In very exciting news to close out the year, the NY Times in an editorial has carefully weighed the two options for the 3.5 mile stretch of abandoned railway that runs from Rego Park—and through a section of Forest Hills—to the Rockaways and come out in support of a High Line-like park which would be called The QueensWay.
I think this is the most important part of their analysis of the two options, the other of which is reviving the rail link to the Rockaways:
A Green Line Through Queens
Many naysayers have dismissed the possibility that The QueensWay will ever come to fruition. They point to the hurdles that the High Line had, which were overcome with the help of big celebrity donors. It reminds me of the same dismissive tone I heard about the possibility of ever reviving Forest Hills Stadium for music concerts.
And we all know how that turned out:
I think this is the most important part of their analysis of the two options, the other of which is reviving the rail link to the Rockaways:
A Green Line Through Queens
....they may be understating the difficulty of reviving those rails for trains. Of the QueensWay’s 47 acres, seven are parkland. If the city, which owns the land, was to return it to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority for transit, it would have to find replacement parkland somewhere else. Then there is the question of when the M.T.A. would get to this capital project, which would be one of many on its overflowing, underfunded to-do list.
The likeliest answer is never. The M.T.A.’s capital plan is only half-funded; the agency is strapped by debt and is hard-pressed to protect the infrastructure it has.
Many naysayers have dismissed the possibility that The QueensWay will ever come to fruition. They point to the hurdles that the High Line had, which were overcome with the help of big celebrity donors. It reminds me of the same dismissive tone I heard about the possibility of ever reviving Forest Hills Stadium for music concerts.
And we all know how that turned out:
The Forest Hills Stadium and this park are completely different, unless you imagine the city selling tickets to see acts in the park to raise money to build and maintain the park. $120 million is a lot of money.
ReplyDeleteI still think they should consider building the park and having a rail option for the future, because eventually rail will have to be built in the middle of Queens to accommodate all the new residents.
There could not possibly be "acts in the park to raise money" because the proposed so-called park would be built on an earth berm that's about 18 feet wide at the top and is hemmed in by private lots for most of its length. Not a suitable venue for "acts" or for a "park" for that matter.
DeleteThe end product never looks like the rendering.
ReplyDeleteDisappointing. As Ramiro points out, it's a matter of whether a transit artery is needed in that very spot now or DESPERATELY needed later on, and it's stupid to bury rehab-able infrastructure under an unnecessary park that might not even take off in popularity (there's NO WAY the Queensway would draw anywhere near the crowds the High Line does) because that's just going to make it cost more later. Instead of throwing up its hands and saying that the rail link will never happen due to funding, the Times should have taken the responsible tack and used their influence to start pressuring the MTA to MAKE SURE something happens with getting it reactivated.
ReplyDeleteThere is nothing left of the railway to "rehab." Just loose tracks all askew and rotting ties.
DeleteNIMBY!
ReplyDelete