De Blasio wants streetcar line on Brooklyn-Queens waterfront

[B35 via Church]

17 hours ago, KK 6 Ave Local said:

Hi guys, its c o r p o r a t e i n t r e s t s here, back with another Minecraft Bill De Blasio video. In today's video we're gonna be playing an neat game called "Help your developer friends". So I found the best strategy for this game, and it's to get lots of rails and place them like this, going around here, and make sure you end it in Red Hook or you won't get as many coins. So i hope this strategy helps you out. Thanks for watching and hit that Subscribe button.                                                                                                                                               

And that's what the BQX would be like if it were a gameplay video.

...and would that be the prequel to this sequel? Because I can't be the only one after reading this post that's straight up in the

[LGA Link N Train]

My overall thoughts on the BQX. Hope you guys take notes on this. 

1) The idea of Streetcars in NY is not that bad in my opinion. However, I strongly feel that the BQX is a non-starter! For the obvious reasons that it's barely serving any Transit Deserts. 

2) The only saving grace that the BQX has is that its serving 2 Transit Deserts. In this case it's Navy Yard and Red Hook. That in itself is good but the only connections it makes with other lines is on Jay Street. Which brings me to my next point 

3) The thing that bothers me about the BQX project is THE LACK OF CONNECTIONS!!! Paying $2.75 for this crap won't mean anything if I'm unable to transfer to the subway or bus network without paying another Fare. Thus exposing the fact that the BQX is its own system and defeats the purpose of having connections to begin. With.

4) As @Coney Island Av and many others have said, train ridership is at an increase. Therefore the money being funded to the BQX should be redirected to improving the line (ex. Elevators at Greenpoint (Currently Happening) 21st, Metropolitan, Broadway-Union Av complex (to the transfer with the and lines) , Bedford Nostrand should be fully upgraded in my opinion. Allow relay at Classon, maybe add elevators at Hoyt-Schemehorn,  and of course CBTC) I think the examples I laid out are pretty self-explanatory. 

5) Overall, the BQX idea should be scrapped with the exception of Red Hook and Navy Yard. Also, I thought of a way to tie in a StreetCar/BRT idea with one of @R68onBroadway's proposal. 

[bobtehpanda]

On 8/30/2018 at 2:38 PM, paulrivera said:

The money from both projects could have paid for Andy Byford's Fast Forward plan and maybe even have money left over.

Not really.

Quote

Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Thursday the city should pony up half the money needed to pay for the MTA’s plan to modernize transit service — a 10-year strategy unofficially estimated to cost more than $30 billion.

 

[Interested Rider]

If there are two individuals that cannot be trusted to spend money correctly for a project that will only benefit their developer  friends, it is Cuomo and DeBlasio. If Cuomo wants the LaGuardia connection to Flushing which is a waste, how about him and his developer friends paying for it out of their own pockets and  not one penny out of state funds. The same applies to DeBlasio and have him and his developer friends  pay for the streetcar out of their own pockets and not one penny from state, city or federal funds.

There is a reason that I have no faith or trust in either of them. When these two geniuses had an opportunity to do something constructive that would have in the long run saved the city money, they did nothing. Twenty years ago both of them were in positions of power in the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and they could have allowed tenants in public housing in New York City to buy their apartments at a reasonable cost in many of the developments. At that time, there was talk from many different sources about how this proposal would benefit the residents as it gave the tenants a stake in their buildings and would have allowed funds to be shifted to those developments where it was really needed. Some of the developments would have shifted to a co-op model in the same form with the same protections that buildings  in the city have when a building applies for conversion. The tenants in the conversion  process that did not buy would not lose their apartments but when the apartment was vacated, it would go co-op.  Today many of these same residents who would  have bought 20 years are not interested in such a plan even if offered as the buildings are in far worse shape as compared with 20 years ago.  Now these same two geniuses who are pushing their pet projects and at the same time will have to find 32 billion for housing, billions for transit, pensions etc. but yet when it comes to something that benefits their friends, they will make sure that the taxpayers  will foot the bill!

Both the city and state are headed for a repeat of the fiscal disaster of the 1970's soon after this election with one major difference;is there is no safety net available and with  no elected leadership that knows what fiscal responsibility means and how to practice it.

[m7zanr160s]

On 4/4/2018 at 9:05 PM, bobtehpanda said:

I don't know that you guys are disagreeing. In any case the BQE has a major advantage over a rail line in that you have a nice cushy seat with no tush-moving for your entire trip, tragedy of the commons be damned. The RX makes sense from 4th Av to Jackson Heights; north of that it gets very hard to pencil out since there's not enough capacity over the Hell Gate for a rapid transit service, and there's also not really significant South Bronx-Astoria-Jackson Heights demand.

Nah...you build a direct line between Queens and the Bronx, they'll be demand.

[B35 via Church]

On 8/31/2018 at 10:17 PM, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

My overall thoughts on the BQX. Hope you guys take notes on this. 

1) The idea of Streetcars in NY is not that bad in my opinion. However, I strongly feel that the BQX is a non-starter! For the obvious reasons that it's barely serving any Transit Deserts. 

2) The only saving grace that the BQX has is that its serving 2 Transit Deserts. In this case it's Navy Yard and Red Hook. That in itself is good but the only connections it makes with other lines is on Jay Street. Which brings me to my next point 

3) The thing that bothers me about the BQX project is THE LACK OF CONNECTIONS!!! Paying $2.75 for this crap won't mean anything if I'm unable to transfer to the subway or bus network without paying another Fare. Thus exposing the fact that the BQX is its own system and defeats the purpose of having connections to begin. With.

4) As @Coney Island Av and many others have said, train ridership is at an increase. Therefore the money being funded to the BQX should be redirected to improving the line (ex. Elevators at Greenpoint (Currently Happening) 21st, Metropolitan, Broadway-Union Av complex (to the transfer with the and lines) , Bedford Nostrand should be fully upgraded in my opinion. Allow relay at Classon, maybe add elevators at Hoyt-Schemehorn,  and of course CBTC) I think the examples I laid out are pretty self-explanatory. 

5) Overall, the BQX idea should be scrapped with the exception of Red Hook and Navy Yard. Also, I thought of a way to tie in a StreetCar/BRT idea with one of @R68onBroadway's proposal. 

As it is, streetcars have no place in this city - especially with practically everyone & their mammas quick to summon for an uBer, etc. - or resorting to jumping in their own personal vehicle (moreso than ever now) to get around.... The faith people have in (MTA provided) public transportation in this city is ever so dwindling & quite frankly, I'm not so sure that faith can ever be restored... I also don't see much of that changing w/ BQX, which AFAIC would be an enormous waste of money to (attempt to) quell the commutes of so few people....

Not only is it a non-starter, I don't care for the fact that it resembles some sort of insular connector to the more gentrifying areas in this borough (which to me, is off-putting).... I remember seeing someone's comment on YT (youtube), comparing it to HBLR over in NJ.... I LMAO'd & 'X'd out of the browser window.... BQX wouldn't have near the effect it would have here for Brooklyn commuters as HBLR does for the Gold Coast & beyond - and for damn sure this contraption isn't garnering around 50k riders/day... Not even close.... No hesitation required.

[bobtehpanda]

7 hours ago, m7zanr160s said:

Nah...you build a direct line between Queens and the Bronx, they'll be demand.

Devil is in the details; where in Queens and where in the Bronx. There's not much of anything on the Queens segment of the route that would be a major draw for people in the Bronx. It misses a bunch of big centers near the route (Rego Park and LGA); likewise, the Bronx segments that have been proposed are meh at best. The Q44 works because it hits multiple major centers. I would hardly consider a stop in Astoria and a stop in Jackson Heights to be sufficient to justify the Bronx leg of that corridor.

[R68OnBroadway]

For RX I'd build it from Jackson Heights to 8th Avenue, any Bronx extension would need to be studied considering what routes it could take and how effective it would be. 

On the topic of RX though, where would we have a maintenance yard/shop and relay space, and also a terminal that doesn't interfere with freight operations? Many people propose ending the line at the Brooklyn Army Terminal but is there any space for a station + layups in that yard given the car floats there? (As for JH you could just add some sidings and a diamond crossover for turnarounds, much like the RPK shuttle at Broad Channel.)

[m7zanr160s]

3 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Devil is in the details; where in Queens and where in the Bronx. There's not much of anything on the Queens segment of the route that would be a major draw for people in the Bronx. It misses a bunch of big centers near the route (Rego Park and LGA); likewise, the Bronx segments that have been proposed are meh at best. The Q44 works because it hits multiple major centers. I would hardly consider a stop in Astoria and a stop in Jackson Heights to be sufficient to justify the Bronx leg of that corridor.

If I can bypass Manhattan coming from Queens, via subway, it works for me. Just as long as there are connections to other lines, it'll save time. I travel from Jamaica to Fordham via the subway and that is way faster than the bus will get me there. Some things are out of the question for some if the travel is too long, make the Bronx more accessible from Queens and things become open for consideration.

[RR503]

17 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Devil is in the details; where in Queens and where in the Bronx. There's not much of anything on the Queens segment of the route that would be a major draw for people in the Bronx. It misses a bunch of big centers near the route (Rego Park and LGA); likewise, the Bronx segments that have been proposed are meh at best. The Q44 works because it hits multiple major centers. I would hardly consider a stop in Astoria and a stop in Jackson Heights to be sufficient to justify the Bronx leg of that corridor.

If the Bronx extension just follows the NEC to Co-op city or something, I'd agree, it's a waste. That said, if the line can be threaded crosstown on, say, 149 or 163/161st Sts, I think it'd have good value -- you'd hit the Hub and get some good transfers.

I also think the Queens/N Brooklyn segment has some stellar on and off-line generators -- Jackson Heights is a major shopping area, ENY is an up-and-coming mixed use district, and the line conveniently passes through both of those hubs within transfer distance from a combined 10 subway lines. That connectivity cannot be discounted -- especially given that a major (one could even say the major) role of circumferential routes is to link corridors outside of the core. 

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, RR503 said:

If the Bronx extension just follows the NEC to Co-op city or something, I'd agree, it's a waste. That said, if the line can be threaded crosstown on, say, 149 or 163/161st Sts, I think it'd have good value -- you'd hit the Hub and get some good transfers.

I also think the Queens/N Brooklyn segment has some stellar on and off-line generators -- Jackson Heights is a major shopping area, ENY is an up-and-coming mixed use district, and the line conveniently passes through both of those hubs within transfer distance from a combined 10 subway lines. That connectivity cannot be discounted -- especially given that a major (one could even say the major) role of circumferential routes is to link corridors outside of the core. 

Absolutely. I think that Jackson Heights - Sunset Park is a viable corridor, with several viable Minimum Operating Segments.

I just don't buy that Jackson Heights - Bronx is really a good corridor. It's too far west, the Hell Gate will reach capacity, Astoria is too difficult of a station to build, etc.

[LGA Link N Train]

22 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Absolutely. I think that Jackson Heights - Sunset Park is a viable corridor, with several viable Minimum Operating Segments.

I just don't buy that Jackson Heights - Bronx is really a good corridor. It's too far west, the Hell Gate will reach capacity, Astoria is too difficult of a station to build, etc.

Your proposal that you laid out here would be a good way to use the upper level of Roosevelt Avenue station  (despite the limitations and downside that this would bring). I just wanted to point this out 

[RR503]

29 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

I just don't buy that Jackson Heights - Bronx is really a good corridor. It's too far west, the Hell Gate will reach capacity, Astoria is too difficult of a station to build, etc.

Hell Gate has space for 4 tracks. No more than 2 can feed to Sunnyside, which means the other 2 are locked in to the NYCR ROW. Currently, only one track follows that path, but who's to say we can't re-lay the second. Given that passenger trains barely suffer grade penalties, that will be enough -- the rest of the RX is 2 tracks, too. 

Astoria Station is an interesting issue. It was rejected in the original PSAS studies not just because it was complicated to construct, but also because the expected ridership was exceedingly low. 26 million for 300k annual riders just couldn't be sold. In the context of the RX, I think such a station would actually be perfectly complementary to a well-designed Bronx section. One could then commute from the Hub to LIC without suffering the Lex, for example. 

[bobtehpanda]

34 minutes ago, RR503 said:

Hell Gate has space for 4 tracks. No more than 2 can feed to Sunnyside, which means the other 2 are locked in to the NYCR ROW. Currently, only one track follows that path, but who's to say we can't re-lay the second. Given that passenger trains barely suffer grade penalties, that will be enough -- the rest of the RX is 2 tracks, too. 

Astoria Station is an interesting issue. It was rejected in the original PSAS studies not just because it was complicated to construct, but also because the expected ridership was exceedingly low. 26 million for 300k annual riders just couldn't be sold. In the context of the RX, I think such a station would actually be perfectly complementary to a well-designed Bronx section. One could then commute from the Hub to LIC without suffering the Lex, for example. 

Depends on who you ask. Amtrak's long term plans, if they ever get the money for them, forecast demand is strong enough for six tracks through Penn. And with Penn Access it's not that crazy of an idea.

[RR503]

21 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Depends on who you ask. Amtrak's long term plans, if they ever get the money for them, forecast demand is strong enough for six tracks through Penn. And with Penn Access it's not that crazy of an idea.

Those additional two tracks are almost exclusively to provide more LIRR capacity. Remember, Penn Access is using the slots that the LIRR is moving to ESA, so total tph to Penn is unchanged. When those trains saturate, the LIRR will be in the same bind they are in today -- hence the additional tracks projected as being necessary. Keep in mind, too, that the limitations on really any Penn-bound train service is Penn Station itself, rarely the other infrastructure involved. This is to say, of course, that I doubt the Hell Gate would be anywhere near capacity with what they schedule with PSAS and incrementally increased Amtrak service. They run 24tph under the Hudson with high density signalling -- I see no reason that such a feat could not be replicated here. 

Regardless, a 4-track Hell Gate exclusively for Penn-bound service wouldn't add one iota of capacity to the lines in question. New Rochelle's (flat) interlocking probably couldn't handle full service on the current two diverging tracks, let alone another two. And even if that junction was grade separated, you're still left with the issue that the New Haven Line itself is only four tracks... 

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, RR503 said:

Those additional two tracks are almost exclusively to provide more LIRR capacity. Remember, Penn Access is using the slots that the LIRR is moving to ESA, so total tph to Penn is unchanged. When those trains saturate, the LIRR will be in the same bind they are in today -- hence the additional tracks projected as being necessary. Keep in mind, too, that the limitations on really any Penn-bound train service is Penn Station itself, rarely the other infrastructure involved. This is to say, of course, that I doubt the Hell Gate would be anywhere near capacity with what they schedule with PSAS and incrementally increased Amtrak service. They run 24tph under the Hudson with high density signalling -- I see no reason that such a feat could not be replicated here. 

Regardless, a 4-track Hell Gate exclusively for Penn-bound service wouldn't add one iota of capacity to the lines in question. New Rochelle's (flat) interlocking probably couldn't handle full service on the current two diverging tracks, let alone another two. And even if that junction was grade separated, you're still left with the issue that the New Haven Line itself is only four tracks... 

Four track Hell Gate allows you to deinterline the Harlem and Hudson, making a true Metro-North. Which isn't the most ridiculous idea, particularly as the northern suburbs become more popular with millenial families decamping for more house.

[Union Tpke]

4 hours ago, RR503 said:

Hell Gate has space for 4 tracks. No more than 2 can feed to Sunnyside, which means the other 2 are locked in to the NYCR ROW. Currently, only one track follows that path, but who's to say we can't re-lay the second. Given that passenger trains barely suffer grade penalties, that will be enough -- the rest of the RX is 2 tracks, too. 

Astoria Station is an interesting issue. It was rejected in the original PSAS studies not just because it was complicated to construct, but also because the expected ridership was exceedingly low. 26 million for 300k annual riders just couldn't be sold. In the context of the RX, I think such a station would actually be perfectly complementary to a well-designed Bronx section. One could then commute from the Hub to LIC without suffering the Lex, for example. 

The Astoria station would provide quicker access to LaGuardia, and could help reduce burden on the N/W in Astoria. The investment would be worth it.

[Italianstallion]

14 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

The Astoria station would provide quicker access to LaGuardia, and could help reduce burden on the N/W in Astoria. The investment would be worth it.

Huh? How would you get the LGA from there?

[Union Tpke]

31 minutes ago, Italianstallion said:

Huh? How would you get the LGA from there?

M60 or N/W extension. You could also have a branch of the Triboro over the BQE head to the Airport

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, Union Tpke said:

The Astoria station would provide quicker access to LaGuardia, and could help reduce burden on the N/W in Astoria. The investment would be worth it.

Who is even trying to go from the Bronx to LaGuardia? We couldn't even get the Bx50 off the ground and that was a bus.

[MysteriousBtrain]

3 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Who is even trying to go from the Bronx to LaGuardia? We couldn't even get the Bx50 off the ground and that was a bus.

A handful of the crowds get off at Lexington Avenue for service to the Bronx. Not all LGA crowds but about 50% (of M60 riders in general) go from Queens to the Bronx via M60.

[RR503]

7 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Four track Hell Gate allows you to deinterline the Harlem and Hudson, making a true Metro-North. Which isn't the most ridiculous idea, particularly as the northern suburbs become more popular with millenial families decamping for more house.

Yes, because what our subway *really* needs right now is 200k people trying to get from Penn to GCT...

Deinterlining commuter rail won't do really anything to its capacity unless a whole slew of improvements are made first. Top of that list must include high density signalling, grade-separated, high capacity terminals, grade separated junctions for branches (looking at the New Haven right now) and higher performance rolling stock. After spending many billions of dollars on those things (and assuming you still need that capacity bump), you still run up against policy issues wherein you're forcing people to make paid transfers to access areas they once could arrive at directly, and the fact that you'd be woefully underserving the region's most capable and economically central rail terminal. 

There's also a scale and relative benefit issue here. Metro North carries about 300k people per day. Let's be super generous, and assume that said ridership doubles to 600k because of the factors you mention above. That's a lot, sure, but it's entirely within the realm of possibility that the RX's daily ridership could be in that ballpark. Something to keep in mind, I think, when weighing the relative value of RX to the Hub or this MNR proposal.

Finally, of course, you come to the engineering issues. Any expanded line down the West Side would have to contend with the fact that the ROW under the Trump Towers is only two tracks wide and that HY's footings cage the current Empire Connection tunnel. If you surmount that, even, you're left with the issue that (unless you're willing to reduce LIRR/Amtrak cap) you now need 8 tunnels under the East River -- 4 for LIRR, 4 for MNR. Methinks there are better ways to spend all that cash. 

I'm all for deinterlining in certain areas of the subway -- I generally agree with stuff you've discussed for Queens and the northern end of the core. But that said, deinterlining must not be treated like a religion, but merely as another tool in a buffet of service improvement solutions. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

On ‎9‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 1:39 PM, RR503 said:

If the Bronx extension just follows the NEC to Co-op city or something, I'd agree, it's a waste. That said, if the line can be threaded crosstown on, say, 149 or 163/161st Sts, I think it'd have good value -- you'd hit the Hub and get some good transfers.

I also think the Queens/N Brooklyn segment has some stellar on and off-line generators -- Jackson Heights is a major shopping area, ENY is an up-and-coming mixed use district, and the line conveniently passes through both of those hubs within transfer distance from a combined 10 subway lines. That connectivity cannot be discounted -- especially given that a major (one could even say the major) role of circumferential routes is to link corridors outside of the core. 

I like the 161st St corridor idea, because then Triboro line would hit every subway line in The Bronx except the  (also  express service, but those are peak-direction rush hour services primarily aimed at Manhattan-bound riders anyway) and it would be in a relatively straight alignment. By putting it a bit further north, that makes it that much more convenient for riders coming from the northern and eastern Bronx.

23 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

Absolutely. I think that Jackson Heights - Sunset Park is a viable corridor, with several viable Minimum Operating Segments.

I just don't buy that Jackson Heights - Bronx is really a good corridor. It's too far west, the Hell Gate will reach capacity, Astoria is too difficult of a station to build, etc.

It may be further west, but wouldn’t that make it more convenient for riders coming from the southern, western and north-central parts of the Bronx who can’t quickly or easily get to the Q44 or Q50 buses?

But Jackson Heights-East New York would certainly be an excellent place to start for an initial operating segment with transfers to multiple train lines at both ends.

[Yankees4life]

He needs to lay off the drugs...

[BreeddekalbL]

Well his czar Giambrone is going back north

https://therealdeal.com/2018/09/18/next-stop-canada-bqx-czar-stepping-down-next-month/