Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Alucard-VS-Artorias t1_ixves6e wrote

Queens has a lot of great parks. An while I would not turn down the opportunity for another I feel the borough is in more need of adequate public transit.

As a Queen's resident I vote for more trains at this time.

334

Edwunclerthe3rd t1_ixvhf7a wrote

Having an elevated greenway through ozone park would have a much smaller impact then having stations inside the park. It would allow residents all along the line to reach an actual forest within 10-15 minutes of their home station .

69

k1lk1 t1_ixvqxvs wrote

Having great parks isn't as useful if they are halfway across the borough or even a 20 minute walk away. Queen has some good ones, they are a long way from a lot of people though.

That said, better transit is more important here.

66

Awkward-Painter-2024 t1_ixw5bjq wrote

A train going down the LIE expressway, stopping at Main Street, Kissena, Francis Lewis, Springfield and Little Neck Parkway, connecting to the Woodhaven stop on the M.

A train originating from Archer and Sutphin, cutting across Flushing Meadows (stopping at Jewel and LIE) anf City Field/NYCFC stadium and finishing at LaGuardia Airport.

We also need some way to get to Southeast Queens. A rail, college expansion, tech center. And a train extension to JFK.

We need to say FUCK YOU to more bus lanes.

38

mastercheif t1_ixyw3cx wrote

> A train going down the LIE expressway, stopping at Main Street, Kissena, Francis Lewis, Springfield and Little Neck Parkway, connecting to the Woodhaven stop on the M.

You can thank Robert Moses for the lack of elevated rail (or even the space for it) on the LIE.

10

ChunkofWhat t1_ixwu6lc wrote

I feel like most of the green spaces in Queens are cemeteries. I know people get squeemish about disturbing the dead but there just isn't enough room in NYC for corpses to be taking up precious real estate. Sure, Greenwood and a few others are pretty, but most NYC cemeteries are densely occupied, ugly, treeless, and generally not used as parks by the public. At some point we are going to have to get over the idea that a dead body deserves a plot of land for all time and transition to some kind of temporary, 1-2 generation-duration memorials so we can make more room for the living.

29

TetraCubane t1_ixx061u wrote

Replace headstones with trees that have a name player.

For a new burial, plant the roots of the tree near the body. The body feeds the tree.

8

ChunkofWhat t1_ixxaoee wrote

That's a nice idea, but it gets a bit tricky with the reality of landscaping. A lot of these cemeteries are way too densely packed to allow one tree per person. You'd need to group people up. If we're going to group people up, we might as well make one big marble mausoleum that contains the New Yorker Ash Heap where we can all mingle like rush hour 6 train commuters for all time. Designing a park around bodily remains will always be cumbersome and will also creep a certain number of potential visitors out. People get called out all the time for taking overly frivolous social media posts at cemeteries - there is a stigma for many activities in a burial ground. Remove the bodies and make them real parks. The Big Ol' Ash Heap can go somewhere cool like Randal's Island or the interior of the Statue of Liberty.

6

cowtownsteen23 t1_ixyiyoo wrote

Heck, they didn’t even remove the bodies for Washington Square Park. I think the estimate is there are about 20k bodies under there from when it was a potter’s field/hanging grounds

Given enough time, no one cares and people get a nice park.

6

TetraCubane t1_ixxbpse wrote

Oh I don’t want to make them into parks. I just want the cemeteries to look more like forests.

5

stewartm0205 t1_ixx7ego wrote

It would be best to burn the bodies or store the bodies in small containers after two generations.

8

ctindel t1_ixxbkue wrote

Hells yeah bring back viking funerals to the east and hudson rivers!

13

Bertie_Woo t1_ixz7xjz wrote

That would actually be awesome!

2

ctindel t1_ixzl628 wrote

It would and getting rid of cemeteries to reclaim the land for people who are still alive would be even more amazing tbh.

Just build a memorial wall with the names on all the headstones that relatives can visit if they want.

4

stewartm0205 t1_iy2agzb wrote

With a little shelf each so they can leave a small vase with flowers.

1

ChunkofWhat t1_ixx9qvw wrote

I honestly love the idea of having my ashes thrown in a big pile with millions of other New Yorkers.

9

azspeedbullet t1_ixvcbb7 wrote

as someone that lives in queens in a transit desert area, i want more trains

231

myassholealt t1_ixvnihn wrote

Same. 30-40 minute bus ride to a train is a lot more draining on quality of life than not having another park.

80

SexyPeanut_9279 t1_ixvteg2 wrote

And that’s not even including the time it takes to wait for the bus/walk to the bus stop.

27

Edwunclerthe3rd t1_ixvde4z wrote

My god the amount of traffic that can be alleviated by this

124

_borninathunderstorm t1_ixxuga4 wrote

Facts. The number of times I had to drive to the train. Sooo much parking in jamaica and forest hills is eaten up by people just tryna get the subway. Imagine the gcp without that extra traffic

6

vanshnookenraggen t1_ixvmepg wrote

Hey yall, as the co-founder of the QueensLink I'd just like to ask that if you are interested in the project in any way, check out our website thequeenslink.org and PLEASE sign our petition. The more voices we have in support, the harder it will be for the MTA to ignore us! Thanks!

118

Status_Fox_1474 t1_ixvf7dd wrote

Woodhaven is an over-congested street that's filled with commuters going everywhere. It needs a subway line, and it needs one branch going to Queens Blvd line and the other branch going north to LGA via Northern Blvd.

75

thebruns t1_ixw91ae wrote

Build the train.

Then put a roof on it and a park on top.

WTF happened to this country

74

Wowzlul t1_ixwarjn wrote

Real estate became a middle class wealth creation vehicle

40

Junk-trash t1_ixwfi44 wrote

And then became hoarded by the oligarch class and corporations

29

yoshimipinkrobot t1_ixwqxd2 wrote

Citation

−12

Wowzlul t1_ixxcwxv wrote

To be fair I didn't provide a citation either

5

Junk-trash t1_ixz3wp7 wrote

Also google

“Shrinking middle class” “Income to buy a house” “Investors buying single family houses” Etc.

The historical middle class cant afford to buy houses anymore because the investor class drove up the prices with speculation.

2

yoshimipinkrobot t1_iy0a23w wrote

The first part is true but the second part is not. It’s because liberals want to find a capitalist enemy so they don’t have to take responsibility. The cause is by and large boomers, including liberal ones, opposing the building of new housing in places with jobs. When boomer kids (the biggest generation ever) entered the job market, demand doubled but supply hadnt grown

1

Junk-trash t1_iy0bpi6 wrote

I dunno about those labels but I thought liberals support capitalism.

The speculation factor is huge. Boomers are also a problem

1

JaimeGordonLannister t1_ixxfpct wrote

Or put a 7-style El through a park. Whichever is cheaper/easier. Maybe one of us should run for mayor with these brilliant ideas?

6

Bertie_Woo t1_ixz86vv wrote

I actually love the park underneath the Hudson Greenway. Probably a lot more expensive though?

2

normVectorsNotHate t1_ixxtidv wrote

That park isn't going to be very practical with all the shaking and noise that comes with being right above a subway

1

iamiamwhoami t1_ixy8370 wrote

Put another train above the park. The vibrations from the two train lines will cancel each other out.

8

JaimeGordonLannister t1_iy1kkv2 wrote

Just like nobody lives near elevated lines because it's too noisy, right? And all of the cut-and-cover near-ground-level subways like make life intolerable nearby, and they're totally not the most valuable real estate in the entire city?

2

LongIsland1995 t1_ixveb1z wrote

The idea of Eastern Queens having subway access is weird to me but it would be cool

32

GoRangers5 t1_ixvhwhm wrote

Does it have to be either or? But the answer is another train.

31

cty_hntr t1_ixwhwsk wrote

Queens need a new train line more than it needs another park. Preferably something that covers eastern Queens, and connects to Brooklyn, and Bronx without routing through Manhattan.

30

nowimswmming t1_ixvt8cz wrote

BRING BACK STREETCARS

EXPAND INTER-BOROUGH AND IN-BOROUGH TRAIN LINES BUILD MORE ACTUALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALL OVER

28

wookietennis t1_ixwjw1w wrote

There should be a street car running down Woodhaven and an LIRR station where it meets Queens Bully.

6

ooouroboros t1_ixxaycj wrote

De Blasio tried to do that and people in the nyc subs had a fit

1

take_five t1_ixxgk2j wrote

His little pet project along the waterfront that basically added nothing?

3

ooouroboros t1_ixxo13u wrote

Added nothing eh? Because there is already good mass transit between Astoria and Red Hook?

1

take_five t1_ixz5hpb wrote

Basically ran parallel to the G and more transit is needed away from, not closer to the waterfront in most cases.

0

ooouroboros t1_iy6j5ir wrote

It did not run parallel to the G AT ALL.

0

take_five t1_iy8od8g wrote

Here is the most recent r/nyc thread about the BQX. https://www.reddit.com/r/nycrail/comments/skt0lp/remember_this_no_transportation_project_has_ever/

the most upvoted comment:”Give the G more cars and connect it to Hewes Street. Notice how they paralleled each other and the lack of a connection to the J/Z, L & M.”

Everyone was saying this the whole time since it was proposed.

1

RedOrca-15483 t1_ixvw983 wrote

“Building on the proven model of linear parks, our $35 million investment vision for the QueensWay will enhance quality of life, improve air quality and kick-start local small businesses,” -Eric Adams

-so does queens link. Queenslink not only incorporates greenspace but a transit line that will advance transit equity for queens residents, decrease car dependence, traffic congestion, and vehicle emissions by bringing new transit options (47,000 rides are projected to use it daily) , resolve the congo-line that happens at forest hills, and increase connectivity to the rockaways and jamaica wildlife refuge. also, multiple studies show that transit-oriented development positively correlates with real estate development and prices.

simply put, queens link is in every way a better urban development project than Queensway.

24

not_shajal t1_ixvvean wrote

We need new Trajn Line.

13

avLugia t1_ixwdx8d wrote

We need a new train line. Woodhaven Boulevard is so congested with traffic and this thing is parallel to it yet Mayor Eric "Swagger" "build a park over it" Adams (R-NJ) insists for a park that will run through another park (Forest Park) simply to get it done and to get swagger points with the electorate. This thing is purposefully designed to get rid of any possibility for a rail service as there would be opposition to building on top of a park (see 63rd St tunnel) which is why this thing (the park without rail) is supported by the folks at Forest Hills.

13

maducey t1_ixw8bkp wrote

I used to ride my bike up and down that trail as a kid. I say dream big. High speed, 2 stops into Penn Station, over the trail, keep both! Use your land very wisely.

8

Palaiologos77 t1_ixx0bbj wrote

Train. How is this even a question?

8

wefarrell t1_ixwl378 wrote

It would be nice if the cemeteries could be repurposed into parks. They’re quite large, there aren’t many parks near them and not that many people use them.

I say this as someone with four ancestors who are currently occupants. I don’t think they will mind and neither will I.

7

brieta7 t1_ixwth9j wrote

Yeah, and plenty of residents nearby the many cemeteries of Eastern Queens basically use them as parks already. Even with the gravestones and limited hours, the cemetaries are absolutely gorgeous to walk through, and it's really interesting to see all the super old headstones datung back to the 1800s.

3

wefarrell t1_ixwy30h wrote

They are nice to walk through because they're so secluded, but it would be nice to play a game or have a picnic there. Maybe you can but I'd feel weird about it.

2

Dantheking94 t1_ixw6kso wrote

A new train line from Queens-Brooklyn-Bronx. Then more parks.

5

Die-Nacht t1_ixwfmzh wrote

I want more rail in queens. But I won't fight a new park, specially a park with a bike lane that will allow a direct connection between Rego Park and the Forest Park through the Trader Joe's area.

I want rail, but we have a government that just doesn't prioritize it. So even if they were to start it, it would likely take decades.

Why not turn the Woodhaven bus lane into a proper, grade-separated BRT? Disallow some turns, prioritize the buses, and you can likely solve the same issue. And as a positive, this is something NYC DOT can do on its own, it would require no state help or politics. Ths is the issue with the link, it requires the state to act.

5

Luke90210 t1_ixwhw7i wrote

> I want rail, but we have a government that just doesn't prioritize it. So even if they were to start it, it would likely take decades.

Thats the beauty of this project. The land is already public and shovel ready. NIMBY means nothing as rails were already there. The costs would be minimal compared to building tunnels.

4

Die-Nacht t1_ixwk8z1 wrote

I know that. Which is why I prefer the link, especially since you can use cut and cover, which is much cheaper than boring (what we normally do, specially in Manhattan)..

But that's not really the issue, the issue is that the State isn't gonna prioritize this. I wish they did, but we just don't have that kind of government (due to it being ran by mostly suburbanites whose priorities tend to be things like highways, not public transit).

For this reason, I have little faith in such a project happening any time soon. This is likely why the mayor went with the Way: it doesn't require any state help or coordinating. The city can do it on its own, it's an easy win for a mayor. The BRT proposal would be similar.

Tbh, if I was mayor, that's what I would do. I would make sure no bus in the city can ever get stuck in traffic, no matter what. It would end transit deserts and unlock an insane amount of housing and economic opportunities. All without ever having to deal with Albany.

4

Luke90210 t1_ixwt4d4 wrote

Is cut and cover a viable legal option anymore? It doesn't seem to meet modern safety standards.

1

Die-Nacht t1_ixx09zq wrote

It's still used all around the world. The main reason the US moved away from it is because of nimbyism: boring removes the "it'll be loud and block access" excuse.

It's also part of the reason construction of underground stuff tends to be so expensive in the US.

4

mikeymiggz OP t1_ixx8deh wrote

>All without ever having to deal with Albany.

This is why I wish NYC would secede from NYS. The taxes paid to the state could be used for infrastructure improvements in the city.

1

kbeks t1_ixwrtul wrote

¿Por qué no los dos?

This is New York City, we’ve got friggen Wall Street, we got Saudi princes’ real estate holdings, we’ve got billionaires and actors as residents, don’t tell me there isn’t enough money for both.

Besides, a new train comes out of the MTA’s budget and a new park comes out of the city budget.

5

SeanFromQueens t1_ixxyzlo wrote

The linked article is about the abandoned railroad being turned into a longer Highline styled park or into an elevated subway line parallel to Woodhaven Blvd. It's mutually exclusive in this instance and not a way to make the same space both a park and transit.

3

kbeks t1_ixyo4pe wrote

Oh then transit, we can make other parks. My b.

3

ooouroboros t1_ixxb5xx wrote

Queens needs about 5 new subway lines but I think Parks are a lot 'easier' to get done because the NIMBY folks would fight a subway in their neighborhood.

5

AvatarNab_Echo t1_ixwtmpq wrote

The QueensLink proposal would be the best of both worlds, combining a new subway connection and park space. Absolutely shameful that it has to be an either/or situation.

4

TwoCats_OneMan t1_ixwwh7n wrote

How about another Trader Joe's instead?

3

[deleted] t1_ixyxjv0 wrote

I don’t even live in that boro and I can say…train!!! There’s plenty of parkland and places to hike or bike. People have to get to work.

3

Beginning-Jelly9696 t1_ixz1c7j wrote

Improved transportation - rail, subway, clean energy buses, etc.

3

HiddenPalm t1_iy015l0 wrote

  1. More train lines that go from the Bronx through all of Queens and into Brooklyn, skipping Manhattan entirely.

  2. A drive in movie theater in Flushing that only plays Tim Burton movies new and old.

  3. A retro weed cafe arcade in Corona or Elmhurst or Jackson Heights or Woodside. It can have modern arcade machines, but the theme has to be retro. With concrete unpainted walls, dingy lighting to romantically capture all the smoke and staff who look like punks from the late 1970s, metal heads from the 1980s and Hip Hop fiends from 1986-1988. Music must be between 1966-1994 at all times.

You're welcome.

3

thenewyorkoffice t1_ixwag2z wrote

The outer boroughs need more train lines, a lot more train lines, but they're expensive and take forever to complete so that's not happening.

2

GochujangChips t1_ixxgfpw wrote

With the new soccer stadium arriving along with the shopping structures surrounding it, the 7 line is going to get clattered without any supplementary infrastructure

2

mikeymiggz OP t1_ixxhjgw wrote

There should be a subway line along Northern Blvd to take pressure off the 7

1

Mistes t1_ixxl7n5 wrote

More parks where we lack parks would be great. The whole concept of a 5-10 minute city where no matter where you live it's no more than 5-10 min from some green space.

2

chanelcooch t1_ixyzseq wrote

Why would we need another park? Like there’s needs to be a new line. Like a triboro one from Brooklyn all the way to the Bronx.

2

I-Sleep-At-Work t1_iy0ha54 wrote

train of course. we got many parks here, and further into LI, MORE parks...

2

Accurate-Wish-8674 t1_iy3kghp wrote

It definitely needs a new train line because the trestle has been sitting there for decades. Something needs to run there because it definitely needs Transportation. No park. Good enough they have a park at 34 street Hudson yards. Make it a brand new subway line.

2

Bangu_Jenge0 t1_iy42s9y wrote

It would be so nice if the M was a circle and you could ride it both ways to get into northern Brooklyn/southeast queens

2

spk92986 t1_ixxiw2f wrote

An old train line reopened.

1

falafelballtX t1_ixxnh4b wrote

Flushing meadow park needs a MAJOR swamp drainage and upgrade. It could easily be a huge summer event location on the water. We need a train queens - Brooklyn. We need a good museum.

1

rtillerson t1_ixyuy7t wrote

Didn't they already nix this idea?

1

surpdawg t1_ixz57aq wrote

It’ll end up left abandoned.

1

xyrrus t1_ixz57zt wrote

This question is rather pointless. No sane person would say a new park but a new train line would also be orders of magnitude more difficult and expensive to achieve.

1

Accurate-Wish-8674 t1_iy3jtsx wrote

The trestle definitely needs to have trains on them because thet

1

edom31 t1_ixx1dbb wrote

A new stadium baby!!!! Go team! Fuck families!

0

bull_bearings t1_ixw11q4 wrote

"I'm going to need 3 copies of each of these, stapled and colated"

Pikachu face

−2

WednesdayKnights t1_ixyhdjx wrote

Leave it as it is. Those neighborhoods would not benefit from a train in that area, nor will they be able to suffer the parking of commuters.

−8

LittleBlueBudgie t1_ixvk715 wrote

False equivalency. Queens needs a lot of new train lines, but not this one at what will inevitably be a much higher price tag than estimated. $8 billion? Cute, try tripling it. Every bridge needs to be rebuilt because they’ve been abandoned for decades and aren’t structurally sound. And there are a LOT of bridges along this line. They’d have to eminent-domain the Home Depot at Metropolitan and Woodhaven, and probably a lot of private homes as well. These neighborhoods aren’t even transit deserts, but eastern Queens certainly is.

This ain’t it.

−12

vanshnookenraggen t1_ixvm7tr wrote

All of this is factually incorrect. The $8 bil cost was pre-inflated. The MTA's own costs estimate that the hard costs will be around $1.5b, and double for soft costs which cover cost over-run contingency.

There does not need to be ANY eminent domain, especially at Metropolitan Ave.

These neighborhoods, at least south of Queens Blvd, are absolutely transit deserts. While there are some areas with literally no rail transit and only a couple of buses, the areas south of Forest Park seem like they have good transit if you are only looking at a subway map. But the limited capacity on the J/Z and A/C means that they are de facto deserts. Deserts aren't devoid of water, they just don't have enough to sustain a lot of life.

This is not to say that there aren't more areas that need transit, just that this is one of the last places where we have existing infrastructure that can be reused at significant cost savings. It's ludicrous to think we should turn it into a park that would block any future use of transit.

23

Business_Young_8206 t1_ixvovn3 wrote

There are just too many homes and businesses that have sprouted up in very close proximity to this line in the years since it was abandoned for it to be reactivated. For example, if you look at google maps just behind the Home Depot, the section of track that runs past the Forest View Crescent Hills apartment complex has been completely ripped up for a parking lot. It's just not feasible. Expanding SBS bus service is the most practical solution.

−13

huebomont t1_ixwcfz9 wrote

so we’d have to rip up the parking lot? doesn’t seem that hard

9

Rakonas t1_ixvrpsz wrote

parking lot not necessary if train

6

doodle77 t1_ixwkuyr wrote

Forest View Crescent Hills leases the property from the state, they don't own it.

3

[deleted] t1_ixvbqdj wrote

[removed]

−60

huebomont t1_ixwcjjz wrote

area man terrified of his own shadow because the news told him to be. wont go out in the sunlight to see it and find out for himself if it’s dangerous or not.

3