|
|
| Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion (1464991) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 7 of 9 |
||
|
| (1525344) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Sep 29 11:45:18 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Dyre Dan on Sun Sep 29 10:18:46 2019. AECOM is a big consulting company. |
|
|
| (1525345) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 11:52:26 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Sep 28 14:18:02 2019. Why does it have to a be be a subway ? There is such a thing as light rail, and the London Overground model of a hybrid commuter rail/rapid transit.There aren't going to be any more subways built in Queens. Lucky if there is ever an extension of the Nostrand subway or a Utica subway in Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1525346) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 11:53:29 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by sloth on Sat Sep 28 22:44:12 2019. I agree. Harder to make a case for Lower Montauk. Much easier for RBB. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1525347) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 11:56:49 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Sep 28 23:57:06 2019. It doesn't duplicate anything. We can put in stations wherever we want. It is a north south line that would take some people off Woodhaven Blvd Buses that feed into 3 subway lines, and permits easier intra-Queens trips. |
|
|
| (1525348) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Sep 29 11:58:53 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 11:52:26 2019. There aren't going to be any more subways built in Queens.Why not a Hillside Ave. or Archer Ave. extension? |
|
|
| (1525350) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 12:12:05 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by AlM on Sun Sep 29 11:58:53 2019. Nice idea, but it will never happen. |
|
|
| (1525357) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 13:32:54 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Sep 28 22:57:46 2019. Wow.Amazing how people pretty much put their own spin on what Couldn't be. In any case,My "Network" statement was based on the LRT,not heavy rail system. There's plenty of under used rail ROW. Even the MTA Twenty Year Needs accessment stated this fact. A new system, using Triboro RX,BQT,and this proposal can happen. But, then again, you understood exactly what I was referring to the in the first place. I despise nit pickers. |
|
|
| (1525361) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 13:59:10 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 11:56:49 2019. The light rail plan doesn't duplicate much of anything.Plus,the Triboro is a partial rehash of the 1968 Canarsie line relocation. Any of those new routes will bring people to the system, establish connectivity,and provide services where none currently exists. Apples and ORANGES. |
|
|
| (1525362) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 14:06:53 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Sep 28 23:57:06 2019. CONNECTIVITY is what it will accomplish.It will move riders from the Woodhaven bus routes to a functional Rail line, something the SBS can't duplicate no matter what you say. |
|
|
| (1525364) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 14:15:39 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by sloth on Sat Sep 28 22:44:12 2019. However,the End point is also the subject of crush loading, which I know you are well aware of.The Montauk travels through nabs Lacking tail through service. The M line touches ,but doesn't go deep. My "pie in the sky" notion? You better tell that to the MTA,since they were the people who came up with the whole LRT over Underused ROWs. Second, you sound like a NIMBY.. |
|
|
| (1525365) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 14:15:59 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by sloth on Sat Sep 28 22:44:12 2019. However,the End point is also the subject of crush loading, which I know you are well aware of.The Montauk travels through nabs Lacking tail through service. The M line touches ,but doesn't go deep. My "pie in the sky" notion? You better tell that to the MTA,since they were the people who came up with the whole LRT over Underused ROWs. Second, you sound like a NIMBY.. |
|
|
| (1525382) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Sep 29 17:39:40 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 12:12:05 2019. Like the M/V combo would never happen? |
|
|
| (1525383) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 18:06:00 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by randyo on Sun Sep 29 17:39:40 2019. You keep bringing up that invalid analogy. The M/V merger cost $0 capital and no construction. |
|
|
| (1525387) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Sep 29 18:11:17 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 18:06:00 2019. New signs needed to be installed. |
|
|
| (1525398) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Sep 29 19:46:19 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by sloth on Sat Sep 28 22:44:12 2019. The 88st crossing/Woodhaven blvd area is fairly populated.There were 2 issues with the Lower Montauk: 1 - The existing stations were in useless areas 2 - The train didn't go to Manhattan. With a little creativity they could: 1 - Build something (a tunnel?) to connect it to ESA (or at least NYP) 2 - Place new stations in better locations than the old Suddenly it's useful as commuter rail again. |
|
|
| (1525399) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Sep 29 19:47:31 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by sloth on Sat Sep 28 22:44:12 2019. The 88st crossing/Woodhaven blvd area is fairly populated.There were 2 issues with the Lower Montauk: 1 - The existing stations were in useless areas 2 - The train didn't go to Manhattan. With a little creativity they could: 1 - Build something (a tunnel?) to connect it to ESA (or at least NYP) 2 - Place new stations in better locations than the old Suddenly it's useful as commuter rail again. |
|
|
| (1525402) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 19:53:04 2019, 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 Sep 29 19:47:31 2019. LIC is becoming a destination itself. Transfer to Vernon-Jackson is do-able. |
|
|
| (1525419) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 21:42:27 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 19:53:04 2019. Yup.Plus,as a light rail line,if that is the case,then it could potentially join either BQT or Triboro,or both. Easy connections to Subway/bus and commuter rail will be available in Jamaica,Long island City Middle Village Richmond Hill and other locations within the new system. Connectivity is the true key here. One option,is routing through Jamaica. Should the LRT remain on the LIRR Row..or assume street running on Archer Avenue with turning south towards Springfield Gardens,or east towards the Queen's Nassau boarder? |
|
|
| (1525446) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 12:14:57 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 14:06:53 2019. CONNECTIVITY is what it will accomplish.What about first providing connectivity for those that lack any subway service. It will move riders from the Woodhaven bus routes to a functional Rail line, something the SBS can't duplicate no matter what you say. I'm not an SBS advocate nor was I supporter for the Q52/53 conversion. The Woodhaven Blv buses are subway feeders and should be operated that way. |
|
|
| (1525452) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 12:26:51 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 11:56:49 2019. It doesn't duplicate anything.As I've noted, the proposed stations lie close to existing subway stations. That's my definition of duplication. What's yours? We can put in stations wherever we want. The distance between stops on the RBL is approximately 1 mile. Given that it's contribution to increasing walking distance is 0.6%, it's unlikely any different station locations are likely to improve that figure. I'll be happy to run the numbers, if you can supply the locations for alternate station locations. It is a north south line that would take some people off Woodhaven Blvd Buses that feed into 3 subway lines, and permits easier intra-Queens trips. The demand for north-south intra-Queens trips is greatly exaggerated. Pathological examples are often cited. However, these examples are usually less than 1% of the trips to work, when census data is used to quantify their importance. |
|
|
| (1525454) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 12:34:24 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Sun Sep 29 11:52:26 2019. Why does it have to a be be a subway ? There is such a thing as light rail, and the London Overground model of a hybrid commuter rail/rapid transit.Any new lines should give priority to areas that are not currently served, be it subway, light rail or commuter rail, The Lower Montauk, Triboro RX and the BQT don't. They serve areas that already have subway access. |
|
|
| (1525457) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 13:10:13 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 12:26:51 2019. And where to do these subways go ? The Jamaica el is a schlep and goes only to lower Manhattan, then a transfer to the M train, weekdays only. The Fulton el is a another schlep via downtown Brooklyn. For anyone headed to the upper East Side or West Side, an R train on the RBB is superior.When you run 4 bus routes on Woodhaven Blvd, 2 local and 2 SBS, with a speed limit of 25 MPH, you won't get demand nor encourage travel patterns. The Q53 franchise was created as a replacement for the LIRR service and sped down the middle lanes of Woodhaven Blvd at 40MPH with few stops. That is no longer the case. Woodhaven at the Jamaica Ave and Atlantic Ave stops got screwed, especially after LIRR killed Woodhaven service in the mid-1970's. Parkside was served well by the LIRR stop at Metro Avenue. It is now 10 MPH bus that winds around all over creation to get to 71ST Avenue, a=often getting stuck on Austen Street gridlock to avoid private streets. When you run unmarketable buses, you won't see demand nor encourage use of transit. |
|
|
| (1525459) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 13:14:57 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 12:34:24 2019. They all have poor subway access. BQT service area is too far from the G train to have any economic impact, and has been there 80 years. Nobody cares what Middle School busing distances are. People will take Uber to the Gym to avoid a 15 minute walk. |
|
|
| (1525460) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Mon Sep 30 13:31:48 2019, 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 Sep 29 19:47:31 2019. uhhg, historically speaking, it did "go to manhattan"...if you go by the connectivity standards of a pre-tunnel or bridge nyc: it connected via ferry service,with the modern riverside development of the astoria/l.i.c./eastern district areas and with those areas becoming a "destination" again direct commuter service could be a valid consideration. |
|
|
| (1525461) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Sep 30 13:33:26 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 13:10:13 2019. Excellent post. |
|
|
| (1525465) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 14:47:57 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 13:14:57 2019. They all have poor subway access. BQT service area...Here's how the BQT provides access to those who lack it. In Brooklyn those within 1/2 mile of a subway station increase from 78.0% to 78.7%. Those within 3/4 mile of a subway station increase from 86.6% to 86.7%. No difference for those 1.0 and further from a subway station. In Queens those within 1/2 mile of a subway station increase from 47.3% to 48.0%. Those within 3/4 mile of a subway station increase from 60.2% to 60.4%. No difference for those 1.0 and further from a subway station. |
|
|
| (1525468) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Mon Sep 30 15:13:04 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 12:34:24 2019. The have subway access for those entering Manhattan. TriboroRX for one would provide missing interboro access. Most overseas subway systems have circle routes connections the spokes. Even Maryland is building a crosstown light rail connecting suburban areas and various DC Metro spokes. |
|
|
| (1525470) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 15:31:13 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 14:47:57 2019. You keep obsessing with distance to a subway station with no recognition of where those subway lines go nor recognize light rail as anything legitimate.If we can have none of that until we extend subway lines to Lake Success, Queens Village, or Rosedale, and when pigs fly, we will get nothing, and people will keep driving or keep riding slow buses with declining ridership. |
|
|
| (1525472) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 15:34:54 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by italianstallion on Mon Sep 30 15:13:04 2019. Governor Hogan, not a big mass transit advocate, killed a Baltimore subway extension, but saw the value of a LRT, circumferential LRT line.To take the WMATA Red Line between Silver Spring and Bethesda or a pokey J# bus is ridiculous. With growth of LIC and Jamaica business areas, we cannot keep on being Manhattan centric. |
|
|
| (1525474) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Sep 30 15:52:59 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Sep 30 12:14:57 2019. Connectivity is exactly what I am saying.People transfer from one mode of transport to another all the time.If Subways are Your preference,then Push for them.. fight! Stop playing Devil's advocate . Let's have a Northern Queens route. Let's have a Southern Queens route. Get the freakin LIRR to share it's ROW so hybrid railcars can operate seemlessly between it and the Subway system. We are taking Growth, rezoning, usage Connectivity etc.. not just Subways. Hell,I'll settle for a line that will basically shave time off Any trip I take so I don't have to drive! I love the LIRR Atlantic Branch because it does Exactly that for me... the cost is insane for my destination,but it's still cheaper than driving! |
|
|
| (1525492) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by sloth on Mon Sep 30 18:15:40 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 14:15:39 2019. I've operated on it. Lots of trees and disused industrial buildings. No people. Look, I can almost sort of see there's a demand for a Q54 replacement that doesn't get bogged down in apocalyptic traffic jams. But the fact is these neighborhoods developed around Metropolitan Ave, and not the Montauk. I'm all for more transit but you gotta look hard at stuff like this and ask if enough people will use it so that it actually eases traffic and overcrowded trains, or if it has any chance of earning back its costs. Many of these plans fall somewhere between probably not and NO WAY. And who will get to cover the shortfall? You and me, on our payroll taxes. Not a NIMBY, man, just a pessimist. Give us this day our congestion pricing. |
|
|
| (1525500) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 18:59:03 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by sloth on Mon Sep 30 18:15:40 2019. Transit causes population shifts. LIRR's 2 trains per day had no impact. When the Flushing line was being built, that area of Queens looked like present day North Dakota. |
|
|
| (1525503) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Sep 30 20:02:17 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Sep 28 14:18:02 2019. The percentage of Queens residents living within 1/2 mile of subway is increasing because of new construction of apartments in LIC, Elmhurst, and Rego.Lower Montauk goes through a park, industrial zone, and areas with lots of 1 family homes. But that would change if this project happens. Apartment buildings would pop up everywhere. |
|
|
| (1525513) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Brightonr68 on Mon Sep 30 23:01:56 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Edwards! on Sun Sep 29 21:42:27 2019. For the money in which is building his luxury jails , many of these projects could be built |
|
|
| (1525522) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Oct 1 06:40:23 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Sep 30 20:02:17 2019. I have seen plenty of places in Kew Gardens that were McMansions in the 1960's are now apartment buildings. |
|
|
| (1525527) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 1 09:39:42 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Sep 30 20:02:17 2019. The percentage of Queens residents living within 1/2 mile of subway is increasing because of new construction of apartments in LIC, Elmhurst, and Rego.That's an interesting hypothesis. The LEHD census data is available yearly. 2017 is the latest data. The 2010 census/2017 LEHD workers comparison is: 78.0%/80.2% for Bklyn; 77.0%/78.1% for the Bronx; 98.1%/98.5% for Manhattan; 47.3%/51.5% for Queens; 25.5%/25.1% for Staten Island. There are still a lot of Queens residents who do not live within 1/2 mile walking distance of a subway. Lower Montauk goes through a park, industrial zone, and areas with lots of 1 family homes. The lower Montauk would change the Queens count from 51.5% to 53.5%. But that would change if this project happens. Apartment buildings would pop up everywhere. There's the question of whether current residents or real estate speculators should benefit from public investment. |
|
|
| (1525528) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Oct 1 09:52:13 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 1 09:39:42 2019. walking distanceSTOP THAT!!! You are fully aware the distance is measured as the crow flies. In the rectangular world of NYC (even Queens), this can make a difference of a factor of up to square root of 2. |
|
|
| (1525532) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Brightonr68 on Tue Oct 1 11:08:52 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 1 09:39:42 2019. If there is a rail line that takes people where they need to development will happen |
|
|
| (1525534) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Oct 1 11:46:20 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Brightonr68 on Tue Oct 1 11:08:52 2019. Correct. To make the rail line happen, all you have to do is sell the idea to the NIMBYs of the nearby ROW housing developments, get by enviornmental impact studies and find the $$$ for construction & presto! You have a rail line.I'll sense that nobody is holding their breath on this. |
|
|
| (1525537) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Oct 1 12:33:59 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Brightonr68 on Mon Sep 30 23:01:56 2019. Exactly.Thinking out the box can do more than help. Innovation and investment. Build it, and most definitely the ridership will follow. |
|
|
| (1525539) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Oct 1 12:44:55 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by sloth on Mon Sep 30 18:15:40 2019. L😁L...!Brah..I hear you. But, that the ticket. Development into area like this will bring riders To and Through. If there's Transit worth having. Queens was once a wildernesses, until the elevated subway got there. Not only that, even Queens Blvd was spartian at best, until the 8th Ave subway. |
|
|
| (1525566) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Oct 1 18:05:52 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Mon Sep 30 18:59:03 2019. Close. Heres' the Flushing Line under construction sometime in the late nineteen-teens & somewhere between 82nd St & 90th St. Roosevelt Ave is still a dirt road! |
|
|
| (1525577) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Oct 1 19:48:33 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Joe V on Tue Oct 1 06:40:23 2019. that's why I said apartment buildings would pop up if Montauk line goes passenger. |
|
|
| (1525587) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Oct 1 22:22:19 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 1 09:39:42 2019. Of all the subway projects that have been discussed here, what would be a good new line or project that would significantly decrease the number of people who live more than 1/2 mile from a subway? |
|
|
| (1525589) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Oct 2 00:10:45 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Oct 1 22:22:19 2019. I assume extending the 7 line in Queens as that area has a lot of apartment buildings. |
|
|
| (1525601) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Oct 2 10:22:29 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Oct 1 22:22:19 2019. what would be a good new line or project that would significantly decrease the number of people who live more than 1/2 mile from a subway?One needs to provide subway access beyond the existing terminals, to significantly reduce the number of people living more than 1/2 mile from a subway. Let me suggest 2 projects that fulfill this and also can be implemented on the cheap. It involves re-purposing the LIRR but not in the way that has been suggested. I'd run LIRR shuttles at 5 minute headways between their outer reaches within Queens and the existing subway terminal. The fare would equal the subway with a free transfer between subway and LIRR at the terminals. Such service cannot interfere with the existing LIRR service. Thus the shuttle terminals would need their own turnaround tracks. I've made these suggestions several times over the years. The Bayside-Willets Pt shuttle would use the Port Washington Branch. There are turnaround facilities at Willets Pt and just east of Bayside. There's a convenient transfer at Willets Pt. The Jamaica trains would use the unused Richmond Hill station for turnarounds. One shuttle would run on the mainline between Richmond Hill and Belmont Park. The second would run between Richmond Hill and Rosedale on the Far Rockaway Branch. The third would run between Richmond Hill and St. Albans on the West Hempstead Branch. Additional turnaround facilities would be required for all 3 branches. This would increase the percentage of people living within 1/2 mile of a subway stop from 47.3% to 54.2%. However, the percentage of people living within 2 miles of a subway stop would increase from 83.6% to 98.2%. The second figure is in line with 99.5% and 98.9% figures for Brooklyn and the Bronx. The bus network would be modified to serve these new stations and not provide direct access to the existing Flushing and Jamaica terminals. This would result in a lot less need for buses and the bus network's inordinate deficit, compared to heavy rail operations. I've not calculated what the distance to subway would have been, had the IND Second System been built. It would be an interesting exercise. |
|
|
| (1525625) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Oct 2 14:59:56 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Oct 2 10:22:29 2019. Basically, what you've just stated was a proposal I said some time ago.However,I went further. Im looking at a hybrid system, using both LIRR and NYCT row , using the aforementioned routes,plus the Atlantic Branch, Montauk, Bay Ridge, and Rockaway. |
|
|
| (1525631) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Oct 2 16:30:10 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Oct 1 22:22:19 2019. Utica Av subway to Kings Plaza. |
|
|
| (1525637) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Oct 2 16:46:29 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 2 16:30:10 2019. Yup.Dust off those old plans. |
|
|
| (1525641) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Oct 2 16:53:13 2019, in response to Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Oct 2 10:22:29 2019. Also, repurposing the Port Washington branch to hybrid standards ,at least as far as Great Neck would put subway service with in the targeted area.The R44/46 cars were built with this purpose in mind,(Queens super express, south Jamaica,SAS in the Bronx, Northern Queens line. |
|
|
|
Page 7 of 9 |
||
