Idea: The Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch

[metsfan]

I am not using a subway fan's perspective, but rather an urban planner's perspective. If given both options, the locals would most certainly choose the subway. I have already mentioned the fare comparison. Now let's think of the nature of a commuter railway, like the LIRR/MNRR. Stations are generally spaced out, so to allow trains to run at a faster speed. Consider distances between East New York and Jamaica, or 125th and Grand Central. They are spaced further out, so that trains could run faster. That is good for the rider in terms of speed, but in terms of coverage, it is not. If the community was to benefit from a new rail line to the fullest extent, having additional stations would make sense. Now, addition stations would decrease the distance between stations, therefore, trains would not run as fast as they should have. Subways on the other hand, provide such service, offering communities easy access to stations. Typical subway lines were not designed for speed, rather they were designed for coverage.

Now this goes to frequency: how frequent would trains line be, if this were to be a railway line? Where would it connect? If stemming from the LIRR Main Line, frequency is much lower. Why? It is not heading into Nassau or Suffolk Ctys. The priority would be given to trains heading towards Jamaica. As for subway, if stemming from the QBL, service can be frequent, running from 5-7 minutes per train.

The biggest plus is this, the subway could head to many parts of the city. The residents in that sector have jobs that are beyond Midtown, I believe. If all of them work in Midtown, of course the railway line would benefit. But how about if they don't? They would have to transfer to the subway from the railway at some point in the journey in order to reach the destination they desire. I believe this is true for many cases if such were to be implemented.

Additionally, this stretch is meant to head to the Rockaways. Everything south of Liberty Avenue is under NYCTA control, meaning the tracks are used by subways. Where would the new line go, if it were to be under LIRR control? If half of the line is now subway, why not make the entire line subway? It is logical in terms of operations.

 

I see what you are saying however........

 

Why make a LIRR ROW into subway when its built for LIRR? This line is as old as steam trains in new york and the LIRR itself. Why make trains travel some long route when all that's needed is a simple EMU shuttle? Some subway routes are all ready unbearably long end to end. 2 tracks & a storage track that can fit 2 sets. Keep it main line. MNRR has a stop at 125th because GCT was the terminal for a 2200+ mile rail system. LIRR is not related to and never had anything to do with MNRR. In fact LIRR all most went dead because of the rail line between NYC & CT.

 

75 mph express & 65 mph local. Express could be a non-stop train end stop to end stop. Local makes all stops. Service every 12-15 minutes, 10-12 peak hours.

 

- A

[INDman]

The unused RoW is only 3.2 miles long though and to used the Row, it would have to be completly rebuilt. That being said, it makes no difference that it was built for the LIRR beacuse they both run via 3rd rail power and subway cars can run on the LIRR.

[MTR Admiralty]

I see what you are saying however........

 

Why make a LIRR ROW into subway when its built for LIRR? This line is as old as steam trains in new york and the LIRR itself. Why make trains travel some long route when all that's needed is a simple EMU shuttle? Some subway routes are all ready unbearably long end to end. 2 tracks & a storage track that can fit 2 sets. Keep it main line. MNRR has a stop at 125th because GCT was the terminal for a 2200+ mile rail system. LIRR is not related to and never had anything to do with MNRR. In fact LIRR all most went dead because of the rail line between NYC & CT.

 

75 mph express & 65 mph local. Express could be a non-stop train end stop to end stop. Local makes all stops. Service every 12-15 minutes, 10-12 peak hours.

 

- A

 

Listen, do you expect trains to be zipping at 75 mph in that section? Honestly. Besides, IIRC, this ROW is suited for 2 tracks only. Two. Deux. Dos. Not four. How can you have express service and a local service simultaneously, when obviously the tracks can handle one type of service? And look, even if the maximum operating speed is 65 mph, trains would hardly reach that speed considering the spacing of the stations to make the line worth of use.

And I would like to know, what is the southern terminal for your EMU line?

 

By the way, just so you know, the longest subway line in the city is not comparable to subway lines in other cities. There are lines that are longer than the . The Seoul Metro Line 1 hooks central Seoul with Incheon, the Tokyo metro has lines extending into Yokohama, IINM. The Metropolitan Line in London goes all the way to Amersham, quite a distance from the City.

 

As per Wikipedia, and other sources:

(By comparison)

-The line: 50 km

-Northern Line, London: 58 km

-District Line, London: 64 km

-Metropolitan Line, London: 66.7 km

-Piccadilly Line, London: 71 km

-Seoul Subway Line 1, Seoul: 198.3 km

[Joe]

The line is two tracks but had an additional two tracks in Ozone Park. Bob Emery (former LIRR employee and [kick-ass] historian) created track maps and notes of all the lines, here is Whitepot Junction, Ozone Park #1 and Ozone Park #2.

 

Adding to the subway vs. LIRR debate: the subway is seen by many as the mugger mover while the LIRR has a classier reputation. When the LIRR considered transferring the Port Washington Branch east of Flushing to the City and extending the along the ROW, the residents of Bayside, Auburndale, Douglaston, Manhasset, Plandome and Port Washington screamed NIMBY so loud that the plan has never been considered again.

 

That said, I have no idea what the residents would choose. I don't live in any of those communities so I don't know how they feel about the particular issue. One thing they like about their neighborhoods is the disconnection from the rest of the borough, and this sort of thing is generally appreciated in a community. If these people wanted mass transit, it would have been built long ago.

[MTR Admiralty]

Adding to the subway vs. LIRR debate: the subway is seen by many as the mugger mover while the LIRR has a classier reputation.

 

But honestly, is LIRR an effective means of intramural transport? It is true that subway extensions brought in urban blight, so to speak, to outer-borough neighbourhoods. However, Roosevelt Island recently has a subway station (as recent as 20 odd years ago), does that opening of a subway line bring in crooks and rapists to the area? AFAIK, crime rates are not as extreme as the ones in Richmond Hill, so to speak.

While it may be classier to ride the LIRR, but think again, does the LIRR take you to your final destination? 75%-90% if the cases would be no, and customers will be forced to transfer to a subway line.

 

The most controversial question that can exist in this debate would probably be, if the ROW were to be used for the LIRR, where will the service end?

[Joe]

Henry, I didn't say I agree with that, you should know i'd love a subway stop outside my house, but unfortunately its an opinion that many seem to have.

 

Roosevelt Island station has a transit cop in it most of the time, I wonder if that was a concession that had to be made in order for a station to be placed there.

 

If the LIRR was going to operate service on the line, it would be like another Port Washington branch. Can only service Penn Station and Woodside (GCT in the future). The lack of a Jamaica connection would turn the RR off from running service on the line (methinks, at least).

 

Better connections can be made if it's part of the subway system. The line would be able to connect the and . An extension of the along the line would be an interesting proposition.

 

Crosstown Local | Church Avenue | Howard Beach-JFK

[MTR Admiralty]

Henry, I didn't say I agree with that, you should know i'd love a subway stop outside my house, but unfortunately its an opinion that many seem to have.

 

Roosevelt Island station has a transit cop in it most of the time, I wonder if that was a concession that had to be made in order for a station to be placed there.

 

If the LIRR was going to operate service on the line, it would be like another Port Washington branch. Can only service Penn Station and Woodside (GCT in the future). The lack of a Jamaica connection would turn the RR off from running service on the line (methinks, at least).

 

Better connections can be made if it's part of the subway system. The line would be able to connect the and . An extension of the along the line would be an interesting proposition.

 

Crosstown Local | Church Avenue | Howard Beach-JFK

Well yea, I didn't mean to say that you're disagreeing with me or something.

In many areas of the outer boroughs which lack subway service, questions are raised over the issue of rapid transit in their area.

[R110B]

all good subway plans are better than a new liir branch.

[Trainmaster5]

After reading all of these posts at least twice I did some research. It appears that the Transit Authority, or Board of Transportation, purchased the section now in use on the line. That is, from Liberty Junction-Rockaway Blvd south to the Rockaway peninsula. It would appear that the owns all of the ROW north of that point. Perhaps the City of New York and the State of New York () and the regional planners could sit down and sort this out for the betterment of all the residents of city. I'm 99.9% sure that the LIRR wants no part of this plan so it would up to the city and state to come up with a plan, subway or light rail, and see it through. I'm not unmindful of the financial morass we're in right now but this should be, or should have been, one of those "shovel ready" plans the stimulus was made for.Not hi-speed Albany to New York rail but something that has a bigger upside in my opinion.

[R110B]

thats good, yay.

[Far Rock Depot]

Being a rockaway resident, ive studied the history of this line. LIRR service south of Hamilton Bch over the Bay ended around 1950 when the bridge burned down. LIRR service to rockaway was available via the current LIRR far rock branch to Rock Park. around 1952 the City took over the current rockaway A/S line and the LIRR severed the connection between its Far Rock lina and the Mott ave station. LIRR service along that RoW terminated at Ozone Pk( which is just north of liberty jct) and ended a few years later due to low ridership. now i fully support the use of this Row for subway service(the Q53 bus was created to replace the LIRR service to Rockaway via this Row and after the MTA takeover, now takes longer because its now a "limited" instead of "express"), but the price tag in todays dollars i beleive will be the reason that it wont happen. most of the line is either full of trees, blocked by buildings, or just completly fell apart. trust me, i would love a Queens north to south crosstown subway route, but its too expensive to rebuild. Second Ave is bearly, but finally being built.

 

Now a Light rail may be possible(and a little cheaper), but where would its southern terminal be?

 

IMHO of course

[MTR Admiralty]

 

Now a Light rail may be possible(and a little cheaper), but where would its southern terminal be?

 

IMHO of course

 

Light rail is nice, but to make the most out of this corridor, if a transit line was ever to be there, it should be a subway. A subway will most likely offer a one-seat ride in Manhattan.

[metsfan]

Light rail is nice, but to make the most out of this corridor, if a transit line was ever to be there, it should be a subway. A subway will most likely offer a one-seat ride in Manhattan.

 

Subway should never be used to travel long distances, the ride comfort is non existent. LIRR has comfy seats, as would any light rail system's vehicles. Subway cars also have no luggage areas, and luggage impedes flow of people. Light rail and LIRR EMU both would have luggage standee or seated areas, plus LIRR has racks for luggage. I understand people on this site like the subway, but it's not the answer for everything, especially this. It worked as a branch of the LIRR, and it would work again as a shuttle. :tup:

 

- A

[MTR Admiralty]

Subway should never be used to travel long distances, the ride comfort is non existent. LIRR has comfy seats, as would any light rail system's vehicles. Subway cars also have no luggage areas, and luggage impedes flow of people. Light rail and LIRR EMU both would have luggage standee or seated areas, plus LIRR has racks for luggage. I understand people on this site like the subway, but it's not the answer for everything, especially this. It worked as a branch of the LIRR, and it would work again as a shuttle. :tup:

- A

 

Mr Man's Fourteen Points:

1. This corridor is intramural, meaning within city limits. The subway has every right to build within the city limits, if it is willing enough and has the financial resources for it.

2. Seats mean nothing in Manhattan during rush hour. Subway service is not about putting as many people into seats as possible. It is meant to hold as many people as possible. In short, it is designed to crowd. It carries more people than a traditional light rail line and a commuter rail line, undoubtedly.

3. Prospective commuters along that branch do not need luggage racks, for they will not be carrying large pieces of luggage to work and from work.

4. Luggage restricts the number of people in the car. The point about rapid transit is to put as many people in as possible in the shortest amount of time from point A to point B.

5. It's not about what USED to work. It's about what WILL work.

6. The LIRR, as far as I am concerned, has no intentions of reactivating the line from White Pot Junction to Liberty Avenue.

7. However, the TA, as well as regional transportation agencies and watchdog groups have proposed, over many years, to turn the right-of-way for rapid transit use.

8. A shuttle from White Pot Junction to Liberty Avenue would benefit very few. This market is NOT suitable for commuter rail traffic.

9. This market requires several intermediate stations, access to Manhattan and probably interchange to existing subway lines.

10. A short shuttle line fails to meet these demands, as A) will certainly have no one-seat ride into Manhattan B)will have poor subway connections and C) intermediate stations will not be used to its fullest potential as a result of the culmination of the first two reasons in this point.

11. Commuter rail is meant for connecting extramural communities (suburbia) with the central city core. Few intermediate stations are included for higher speeds. This will not be desirable for the community, if they so desire a transit line, as they would most likely prefer intermediate stations for which they could access the line easily.

12. Commuter rail, compared to rapid transit, offers a premium fare. A premium fare which may not take them to their rightful destinations. If they ride monthly, they will pay for a monthly Metrocard IN ADDITION TO a monthly LIRR ticket. This is not satisfactory to the community. The community would find it cheaper to take the Q53 to a subway line and then ride it into Manhattan, if such a LIRR line is built.

13. Light rail will not offer a straight-on one-seat ride connection into Manhattan. If such takes place, extra infrastructure MUST be accommodated so that the light rail has access into Manhattan. By converting the existing right-of-way for rapid transit usage, the new line could easily feed in into the existing subway network, thereby minimising any additional construction of infrastructure.

14. Lastly, a great portion of the original line is already made into a subway line already. It would make much more sense into converting the remaining portion for rapid transit use, as it can adjoin the existing subway line now termed the IND Rockaway Line. By adjoining with the Rockaway subway line and even the IND Queens line, Rockaway riders could have better options into accessing Manhattan. Through Brooklyn into Lower Manhattan, or through Queens into Midtown.

 

Therefore, to maximise the potential of the line, it would be better to have it as a subway line.

 

I would like to insert a disclaimer here. I am writing this from an urban planner's point-of-view, not from a subway fan's or an expansionist's point-of-view. My status as a subway fan has no part in my proposals. Like other fans I do like seeing expansion, however I expand for a cause. What sets me apart from the so-called "foamer" or "expansionist" from Rider's Diaries is that, I evaluate all options possible and I look into the possible repercussions of what will happen. Subway service may not be the best thing for these communities. However, when compared to LIRR service, a commuter rail shuttle or a light rail option, I believe strongly, under my Fourteen Points, that rapid transit is the best thing for the community, if it so desires to have a transit link along the corridor.

[Joe]

M7s are not cut out to carry luggage. While half the cars in a given consist will have a handicapped area, its purpose isn't to carry luggage. The only cars on the LIRR with storage space are 2 C3s AFAIK.

[Trainmaster5]

Mr Man's Fourteen Points:

1. This corridor is intramural, meaning within city limits. The subway has every right to build within the city limits, if it is willing enough and has the financial resources for it.

2. Seats mean nothing in Manhattan during rush hour. Subway service is not about putting as many people into seats as possible. It is meant to hold as many people as possible. In short, it is designed to crowd. It carries more people than a traditional light rail line and a commuter rail line, undoubtedly.

3. Prospective commuters along that branch do not need luggage racks, for they will not be carrying large pieces of luggage to work and from work.

4. Luggage restricts the number of people in the car. The point about rapid transit is to put as many people in as possible in the shortest amount of time from point A to point B.

5. It's not about what USED to work. It's about what WILL work.

6. The LIRR, as far as I am concerned, as no intentions of reactivating the line from White Pot Junction to Liberty Avenue.

7. However, the TA, as well as regional transportation agencies and watchdog groups have proposed, over many years, to turn the right-of-way for rapid transit use.

8. A shuttle from White Pot Junction to Liberty Avenue would benefit very few. This market is NOT suitable for commuter rail traffic.

9. This market requires several intermediate stations, access to Manhattan and probably interchange to existing subway lines.

10. A short shuttle line fails to meet these demands, as A) will certain have no one-seat ride into Manhattan B)will have poor subway connections and C) intermediate stations will not be used to its fullest potential as a result of the culmination of the first two reasons in this point.

11. Commuter rail is meant for connecting extramural communities (suburbia) with the central city core. Few intermediate stations are included for higher speeds. This will not be desirable for the community as, if they so desire a transit line, as they would most likely prefer intermediate stations for which they could access the line easily.

12. Commuter rail, compared to rapid transit, offers a premium fare. A premium fare which may not take them to their rightful destinations. If they ride monthly, they will pay for a monthly Metrocard IN ADDITION TO a monthly LIRR ticket. This is not satisfactory to the community. The community would find it cheaper to take the Q53 to a subway line and then ride it into Manhattan, if such a LIRR line is built.

13. Light rail will not offer a straight-on one-seat ride connection into Manhattan. If such takes place, extra infrastructure MUST be accommodated so that the light rail has access into Manhattan. By converting the existing right-of-way for rapid transit usage, the new line could easily feed in into the existing subway network, thereby minimising any additional construction of infrastructure.

14. Lastly, a great portion of the original line is already made into a subway line already. It would make much more sense into converting the remaining portion for rapid transit use, as it can adjoin the existing subway line now termed the IND Rockaway Line. By adjoining with the Rockaway subway line and even the IND Queens line, Rockaway riders could have better options into accessing Manhattan. Through Brooklyn into Lower Manhattan, or through Queens into Midtown.

 

Therefore, to maximise the potential of the line, it would be better to have it as a subway line.

 

Kudos for the above post. To Metsfan, the LIRR wants no part of city stations and surely not a shuttle. As for luggage and luggage racks leave that to AirTrain and the LIRR. Comfort on a long ride to Manhattan you say, I say ask the to Far Rock riders do they want to take the LIRR or the subway. Cost trumps comfort in most cases. As for light rail there is no real benefit that woulld overide the " one seat " factor IMHO. Just my 2 cents here but I'd love to see more discussion about this ROW.

[metsfan]

Kudos for the above post. To Metsfan, the LIRR wants no part of city stations and surely not a shuttle. As for luggage and luggage racks leave that to AirTrain and the LIRR. Comfort on a long ride to Manhattan you say, I say ask the to Far Rock riders do they want to take the LIRR or the subway. Cost trumps comfort in most cases. As for light rail there is no real benefit that woulld overide the " one seat " factor IMHO. Just my 2 cents here but I'd love to see more discussion about this ROW.

 

I didn't mean for people going to/from airport, i mean in general. Strollers, art bags etc etc.

 

- A

[MTR Admiralty]

I didn't mean for people going to/from airport, i mean in general. Strollers, art bags etc etc.

 

- A

Even in such casual settings, cars with luggage areas would not be needed for such a line.

[metsfan]

Even in such casual settings, cars with luggage areas would not be needed for such a line.

 

It makes no sense to re-activate a LIRR line as subway, when the LIRR is for the most part cleaner, safer, higher service standards, faster, more room, all ready has the fleet to support the line, and no, the notion of "can't stand" its city stations is 100% false. If they dislike serving the city so much, why are they building the vital ESA, and possibly re-activating another in-city line older than this one, and in the process of planing the rebuilding of all the city zone stations and increasing service to/from LIC and flatbush?

 

Once is out of its financial funk, LIRR will have the reseouces to put this line back into service. We don't need another 15 mile subway route just to serve this short branch, especially since it all ready has the physical properties to handle LIRR pending a reconditioning of the trackbed. Putting subway would totally and completely change how trains go through the rest of the system, and how do you propose to link the to the LIRR? Build a huge billion dollar interchange station? That's what it would take. LIRR re-activate would simply restore the line to LIRR operation, rebuilding of stations along the route, and a new interlocking at the main line connection point. You're talking about converting an ROW to subway spec that is all ready main line LIRR spec. We don't need rapid transit there, we need main line railcar capacity, and run it at close intervals.

 

 

- A

[Maserati7200]

Another problem no one has mentioned here, if the subway were to be extended on this brach, more cars would be needed to keep headways the same. In addition, where are you going to store these new cars?

[INDman]

It makes no sense to re-activate a LIRR line as subway, when the LIRR is for the most part cleaner, safer, higher service standards, faster, more room, all ready has the fleet to support the line, and no, the notion of "can't stand" its city stations is 100% false. If they dislike serving the city so much, why are they building the vital ESA, and possibly re-activating another in-city line older than this one, and in the process of planing the rebuilding of all the city zone stations and increasing service to/from LIC and flatbush?

 

Once is out of its financial funk, LIRR will have the reseouces to put this line back into service. We don't need another 15 mile subway route just to serve this short branch, especially since it all ready has the physical properties to handle LIRR pending a reconditioning of the trackbed. Putting subway would totally and completely change how trains go through the rest of the system, and how do you propose to link the to the LIRR? Build a huge billion dollar interchange station? That's what it would take. LIRR re-activate would simply restore the line to LIRR operation, rebuilding of stations along the route, and a new interlocking at the main line connection point. You're talking about converting an ROW to subway spec that is all ready main line LIRR spec. We don't need rapid transit there, we need main line railcar capacity, and run it at close intervals.

 

 

- A

 

What perpose would it serve for the LIRR to reactivate the line? Have you even seen the RoW in person, if so you would know that the whole thing needs to be rebuilt to handel any train service. In most places the tracks are washed out and the stations are no longer there as are realy rooms, interlocking. And as has been said many times before, the LIRR is not interested in having stations in Queens and why spend the money to run trains at close intervals on a line that would have more rider ship as a subway. Extend the down the RoW to Libertry Ave. or even to the Rockaways. There is no need for the LIRR to bother with it.

[7LineFan]

It makes no sense to re-activate a LIRR line as subway

 

Then explain the IND Rockaway line. And by extension, the Dyre Avenue Line, formerly part of the NYW&B but converted to subway.

 

MTR, with his Wilson-esque list, definitely hit it right on the spot. Metsfan, it seems you're just stuck in the "once a commuter line, always a commuter line" mindset.

[Trainmaster5]

I'd like to point out the LIRR closed the Woodhaven station which was situated below the ROW , Union Hall station, and all of the lower Montauk because they didn't want to invest $$$ in stations that were underutilized or spaced too close together. The mass transit proposal floated in the '60's proposed using unused ROW like this one and the underutilized Bay Ridge Branch for subway and not commuter rail because the LIRR had (has ) no interest in adding service within NYC proper. Even the ESA project was proposed to make things easier for suburbanites, not city dwellers. As for yards and rolling stock most posters have proposed connections with the and the QBL so Pitkin and Jamaica would be the logical places for that. Just remember that this is just an idea that was floated and I commend the OP for thinking outside the box. Oh, IIRC the SAS doesn't mean new cars, so why should this proposal need any? Just think "extension" and not new, self contained line. Increase the headway on the main lines by 1 or 2 minutes and most people don't even notice it.

[metsfan]

Then explain the IND Rockaway line. And by extension, the Dyre Avenue Line, formerly part of the NYW&B but converted to subway.

 

MTR, with his Wilson-esque list, definitely hit it right on the spot. Metsfan, it seems you're just stuck in the "once a commuter line, always a commuter line" mindset.

 

More like i want to see LIRR stop being a shadow of its former self. LIRR had stations from whitepot junction all the way out to the last current station. If you're going to make it subway, you should not just make it on some 4 mile section haphazardly connecting to another line, do it all the way out, rebuild the rockaway wye to handle full time end to end service. Terminate the at broad channel. Let the handle it from there. Like i said, the system as configured cant handle service on that ROW, and yes i've been there once and seen photos taken in all 4 seasons.

 

When i say configured for LIRR i mean the loading gauge was for diesel and smaller (low stack) steam locos pulling 2, 3, or 5 85 foot cars. It's in about the same condition, and configured similarly to the currently disused newtown R8 line. I believe the lines were constructed using similar equipment and methods, the newtown line only being deactivated in 1983 vs in the 50's. We have a lot more tree & plant growth here, which somewhat equalizes the time difference.

 

 

- A

[metsfan]

Re-open hamilton beach also.

 

- A