|
|
| Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) (1464991) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 9 |
||
|
| (1465376) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Mon Feb 12 17:04:58 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:03:54 2018. Correct. It certainly does not exist separately today. |
|
|
| (1465377) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:06:11 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by italianstallion on Mon Feb 12 17:01:07 2018. Exactly. The more plausible explanation is that they needed these trains to run from Oyster Bay or wherever they ran from to LIC and it cost little to continue to stopping at the intermediate stops even if the benefit was minuscule.In 1998 they had no choice but to either abandon the intermediate stops or spend money to install high platforms. |
|
|
| (1465378) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:06:49 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 16:52:18 2018. .... that's just it, there's no explanation for the quirky odd silly service, except requirements. They abandoned much more used service, and with way better infastructure at stations, but kept this til 1998? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1465380) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Feb 12 17:10:47 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:06:11 2018. That sounds like a winner.- Diesel trains going to Jamaica - Didn't want to crowd the main line with them - Didn't want to terminate them at Jamaica for some congestion-related reason - LIC was a fine place to terminate them |
|
|
| (1465381) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:11:23 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:06:11 2018. There's no explanation for the local stations though. Fresh Pond was down right dangerous. Meaning the "platform" was a rubble strewn weed infested disaster.For the record, the morning local was from Patchogue, the other 3 to/from oyster Bay. |
|
|
| (1465382) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:15:14 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by AlM on Mon Feb 12 17:10:47 2018. And the local "stations"? |
|
|
| (1465383) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:16:00 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:03:54 2018. But restrictions on it would carry over |
|
|
| (1465384) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:17:07 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 17:06:49 2018. 1998, meaning local service. The express continued till 2010 or 2012.(forgot when) |
|
|
| (1465385) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Feb 12 17:17:16 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 17:15:14 2018. As Spider-Pig said, why not, if the train is running past them? |
|
|
| (1465386) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:18:16 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 17:06:49 2018. Inertia is the explanation.What did they abandon? The Whitestone Branch? The Whitestone Branch did not have any through service. |
|
|
| (1465387) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:19:27 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 17:11:23 2018. No one ever sued them for any injury there and there were no crimes reported so no one cared that it was a disaster. |
|
|
| (1465388) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:23:15 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 17:16:00 2018. As can be seen from the copy of the 1980 charter posted by italianstallion, the charter can be amended in its entirety and any provisions eliminated. Any such provisions would have been eliminated no later than 1980.Of course, you are almost certainly thinking of something besides a corporate charter. But even if it were a property restriction/covenant, its recent elimination would have been documented. |
|
|
| (1465389) | |
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, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by AlM on Mon Feb 12 17:17:16 2018. Don't buy it. Many real stations we're abandoned over the years they "just went by", yet they would stop at a grade crossing to a cemetery and sparse 1 family homes at Glendale? |
|
|
| (1465390) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:29:27 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:23:15 2018. Which they obviously did by 1998. |
|
|
| (1465391) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:30:39 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:18:16 2018. Central branch, Rockaway, stations all along active lines, and so forth. Yet they stopped in the weeds at Glendale. |
|
|
| (1465392) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:32:25 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:19:27 2018. Please. Yet they abandon "Springfield Gardens" or add a name |
|
|
| (1465395) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:51:40 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 17:30:39 2018. Bad examples. Rockaway wasn't abandoned, it was converted to subway operation. As for the remnant to Ozone Park. Without the longer connection to Rockaway, it became superfluous and was closed. Unlike Montauk, there was no need for through service anymore and there were no freight customers. Stations on through lines (like Hillside, Bellaire, Union Hall) were likely abandoned to speed up service, a consideration that was probably ignored in the case of the Montauk line.I think Occam's Razor applies here. |
|
|
| (1465396) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:54:02 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:51:40 2018. Then explain, Bayport, and countless others all over the LIRR, yet stopped at Glendale and Penny Bridge? |
|
|
| (1465397) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:54:57 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 17:54:02 2018. I agree with you on union hall and mainline however |
|
|
| (1465398) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 17:55:20 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 17:54:02 2018. I agree with you on union hall and mainline stations however |
|
|
| (1465399) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 17:56:48 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 11:59:50 2018. It doesn't matter if there was a "charter" in effect or not; LIRR passenger service vanished 20 years ago without a whimper. |
|
|
| (1465400) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:57:07 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 17:54:02 2018. If you're so convinced of this covenant, explain why it was not more common? Why aren't there railroad lines all over the country that run pathetic passenger services to avoid the tracks reverting to outside ownership? |
|
|
| (1465401) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:00:39 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 17:56:48 2018. No kidding Einstein....the question is why the odd quirky service lasted as long as it did. It should have been abandoned in the 50s already. They abandoned much busier stations with more ridership all over the railroad. |
|
|
| (1465402) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:01:43 2018, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 17:57:07 2018. Every situation is different. There is no explanation for Glendale and Penny Bridge. |
|
|
| (1465405) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 18:42:00 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 18:00:39 2018. Because these were at the time the 2 busiest Oyster Bay trains (though in later years, one was a Patchoge train), they had to give them some sort of connection to the #7 given lack of slots on the Main Line to Hunterspoint, and their equipment was assigned to LIC, not Richmond Hill for light maintenance. |
|
|
| (1465406) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 18:44:15 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 18:00:39 2018. Also, before they installed high level platforms at LIC, your walk to and from the subway was shorter. You climbed on the train from the ballast at the east end of the yard at the 2 closest tracks. |
|
|
| (1465407) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:45:29 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 18:42:00 2018. Yes. But that does NOT address the ridiculousness of Glendale and Penny Bridge.why not SINCE the 40s just LIC? Your arguement is fine for express shipping to LIC. Does nothing for absurdity of Glendale. |
|
|
| (1465408) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Feb 12 18:45:43 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 17:56:48 2018. IT *HAD to be abandoned with the advent of the C3s. No equipment on the LIRR can platform where there are no platforms!Why the last non-stop trains to LIC did not use that route was probably due to track and speed restrictions. The could move all of the equipment they needed to on the mane lion. ROAR |
|
|
| (1465409) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:46:03 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 18:45:29 2018. Express service, not shipping obviously |
|
|
| (1465410) | |
Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 18:46:18 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 18:01:43 2018. Sure there is. Inertia, as italianstallion posted. Just because inertia didn't save other stations like Bayport doesn't mean that it didn't work here. It certainly is a more plausible explanation than some weird covenant/fee simple conditional that you have no proof for. |
|
|
| (1465411) | |
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, in response to Re: LIRR CHARTER: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018), posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Feb 12 18:46:18 2018. Penny Bridge? Glendale? I can see fresh pond remotely, and Richmond Hill, but there's nothing for Penny Bridge or Glendale |
|
|
| (1465412) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 18:51:15 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 18:45:29 2018. I think there were some factory workers at Penny Bridge thru the 1980's. Glendale and Fresh Pond "station" facility amounted to nothing, so no maintenance costs, so not worth the bother of trying to abandon like Elmhurst, Springfield Gardens, Union Hall St, Bellaire, and Woodhaven most of which had crumbling concrete platforms and lighting that needed rebuilding.. |
|
|
| (1465413) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 18:52:12 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 18:45:43 2018. They could have stopped at Richmond Hill, but it had no patronage. |
|
|
| (1465414) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:55:39 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 18:51:15 2018. Bayport, Blue point, Manorville, calverton,and many others were nothing more than gravel platforms and nothing more either at their ends. |
|
|
| (1465415) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 18:56:05 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 15:59:59 2018. It was a 7 car train (with a Club car) and a 5 car train. All the other Oyster Bay trains were 4 or 5 cars at the time. The heavy hitters got the LIC service. They were interested in getting OB Branch people to the #7, not to give Queens any useable service. |
|
|
| (1465416) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:56:16 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 18:52:12 2018. No patronage with one train in each direction. |
|
|
| (1465417) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 18:57:27 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 18:56:05 2018. And? How does that explain the local stations. No one is arguing LIC |
|
|
| (1465418) | |
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, 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 16:16:36 2018. They had already attacked Queens service with the northern section of the RBB, and then Woodhaven in the mid-1970's. Kew Gardens and Forest Hills until the early 1980's only got off-peak service every 2 hours. They are also abandoning numerous other stations in Queens in the 19860's and 1970's. It was not worth the political capital to abandon passenger service on this line when they had bigger fish to fry. |
|
|
| (1465419) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:02:29 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 18:55:39 2018. They had tin sheds and lights. They also wanted to reduce running times as track deteriorated on the East End in the 1960's and 1970's. There was no motivation to do anything with the LIC local stops.The LIRR people who made these choices are dead. We can only speculate. |
|
|
| (1465420) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:04:48 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 18:56:16 2018. St Albans was down 1 train in the 1970's. Yet it managed to survive with the VA Hosp[ital, who later also pressured them to put service back fearing abandonment as with Springfield Gardens in 1979 |
|
|
| (1465421) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:05:51 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 18:57:27 2018. I already told you. (not worth the effort), |
|
|
| (1465422) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:12:28 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. Who would have complained? Even in the 80s, fresh pond, the "busiest" station only had less than 5 regular passengers. |
|
|
| (1465423) | |
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, 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 19:04:48 2018. The "stations" you are defending, didn't even have that, the "VA hospital"!! There would be minor (very minor) cause for fresh pond. There is none for Glendale or Penny Bridge. |
|
|
| (1465424) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Feb 12 19:15:15 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 19:12:28 2018. It would be political. |
|
|
| (1465425) | |
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, 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 19:05:51 2018. What effort? There was no infastructure, and literally no passengers. I used the line often enough (almost as novelty), no one ever got on or off Penny Bridge. A few times I saw one or two at Haberman. Occasionally 1 or two at fresh pond. Never saw anyone at Glendale,vand there was one guy at Richmond Hill. The same guy want time. By the mid 90s, even he was gone. |
|
|
| (1465426) | |
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, 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 19:05:51 2018. What effort? There was no infastructure, and literally no passengers. I used the line often enough (almost as novelty), no one ever got on or off Penny Bridge. A few times I saw one or two at Haberman. Occasionally 1 or two at fresh pond. Never saw anyone at Glendale,vand there was one guy at Richmond Hill. The same guy each time. By the mid 90s, even he was gone. |
|
|
| (1465427) | |
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, 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 19:02:29 2018. No they DID not!!!! No lights. Ant ANY of them, not even fresh pond. Freshpond had a shed and stairs. No she'd at ANY of the others in 70s-90s. Richmond Hill a platform..no lights except for street lights on Babbage Ave. |
|
|
| (1465428) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:21:17 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 19:02:29 2018. No they DID not!!!! No lights. At ANY of them, not even fresh pond. Freshpond had a shed and stairs. No shed at ANY of the others in 70s-90s. Richmond Hill a platform..no lights except for street lights on Babbage Ave. |
|
|
| (1465429) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:25:04 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 19:21:17 2018. I used Fresh pond from 80s to 1998. You stood it pitch darkness in winter, with no lights at all. The only light was from metropolitan ave way up above and diagnal. The stars were only there because the "station" was in a cut there, and there was no choice. |
|
|
| (1465430) | |
Re: Lower Montauk Branch Passenger Rail Study (Final Report 2018) could cost over $2 Billion |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Mon Feb 12 19:25:39 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 19:25:04 2018. Stairs, not stars |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 9 |
||
