this. I purposely didn't use any of the 1998 closings.

Post a New Response

(1465443)

view threaded

Re: Queens-Brooklyn Light Rail (Was: Lower Montauk Branch Report)

Posted by ClearAspect on Mon Feb 12 20:02:22 2018, in response to Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gold_12th on Fri Feb 9 12:11:41 2018.

Ive been geeking out over such an idea for a very long time. Ive designed a light rail system for Queens and parts of Brooklyn that would take over various functions.

The first line would take over the LIRR Atlantic Avenue Branch
It would have stops at Atlantic Avenue Terminal
Nostrand Ave
Utica Ave
East New York
Woodhaven Blvd
Lefferts Blvd
Queens Blvd
Jamaica Station

The montauk branch would have the same stops as the proposed project

The airtrain from Jamaica would be coverted to light rail and stops would be made at
Jamaica Station
109 Avenue
Linden Blvd
Foch / Rockaway Blvds
Then lines would enter JFK terminal and loop 1 thru 8 or vice versa

A North-South Branch would extend the Howard Beach portion of the airtrain and then follow the A line and the old LIRR line with stations at
Casino
101 Avenue
Atlantic Avenue
Jamaica Avenue
(A connection would be built to the lower montauk branch)
Union Turnpike / Woodhaven Blvd
Metropolitan avenue
Yellowstone Blvd
Rego Park - Whitepot Junction

After Jamaica a branch would head out east on a new structure above the LIRR main line stopping at
York College - Guy R Brewer Blvd
177 st - Liberty Ave
Farmers Blvd - Hollis Ave
Francis Lewis Blvd
Queens Village
Hempstead Ave - Belmont Racetrack

Of course theres more but for now thats where Im at

Post a New Response

(1465444)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 20:08:15 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 20:01:50 2018.

All of the 1998 closings were normal stations with infastructure, with the exception of the lower Montauk locals

Post a New Response

(1465448)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 20:28:58 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:18:31 2018.

Well, when you pass onto the next life in the spirit world, you can ask these LIRR people to solve this mystery for you as to how these so-called stations survived to 1998. I don't have any official answers

Post a New Response

(1465450)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by sloth on Mon Feb 12 20:59:47 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:28:38 2018.

Richmond Hill had some strategic importance in case of a prolonged service disruption on the J.
As for the others, here's a cynical yet plausible theory. The LIRR operated their own freight until 5-1997. A freight crew picking up equipment elsewhere and laying it up in Fresh Pond, or one of the smaller yards, would be paid back on paper to their original terminal. Joe Public is better off not knowing how railroaders make their money, so let's just say there are a few different ways of calculating that deadhead, and there are definitely times when the presence of a train station at Fresh Pond, and occasionally Haberman, would have saved the LIRR some penalty payments. NYAR takes over, and the stations close soon afterwards.
But the "out of sight, out of mind" explanation also makes sense. If the eastbound Oyster Bays show up at Jamaica when they're supposed to, who cares where they stop? It's not like the stations were costing much in maintainance money either.


Post a New Response

(1465455)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 21:53:18 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:50:34 2018.

Why close any of them? It cost nothing to stop at Penny Bridge and Glendale as long as they made the other stops.

Post a New Response

(1465457)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 22:04:44 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:37:22 2018.

But those hearings would also have been required for those other stations that Chris mentioned like Cutchogue and Bayport.

Post a New Response

(1465460)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 22:17:21 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 21:53:18 2018.

How much did it cost to stop at Blue Point? They weren't maintaining anything there either. It wasn't even a paved parking lilot there. Nothing in the last decades there.

Post a New Response

(1465464)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by ntrainride on Mon Feb 12 22:19:11 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by italianstallion on Mon Feb 12 16:26:44 2018.

damn. volume one in its entirety. seyfried rules.

Post a New Response

(1465465)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 22:19:36 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 22:17:21 2018.

If they ever did a systemwide review, they probably would have closed all of them as they did in 1998. But they didn't. Those stations just got ignored.

Post a New Response

(1465468)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 12 22:33:03 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Andrew Saucci on Sat Feb 10 23:00:56 2018.

I think it would have had some stops.

Or at some point would have had them added.

Thinks about it. Had the "Super Express" gone in service circa 1988, residents and politicians along the line would have demanded stops in their neighborhood.



Post a New Response

(1465472)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Feb 12 23:10:06 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:50:34 2018.

A rush hr crowd awaits Jamaica bound train at Penny Bridge in the late 1970s

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Post a New Response

(1465475)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 23:39:45 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Feb 12 23:10:06 2018.

By the early 90s...my photos

http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=781426



Post a New Response

(1465476)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 23:46:43 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Feb 12 23:10:06 2018.

Did the shed last until 1998? Is it still there?

Of course, the bridge isn't there anymore!

Post a New Response

(1465477)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 23:47:47 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 23:46:43 2018.

No shed by late 80s.

Post a New Response

(1465478)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 23:49:45 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 23:39:45 2018.

All the stations were still in use yet at the time of my photos linked above

Post a New Response

(1465479)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 23:50:16 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 23:39:45 2018.

I guess that answers my question.

Post a New Response

(1465485)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by ntrainride on Tue Feb 13 01:02:41 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Feb 12 10:01:58 2018.

i was skylarking. although I'd love to visit a parallel universe where brooklyn never banned steam engines...

Post a New Response

(1465489)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Feb 13 06:04:14 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Feb 12 23:10:06 2018.

love that photo.

It's funny that there were guys in suits waiting there. I guess supervisors working in Maspeth and commuting to LI.



Post a New Response

(1465504)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Avid Reader on Tue Feb 13 10:40:17 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 23:47:47 2018.

I guess we should shed a tear.

Post a New Response

(1465506)

view threaded

Re: Queens-Brooklyn Light Rail (Was: Lower Montauk Branch Report)

Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 13 11:14:51 2018, in response to Re: Queens-Brooklyn Light Rail (Was: Lower Montauk Branch Report), posted by ClearAspect on Mon Feb 12 20:02:22 2018.

You cannot altar the Air-Train, it CANNOT be used for local service. That is the way the funding mechanism was set up. It is funded by a tax on AIRLINE tickets and as such can ONLY serve the airport and the transit hubs.

ROAR

Post a New Response

(1465514)

view threaded

Re: Queens-Brooklyn Light Rail (Was: Lower Montauk Branch Report)

Posted by AlM on Tue Feb 13 11:43:00 2018, in response to Re: Queens-Brooklyn Light Rail (Was: Lower Montauk Branch Report), posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 13 11:14:51 2018.

You cannot altar the Air-Train

With enough prayer, you could.

Or with a revision of the funding mechanism (I realize this might require airline approval).


Post a New Response

(1465516)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Feb 13 12:09:14 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Feb 12 10:33:54 2018.

Not even using the Montauk Cutoff?

Post a New Response

(1465517)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Feb 13 12:09:58 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Feb 11 22:13:47 2018.

I'm betting LIRR will find they will be unable to even use all their NYP slots and will be thankful to MNRR subletting them for the New Haven line

Sucker bet.

Post a New Response

(1465528)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Feb 13 15:07:51 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 18:59:31 2018.

Simply put, the LIRR is in exanstance primarily for the passengers of Nassau & Suffolk Counties. Attitude being Queens & Bklyn has its subways & busses. The Whitestone branch was eliminated primarily due to its many grade crossings. The rationale for closing Elmhurst was the nearby IND Subway. The Rockaway Beach branch was abandoned a/c the Green Bus running up & down Woodhaven Blvd and Atlantic Ave.
IIRC with the last Subway strike, LIRR trains highballed all Queens Stations for fear of dangerous overcrowding & causing serious delays. Delays & inconvienence to its bread & butter, Nassau & Suffolk riders...and votors

Post a New Response

(1465545)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by sloth on Tue Feb 13 16:28:06 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 22:17:21 2018.

Chris-- I found some stuff on the 1980 closings. It would seem that Setauket became something of a local political football, and one can infer that Blue Point and Bayport were closed in similar circumstances.

From Derek Stadler's website, regarding Setauket station:

"In early April-1980, Suffolk County cut off the $5,677 a year it paid for operation and maintenance. Another legislator, John Rosso made the station a campaign issue in 1979 calling the expenditure on the a slab of concrete since the early 1970s ridiculous.[103]

On the other hand, MTA spokesman David Plavin said the State Legislature put a cap on the amount the MTA charged for maintenance so the real costs exceeded what Suffolk paid. Under state law, Suffolk paid $5,140,000 for operation and $2,736,984 for maintenance, and was billed for service county-wide even though the law required a station-by-station breakdown."

After 1980, all station closings in diesel territory were done to avoid conversion to high platforms for lightly used stations. The continued existence of the local stops all the way to 1998 does not make much sense, but I don't know if a satisfactory answer can or will be found.

Perhaps there was some agreement between the MTA and the city that was mutually agreeable. The station at Fresh Pond may have had some use as an employee stop. Or maybe as others have suggested the stations were forgotten about-- the station closing policies seem to have been reactive, only done to avoid future expenditures or too much political egg on the railroad's face.

Post a New Response

(1465546)

view threaded

Re: Queens-Brooklyn Light Rail (Was: Lower Montauk Branch Report)

Posted by ClearAspect on Tue Feb 13 16:32:33 2018, in response to Re: Queens-Brooklyn Light Rail (Was: Lower Montauk Branch Report), posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 13 11:14:51 2018.

Taking it over from PA and removing the tax is not difficult

Post a New Response

(1465548)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by sloth on Tue Feb 13 16:44:25 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by sloth on Tue Feb 13 16:28:06 2018.

I forgot the main line east of KO... easy enough to do... as per Stadler's website again, Calverton was closed in response to the 1980 station maintainance lawsuit from Suffolk Co. Jamesport and Cutchogue hung on until 1985, not sure why they got a brief reprieve... Southold was on the block too, and was retained instead of Cutchogue.

Post a New Response

(1465551)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by AlM on Tue Feb 13 17:28:19 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Feb 13 15:07:51 2018.

Simply put, the LIRR is in exanstance primarily for the passengers of Nassau & Suffolk Counties. Attitude being Queens & Bklyn has its subways & busses.

OK, that's a good reason to get rid of Elmhurst, or minimize service to Forest Hills. But eastern Queens doesn't have subways.

Bayside gets superb LIRR service. Why don't St. Albans and Rosedale get similar service? (There may be a reason, but I don't know it.)







Post a New Response

(1465553)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 17:39:37 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 22:04:44 2018.

Queens started getting testy about closures in the 1970's and progressed more into the 1980's. Suffolk was sound asleep. There was Laura Blackburn on the MTA Board. When they shuttered Elmhurst, it really got nasty.

Post a New Response

(1465555)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 17:41:59 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Feb 13 15:07:51 2018.

Actually, the Triboro Q53 franchise arose from the ashes of the RBB.
They hitched up the Rocakway Peninsula with the Fulton St subway because that is what Robert Moses said to do.

Post a New Response

(1465556)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 17:45:47 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by sloth on Tue Feb 13 16:28:06 2018.

Lost in the shuffle was Mill Neck. In the 1980's I heard some sort of school for the deaf needed the service. There is no local bus service.

LIRR tried very hard to get rid of Inwood in the 1950's and 1960's given the relocated Far Rockaway station closer to Lawrence. Only alternate Far Rockaway trains stopped there.

Post a New Response

(1465557)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 17:47:13 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by sloth on Tue Feb 13 16:44:25 2018.

Southold is a Town seat.
Cutchogue is not near the village, but was out in a potato field.

Post a New Response

(1465562)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 18:56:20 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 22:17:21 2018.

You assume railroads always act in an objective and consistent matter throughout their system. They don't. They go on a crutch, focus like a laser on it, and ignore other situations.

Post a New Response

(1465563)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 18:58:47 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by sloth on Tue Feb 13 16:28:06 2018.

Maybe they were picking up / dropping off freight crews at Fresh Pond, either LIRR or Penn Central / Conrail. LIRR would never admit to that.

Post a New Response

(1465564)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 19:02:00 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 17:45:47 2018.

There was also South Farmingdale and Landia around 1971. Pre-MTA: Aquebogue, Laurel, and Peconic in the 1960's; Flowerfield, East Moriches, and Eastport in the late 1950's.

Post a New Response

(1465565)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by Joe V on Tue Feb 13 19:02:45 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Feb 12 22:33:03 2018.

Geraldine Ferraro was on a NIMBY crusade.

Post a New Response

(1465569)

view threaded

Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018)

Posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Feb 13 19:19:01 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Mon Feb 12 23:10:06 2018.

Must have been a big day with so many people there.

Post a New Response

(1465584)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by italianstallion on Tue Feb 13 20:58:48 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by AlM on Tue Feb 13 17:28:19 2018.

Demographics.

Post a New Response

(1465586)

view threaded

Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion

Posted by boliqua2 on Tue Feb 13 21:13:00 2018, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by italianstallion on Tue Feb 13 20:58:48 2018.

St. Albins in recent years has more regular service mainly by Babylon local trains

Post a New Response

[1 2 3 4 5 6]

< Previous Page  

Page 4 of 6

Next Page >  


[ Return to the Message Index ]