Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
LaGuardia Link N Tra

Rockaway Beach Branch

Recommended Posts

On 1/14/2019 at 9:29 PM, bobtehpanda said:

Short of requiring drivers to submit GPS data to the government, it'd be pretty much impossible.

That's my guess though, because

- Woodhaven/Cross Bay have no major destinations on them other than QCM, which is popular but not enough to explain all the traffic in the area.

- More importantly, Woodhaven is the only major continuous north-south road for quite a while. To the west the only road connecting the Belt and Queens Blvd is the BQE; to the east you have the Van Wyck. In between every other road is too disjointed or too narrow or both.

Not necessary… AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, and Sprint already sell your data to anyone who is willing to pay—even the black market.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather see light rail up Woodhaven-63rd Drive-Junction Blvd between Rockaway Park and LGA than a subway down RRB. 

But, if we insist on it, here's food for thought: 

(N) Astoria-Whitehall via Broadway Local

(Q) Current Route

(R) Current Route

(W) runs from Coney Island to Rockaway Park via Sea Beach -> Man Bridge -> Broadway Exp -> 63st -> QB Bypass -> RRB

This doesn't mess up QB and also uses the excess capacity of 63rd st. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, shiznit1987 said:

I'd rather see light rail up Woodhaven-63rd Drive-Junction Blvd between Rockaway Park and LGA than a subway down RRB. 

But, if we insist on it, here's food for thought: 

(N) Astoria-Whitehall via Broadway Local

(Q) Current Route

(R) Current Route

(W) runs from Coney Island to Rockaway Park via Sea Beach -> Man Bridge -> Broadway Exp -> 63st -> QB Bypass -> RRB

This doesn't mess up QB and also uses the excess capacity of 63rd st. 

 

Yeah no, that's basically having the (M) run from Middle Village to Rockaway Parkway.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Yeah no, that's basically having the (M) run from Middle Village to Rockaway Parkway.

The issue with that being....? 

49 minutes ago, shiznit1987 said:

I'd rather see light rail up Woodhaven-63rd Drive-Junction Blvd between Rockaway Park and LGA than a subway down RRB. 

But, if we insist on it, here's food for thought: 

(N) Astoria-Whitehall via Broadway Local

(Q) Current Route

(R) Current Route

(W) runs from Coney Island to Rockaway Park via Sea Beach -> Man Bridge -> Broadway Exp -> 63st -> QB Bypass -> RRB

This doesn't mess up QB and also uses the excess capacity of 63rd st. 

I don’t love this. QB Bypass cap is better spent on a Manhattan-centric demographic, rather than one which already has under-capacity Manhattan options/a purported need to get to job centers along QB.

You’re also leaving some capacity unused (8th) and are adding merges to (F), but that’s secondary...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

Is this guy correct

 

Absolutley not, he could just take the Q52 before transferring to QBL then the (7) or another bus to get to his destination. Even taking the (A) to (J) to (E) to (7) works better here. Will cost much less even if it may take more time. Supporting any subway expansion or revival shouldnt be hinged on improving 2 guys commutes realistically.

 

Edited by NoHacksJustKhaks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

Is this guy correct

 

Q53 Beach 90-Woodside takes about ~70 min.

It would actually be faster if he took the LIRR from Jamaica to Woodside, instead of the (E) and then the (7) which would be 50-70 minutes depending on how long you'd have to wait. But still better to take the (A) and transfer to the Q53 instead of taking the (A) , AirTrain, (E) and (7) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, NoHacksJustKhaks said:

Absolutley not, he could just take the Q52 before transferring to QBL then the (7) or another bus to get to his destination. Even taking the (A) to (J) to (E) to (7) works better here. Will cost much less even if it may take more time. Supporting any subway expansion or revival shouldnt be hinged on improving 2 guys commutes realistically.

 

I disagree with improving a small amount of people's commute comment , it can improve north south travel in queens , shouldn't be forcing people onto buses 

Edited by BreeddekalbL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, BreeddekalbL said:

I disagree with improving a small amount of people's commute comment , it can improve north south travel in queens , shouldn't be forcing people onto buses 

My point is that RBB shouldn't be reactivated into a subway on the purpose of a specific sob story of a commute where a subway must exist between two major urban points. I totally believe that forcing people onto buses is a bad idea and that this subway helps to solve that problem. But in this case, this person is begging for a better commute when there are many options right in front of them (all of which 5x better than control route above). None of them are perfect, but at least attempt to adapt before you complain...  

Edited by NoHacksJustKhaks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's not a lot of people who would use the RBB. Most car trips on Woodhaven have origins and destinations outside of the Woodhaven corridor, and no one is replacing a car ride with a three or four seat train ride.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

https://thecity.nyc/2019/10/study-of-old-rockaway-rail-lines-revival-back-on-track-mta.html?fbclid=IwAR3RhtoNbtrxvH__mIDEO3nKOzAu3-J2DP-kqAmT8aOE4a_g5TSM9wkanLY

Maybe now we’ll finally get an answer about whether restoring the Rockaway branch is worth doing or not. Whatever conclusion they come to, hopefully they will explain why there was a delay. I’m not as in favor of restoring the branch as I was in the past, but I’d still like to see what alternatives Systra studied and what conclusions they come to (as long as it’s not a High Line wanna-be with no rail line under it!).

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hot Take: Considering the Rockaways & the adjacent areas to the east of Far Rockaway are deceivingly so close, yet so far to navigate in & out of...this isn’t the worst idea I’ve seen.

Then again, I’m just here holding my breath until a speculated extension of the Q52 to Far Rockaway somehow happens...probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The (MTA) has not released an official study yet, but I found this:

 

Even though the study hasn’t been released yet, come on! $8 Billion Dollars to restore the ROW. Yet the whole project should cost no more than $2 Billion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LaGuardia Link N Tra said:

The (MTA) has not released an official study yet, but I found this:

 

Even though the study hasn’t been released yet, come on! $8 Billion Dollars to restore the ROW. Yet the whole project should cost no more than $2 Billion. 

Where the hell is an extra 6 billion coming from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from restoring the row, there is other work nessisary.

 

in my ideal version of the LIRR option;

 the Railroad takes one track off the IND, the current northbound track.

new platforms are built on the old southbound express track at all three stations (these would be single direction at Howard Beach and North Conduit, and both directions at the racetrack.

 

a new track is built on the outside of the existing north bound platform at Howard Beach to convert it into an island platform. This way one train can arrive and then another immediately depart over the single track section.

 

 

any subway connection would be probably better off if it avoided the QBL all together, instead operating through queens as part of a relief line.

 

follow the old RBB tracks all the way to woodside, and their tunnel under the mainline tracks or swung over Queens Blvd, dive under the 7 (with a transfer station) and from ether route, connect with the 63rd Street Line via the stub tunnels at Queensbridge. Cross the river along side the F, but then, maybe, swing down the SAS instead of having to squeeze onto one of the existing lines.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even so, $8 billion is just plain excessive here. No project with an pre-existing right of way should cost that much, even if has been out of use for nearly 60 years. They need to show how they came to that figure.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Even so, $8 billion is just plain excessive here. No project with an pre-existing right of way should cost that much, even if has been out of use for nearly 60 years. They need to show how they came to that figure.

The whole thing is an overgrown embankment, isn't it? Whatever has ended up growing there may have well destroyed the integrity of the former structures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

The whole thing is an overgrown embankment, isn't it? Whatever has ended up growing there may have well destroyed the integrity of the former structures.

Doing some brush clearing/embankment work/bridge replacement should, under no circumstances, cost 8 billion dollars. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RR503 said:

Doing some brush clearing/embankment work/bridge replacement should, under no circumstances, cost 8 billion dollars. 

Wouldn’t they have to raise bridges, re-grade the embankment, along with connecting it to some other ROW?

(Not to mention the legals for ousting the squatters and removal of encroached structures and/or relocating some and the environmental cleanups from the parking lots that have sprung up.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Deucey said:

Wouldn’t they have to raise bridges, re-grade the embankment, along with connecting it to some other ROW?

(Not to mention the legals for ousting the squatters and removal of encroached structures and/or relocating some and the environmental cleanups from the parking lots that have sprung up.)

Madrid builds underground metros for well under $100m/mile, so do pardon my incredulity when I'm told this'll cost 8 billion even with the complexities you mention. Little of this work is subgrade, no traffic on the ROW has to be diverted, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RR503 said:

Madrid builds underground metros for well under $100m/mile, so do pardon my incredulity when I'm told this'll cost 8 billion even with the complexities you mention. Little of this work is subgrade, no traffic on the ROW has to be diverted, etc. 

Oh I’m definitely certain that with honest accounting there’s no way that this costs more than the (Q) SAS per mile - even with the contingencies I mentioned.

For $8 billion they could build the rest of SAS and spur it to the Bronx.

This is either a number pulled out the ass to shut up talk, or to make sure the connected folks get some money laundered.

Or they’re inflating cost so they can boast coming in under budget - if they do reactivate.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I really wouldn’t be surprised if they pulled $8 billion out of their asses to shut everyone up about restoring Rockaway. But then, might they also be pulling $6.9 billion out of their asses for SAS Phase 2 for the same reason? And SAS Phase 2 has a significant amount of pre-existing tunnel dug in the 70s before the fiscal crisis made them shut it down. I mean, the MTA bigwigs are crying broke once again, so why not?

Now if it’s to make sure “connected folks” get theirs, then it’s the worst case of that I’ve ever seen in recent years. Nobody should stay quiet about it. 

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.