Today’s Headlines

  • Cuomo Will Milk 2nd Ave Subway Opening on 1/1/2017 for All It’s Worth (News, NBC)
  • Stephen Smith: If You Want More Subways, Tell Your Electeds to Cut MTA Construction Costs (2AS)
  • DOT to Present Queens Blvd Redesign for Forest Hills/Rego Park in January (DNA)
  • Apartments Near Commuter Rail a Hot Commodity in NYC Suburbs (NYT)
  • LGA Could Use More Bus Lanes (AMNY)
  • Queensway Activists Object to MTA Study of Rockaway Rail Reactivation (QChron)
  • Dov Hikind Turned on Ocean Pkwy Safety Plan When He Learned It Would Route Traffic By His House (Post)
  • Here’s Your Bklyn Paper Coverage of Plans for 7th Ave Bike Lane and Amity Street Wiggle
  • 2 Injured in Crash in Port Richmond (Advance); Drunk Driver Smashes Cars on Tillotson Ave (News)
  • Queens CB 4 Chair Lou Walker Steps Down Thanks to Term Limits (QChron)
  • Starting Today You Can Transfer to the E Without Leaving the WTC PATH Station (AMNY)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • ItsEasyBeingGreen

    When they extend the QB bike lane into Rego Park will it still require riders to switch sides to the opposite median at Woodhaven Blvd?

  • AMH

    Cuomo said, “It’s unlike any subway station you’ve seen before.”

    What a short memory our governor has. 86 St looks exactly like a recently-opened subway station I’ve seen before.

  • Riverduckexpress

    About the Rockaway Beach Branch, all I’ll say is:

    The Q53 bus originally started out as a replacement for the Long Island Rail Road’s Rockaway Beach Branch (Easily seen in that it begins at the LIRR station in Woodside and terminates in Rockaway Park, at the A train and shuttle terminal that used to be the terminal for the LIRR). If the current Q52 or Q53 are inadequate for the needs of today’s riders (which the MTA and DOT seem to agree on, based on their plans for Select Bus Service), that seems like a pretty good argument for reactivating the rail line to me.

  • qrt145

    Unlike any other subway station, this one took decades to build!

  • HamTech87

    The demand for near-station homes in the suburbs has been apace for awhile, and is reflected in a historic flipping of suburban valuations with values rising as one gets closer to Main Street and the train station. But distance is not everything.

    While I applaud the construction of these suburban apartments near rail, I think the developers’ vision of those apartments is a real step backward for urbanism and revitalized Main Streets. As they describe their “new suburbanism” towards the end of the article, what they’re talking about is a gated community sucking life out of the surrounding streets and sidewalks. Everyone who may walk to the train is going to drive for everything else — shopping (at big boxes or malls), restaurants, kids-to-school, etc.

    We need new homes that support, not harm, Main Streets. Just as we advocate in NYC, there should be maximum parking caps even if it requires a residential street parking permit regime to grandfather in, and eliminate opposition, from existing residents. Those homes need to be directed outward, preferably mixed-use, and not walled off from the sidewalk; build ’em like townhomes in Brooklyn and/or small apartment buildings with stores on the ground floor.

    There needs to be a serious effort for dealing with affordability. The regional AMI is too damn high to make units affordable in the 60-80% range. Where are most people who can’t afford the Ritz-Carlton (can’t believe the Times cited a Ritz as part of a trend) going to live?

  • AMH

    True, the last new station only took one decade!

  • Boeings+Bikes

    Does the Brooklyn Paper aspire to be a joke or to be a source of information? At least they cover local transpo issues, but why try so hard to sound like they shouldn’t be taken seriously?

  • Maggie

    The promotional shots the Times ran were fascinating – Greybarn in particular is surrounded by a sea of asphalt. And the comments from RXR were perplexingly contemptuous towards Greenwich Village style walkability.

    The parking lot-surrounded resi they showed is so unappealing to me, it will be interesting to watch how demand for those projects plays out. It read like Long Island is grudgingly permitting some traditional garden style apartment construction, and patting itself on the back for it.

  • That bikelash juice is too irresistible to pass up, even if they’re the only ones drinking it anymore.

  • bolwerk

    At this point, unless it’s completely isolated from any other notable transit, it’d probably be difficult to build a rail line in NYC that long that wouldn’t see significant use. Immediately probably, but if not within a few years.

    It’s the daftest place for another park imaginable. Forest Park could use rail access just to get people to actually want to go to it, like Central Park and Prospect Park. But the “QueensRail” (most uncreative name ever) people are automobile advocates.

  • AMH

    The “it can’t be legalized because it’s illegal” BS is getting old.

  • Joe R.

    Besides that they have to give Tal Barzilai a place to post his hilarious anti-bike drivel. My guess is his comments would eventually be banned in most places which had a sensible moderation policy. Unfortunately, the Brooklyn Paper seems to value page views above actual journalism.

  • fdtutf

    But the “QueensRail” (most uncreative name ever) people are automobile advocates.

    Seconded. “Better transit for Queens” is simply a cover for “get buses off Woodhaven,” to put it somewhat crudely.

  • qrt145

    FWIW, the NYT not only publishes Barzilai’s comments, but has even published at least one of his letters to the editor!

  • Joe R.

    Not surprised. The NYT has quite a few vehement anti-bike comments whenever an article on bikes appears. That said, Barzilai would be right at home as a columnist for the NYP. He and Cuozzo could compete to see who can write the most vehement bikelash articles.