Mayor de Blasio to Propose Streetcar Line Linking Brooklyn and Queens 0

[bobtehpanda]

I don't disagree that other areas need transit more (not sure about SI), but keep in mind that the only reason this is being funded is its location. It's because of the developers and development in the area that this is possible--put this in the middle of nowhere, and it has to be funded out of pocket.

 

Hudson Yards proved that TIFs are, at best, not self-sustaining. If the developers want it so bad they can pay for it themselves, directly. That's what developers in London are doing with the Northern Line extension to Battersea; no TIF involved.

[Interested Rider]

What the real estate interests and their developers have is the ability to move the project along at a much faster  time frame as compared with a government project. If they want and are paying for it then they know how to move the project along and get it started a lot sooner. Their companies and individuals contribute to politician's campaigns who will make sure that the project  started and built.

[Roadcruiser1]

 

If the Sunset Park portion runs at a decent speed with concrete barriers, it basically is a light rail. 

 

What worries me is the fact that they will not do that. The best idea would be to use the nearby highways. Underneath the Brooklyn Queens Expressway there is enough room to build a light rail system that can be kept away from traffic. In Red Hook it can be elevated, but if it will run into traffic then it will fail instantly.

[BreeddekalbL]

they also have another problem
http://www.streetsblog.org/2016/02/17/if-nyc-builds-the-streetcar-it-will-run-right-through-flood-zones/

[Interested Rider]

A lot of buildings are going up on flood plains (Sheepshead Bay and the adjacent area are just some examples) and they think that the government will pay for the damage. The problem comes when they get with the bill for flood insurance and they blame the government for the high prices.. The maps are quite clear as to where the level one begins and ends. This is why I have stated that if they want the streetcar line, then let them pay for it and take responsibility for building it on a flood plain

[Interested Rider]

I came across something of interest on the Brooklyndailyeagle.com website that had something of interest involving one part of the proposed route through the Navy Yard area. The Brooklyn Navy Yard will be launching two bus services for the employees. One of the routes will connect the High and York Street stations with the Navy Yard and the other is a route that will connect the A,C,G Clinton-Washington Stations and the Atlantic Terminal Station with the Navy Yard.

The latter reminds me of the the long gone B/19 Carlton Avenue route that connected the Atlantic Terminal with the edge of the Navy Yard terminating at Flushing Avenue and Ryerson Street. While we wait for the light rail line to be built, maybe this can serve a temporary thing (or possibly permanent route for workers.

One last point was the article did not mention anything about the B/67 which runs through the yard and connects it with the A/C, F and a number of subway lines in the Borough Hall area. 

[LTA1992]

If we are going to let flood zones stop us from building things, we might as well not bother with anything at all.

[bobtehpanda]

If we are going to let flood zones stop us from building things, we might as well not bother with anything at all.

 

Most of New York is not at risk of becoming a flood zone. Most places where it would be reasonable to build transit for capacity purposes are not high-risk flood zones. Third Avenue, Utica Av, Nostrand Av, and Eastern Queens, off the top of my head, are not high risk flood zones.

[LTA1992]

Most of New York is not at risk of becoming a flood zone. Most places where it would be reasonable to build transit for capacity purposes are not high-risk flood zones. Third Avenue, Utica Av, Nostrand Av, and Eastern Queens, off the top of my head, are not high risk flood zones.

Irrelevant to the point. People seem to enjoy finding reasons to why we shouldn't build something than rather find reasons why we should.

[bobtehpanda]

Irrelevant to the point. People seem to enjoy finding reasons to why we shouldn't build something than rather find reasons why we should.

 

If something cannot hold up under scrutiny or cost-benefit analysis, why should it proceed? There has been no serious study of alternatives despite the fact that several to boost capacity exist, are reasonable, and are cheaper. The opportunity cost of building bad transit is sometimes worse than the cost of building no transit at all.